[ntpwg] ntpwg Updated NTPv4 ProtocolSpecification/timestamplocation

[TS Glassey]

sounds like we violently agree through different terms.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David L. Mills" <mills at udel.edu>
To: <ntpwg at lists.ntp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: [ntpwg] ntpwg Updated NTPv4 
ProtocolSpecification/timestamplocation


> TOdd,
>
> No, no, no... The goal was never, never even since the 1979 ancestor of
> NTP, to set the clock relative to the transport medium or any capture
> point of the packet in flight.
>
> THE GOAL OF NTP IS TO MINIMIZE THE TIME DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CLIENT
> CLOCK AND THE SERVER CLOCK.

really? wow - oh my gawd... (snicker).

>
> With due and kind respect, have you been reading my messages?

yawn... :-) yep. Read them all. I love your retorts...

>
> The current discussion about the boys and girls is not about defining
> capture points for the NTP PDU but to demonstrate some design goals and
> rules that the operating system and hardware can use to optimize the
> accuracy.

etc.

> For my part these are not an integral component in the
> specification; others may disagree. A discussion on these points might
> well become and appendix to the specification in the form of best
> practices, but the implementer can choose or not choose one or the other
> without violating the specification.

So then the issue is moot.

>
> Dave
>
>> Q:
>> Wasn't the original goal to assign an "instant in the NTP
>> packet-receipt process" which would indicate the specific time
>> represented in the packet-structure itself?
>>
>> Todd
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "STUART VENTERS"
>> <stuart.venters at adtran.com>
>> To: <mills at udel.edu>
>> Cc: <ntpwg at lists.ntp.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 3:55 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ntpwg] ntpwg Updated NTPv4 Protocol
>> Specification/timestamplocation
>>
>>
>>> Dave,
>>>
>>>>> In the famous equation you cite, add one second on the path from t1 to
>>>>> t2 and a corresponding second on the path from t3 to t4. The
>>>>> additional
>>>>> second cancels out. offset = {[(t2 + D) - t1] + [t3 - (t4 + D)]} / 2
>>>>
>>>
>>> That does not compute.
>>>  In your equation, D delays the receive timestamps (T2 and T4)
>>>  In the example, D delays Sue's timestamps (T1 and T4)
>>>
>>> I fear the question stack has pushed too deep to ever pop out to the
>>> original goal.
>>>  (IE. Understanding why CP1 and CP2 are (or are not) a necessary part
>>> of the spec.)
>>>
>>> 73's,
>>>
>>> Stuart
>>> -.-. .-. -
>>>
>>>
>>> ps, If anyone would like to call and help me understand, my office
>>> phone number is (256) 963-8719.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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