[LEAPSECS] smear

[Steve Allen]

On Mon 2023-03-20T19:36:51+0000 Michael Deckers via LEAPSECS hath writ:
> � This seems to be lenient enough to allow for not scheduling
> � a negative leap second even in the case that the difference
> � (UT1 - UTC) should go a bit below -1 s before 2035.

And today in the NTP working group mail list we see that the
big guns expect to force the issue because

> From: Doug Arnold <doug.arnold=40meinberg-usa.com at dmarc.ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Ntp] draft-ntp-ntpv5-requirements update for IETF 116
>
> Re leap smearing:
>
> Operators from multiple data centers tell me that they intend to
> smear leap seconds.  When I pointed out the pitfalls they were
> undeterred.  I have come to understand that leap smearing is viewed as
> less problematic than trying to fix leap second handing in distributed
> database software.

they have taken the stance that if leap seconds do not go away then
they will smear.

This is like Eucla Australia setting their clocks the way they
please and daring the state government to do something about it.

--
Steve Allen                    <sla at ucolick.org>              WGS-84 (GPS)
UCO/Lick Observatory--ISB 260  Natural Sciences II, Room 165  Lat  +36.99855
1156 High Street               Voice: +1 831 459 3046         Lng -122.06015
Santa Cruz, CA 95064           https://www.ucolick.org/~sla/  Hgt +250 m