[LEAPSECS] Bloomberg announced its smear

[Tom Van Baak]

Harlan,

Get down to the details about PC clock frequency instability and OS measurement jitter and I suspect you'll find that cosine vs. triangle is a red herring.

I would almost vote for random smear. The purpose of a smear is to obscure the extra / missing second in UTC. If someone downstream wants to know *how you implemented the smear* you have already lost the battle. It means they secretly want to know real UTC instead of accepting your smeared UTC. This is a problem. Smearing is for clients that don't care about the arcane details of UTC, or about sub-second accuracy, but maybe still want a monotonic clock that's pretty close to UTC and the SI second most of the time.

/tvb

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harlan Stenn" <stenn at ntp.org>
To: "Leap Second Discussion List" <leapsecs at leapsecond.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 5:24 AM
Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] Bloomberg announced its smear


> Martin,
> 
> Cosine smearing might need to be a choice.  It's harder to track the
> leap second if you get a sample during when both phase and frequency are
> changing.
> 
> -- 
> Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.org>
> http://networktimefoundation.org  - be a member!