[ntpwg] KISS codes

[Brad Knowles]

On 7/9/07, Harlan Stenn wrote:

>>  I was wondering about this issue earlier today as I was working through
>>  all the comments received. My question is based on other discussions on
>>  this mailing list related to whether or not we are representing
>>  current practice.
>
>  I believe Danny's change does not represent current practice.

If our sole purpose is to document current practice in the code, then 
Danny's proposal may not reflect what is done in the code today. 
However, in that case, we can quickly fix the code.  ;-)

If our purpose is to document what the current practice SHOULD be in 
the code, then IMO Danny's proposal most definitely reflects what 
should go into the standard.


As far as I'm concerned, the choice is yours.  But if you choose to 
document exclusively that which is done today in the code, don't be 
surprised if the code changes tomorrow to reflect what Danny has 
proposed.

-- 
Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>, Consultant & Author
LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
Slides from Invited Talks: <http://tinyurl.com/tj6q4>

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0