[ntpwg] NTP WG Last Call:draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-proto-10.txt

[Danny Mayer]

Dave,

No, I really meant the discussion on P.30 which confuses me (sorry for 
the misdirection):
"In some scenarios where the initial frequency offset of the client is
    relatively large and the actual propagation time small, it is
    possible for the delay computation to becomes negative.  For
    instance, if the frequency difference is 100 PPM and the interval
    T4-T1 is 64 s, the apparent delay is -6.4 ms. "

That's what I really didn't understand. Not something to hold up the 
document of course.

Danny

David L. Mills wrote:
> Danny,
> I think you mean the formula on p. 29
> 
> delta = T(ABA) = (T4-T1) - (T3-T2)
> 
> This is the first mention of T4 in a formul. That formula is correct.
> 
> Dave
> 
> Danny Mayer wrote:
> 
>> I have reviewed the document and believe it's ready for advancement. I
>> have a couple of nits (mainly word corrections) below but I that
>> shouldn't hold up advancement.
>>
>> P17. Figure 6
>> VERSION should be described as "NTP version number" (add NTP)
>>
>> P17. Section 7.3. First paragraph
>> Last word refers to the RFC as a report. Replace "report" with "RFC".
>>
>> P26 Section 8 Paragraph 2
>> At end of paragraph please add the sentence "Any other non-allocated
>> multicast address may also be used in addition to these allocated
>> multicast addresses.
>>
>>
>> P26 Section 8 first full paragraph at top of page
>> This doesn't look quite right to me. If (T4-T1) is 64 seconds that's a
>> huge delay in getting a response. Is this right or am I misunderstanding
>> the whole paragraph?
>>
>> P56. Section 16.
>> Replace the following:
>> "IANA is requested to establish and maintain a registry for Extension
>> Field Types associated with this protocol, populating this registry with
>> no initial entries."
>> with:
>> "IANA is requested to establish and maintain a registry for Extension
>> Field Types associated with this protocol, populating this registry
>> reserving Field Types 0-7 for the autokey protocol (see RFC xxxx)."
>>
>> or is that done with the Autokey protocol document?
>>
>> Danny
>> _______________________________________________
>> ntpwg mailing list
>> ntpwg at lists.ntp.org
>> https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/ntpwg
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ntpwg mailing list
> ntpwg at lists.ntp.org
> https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/ntpwg
>