[LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 15

[M. Warner Losh]

In message: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456B0168F3BDB at EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
            Jonathan Natale <jnatale at juniper.net> writes:

: AFAIK, most, deployed NTP implementations on routers, if not in general, simply ignore leap seconds and fall slightly out of sync for a bit.  AFAIK, NTP on routers, if not in general, use NTP mainly to sync logs across various boxes, and usually being 1 second off is not a big deal.  Ditto for the NTP eras--it doesn't fly and nobody cares (we'll fix it when it breaks, or we'll be dead by then anyway).  The issue is the OSs--no "xx:xx:60" support.

: 

: What is wrong w/ the "http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/time/utc-sls/draft-kuhn-leapsecond-00.txt" sol'n?  Seems simple and effective enough for most (definitely not for all) apps.


So you are making my point for me: leap seconds are hard.  Let's half
ass it because it doesn't matter much.  We know the systems get it
wrong, but we don't care.

These are all the points I've been making, with a twist: all the
half-assed solutions make it harder to implement a proper solution.

Warner