[ntp:hackers] Cool new stuff

todd glassey tglassey at earthlink.net
Mon Jul 24 22:20:58 UTC 2006


David I know this is where it came from - its just that this isn't the world
of today - and everyone has to play nice with each  other which means that
the issues of how NTP is tested, released and operated are of interest to
the end-user community. Likewise since they appear on the very ISC.NTP.ORG
website, I rest my case here.

As to you and Harlan and several others on this list - you folks know I
respect you immensely including the NIST folks ... But my points are
relevant; NTP needs to be stabilized and fingerprinted in some form and the
licensing issues have to be dealt with and they haven't been to date; and
bluntly I could care less whether Vixie is happy with them or not, the ISC's
agenda IMHO specific to advancing the breadth of its power in this area and
NTP is a key to that.

Personally - I could care less about the ISC and am more worried about how
we get a production-certified footprint for an Open Source tool when the
developers refuse to work with any audit-centric mindset to get their wares
pre-certified for use in the real world.

Todd
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David L. Mills" <mills at udel.edu>
To: <hackers at ntp.org>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: [ntp:hackers] Cool new stuff


> Todd,
>
> I tell you the historic truth addressed by the ICCB, of which I was a
> member. We had long discussions on the issue and in spite of the points
> you bring up, our view was then and is now the common perspective in the
> worldwide Internet. Don't DNS me or NTP me or Fed me; nobody "owns" the
> Internet.
>
> Dave
>
> Todd Glassey wrote:
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> >> From: "David L. Mills" <mills at udel.edu>
> >> Sent: Jul 23, 2006 7:36 PM
> >> To: hackers at ntp.org
> >> Subject: Re: [ntp:hackers] Cool new stuff
> >>
> >> Todd,
> >>
> >> Who owns the Internet?
> >
> >
> > Uh do you mean the ISOC Root - what we refer to as the top-level DNS
> > mapping or to the transport itself? - the peering agreements outside
> > of the FTS agreements that setup the initial peering through NTIA and
> > the Federal Telecommunications Contracts?
> >
> >
> >> That question was posed in the ICCB 25 years ago
> >> and we decided the Internet has no owner, no laws, no lawyers and no
> >> police force.
> >
> >
> > Right - "We decided" - this is the problem with the Internet - Some
> > bunch of early-adapters decided ... not the court - the technology
> > people working for the Government to create and support this limited
> > networking model which was later opened up to be what we refer to as
> > the global internt.
> >
> >> As a practical matter, the NTP code base starts from here and is not
> >> ":checked in" the ISC.
> >
> >
> > Then you and UDel OWN it... and that is the issue or at least
> > partially. The problem is that the code published by the US Government
> > is the property of the people of the US including the work done on the
> > algorithems (outside of my personal claims against it). So who really
> > owns it? my feeling is that the NTP code that is to be used by people
> > either must belong to NO ONE or it needs to belong to the entities
> > that either certify or provide that code. Not you, not UDel, and this
> > is something that you are really famillar with from me - since you
> > personally served on my Technologies Board at CertifiedTime.
> >
> >> The developer corps at the ISC and elsewhere
> >> fixes it up, hands it out and keeps it running.
> >
> >
> > yeah - and has other issues too with that including their not having
> > either a
> >
> > 1) Hold Harmless agreement for sourcing/housing the project
> > 2) Fitness of Use Agreements - as part of the Hold Harmless Agreement
> > 3) Code of Conduct for the participants of the WG
> > 4) DMCA Take Down Policy and Process including the requirements of the
> > Copyright and Use Licenses being adapted to support the DMCA Take Down
> > requirements.
> >
> >> Beyond that, I like the
> >> Internet model,
> >
> >
> > You mean the "Go away and leave me alone" models?
> >
> >> especially the lawyers part.
> >
> >
> > The problem is Dave that the rest of the world doesnt - and you are
> > putting them in a siutuation where they will at some point make the
> > decision to fund a replacement effort for NTP and then where will you
> > be? Certainly not sitting on the throne that I and others have created
> > for you as the founder of the best-practice time distribution process
> > and method.
> >
> > Dave - this wasnt a slam and it wasnt disrespect for you or your
> > desires. Its about process and IP management requirements in what are
> > now referred to as "Transparant companies" i.e. ones that have
> > survived SOXification and other regulatory reporting requirements to
> > put in place time-based audit practices. Bluntly the world has changed
> > and its something that NO ON gets to ignore anymore. Sorry...
> >
> > NTP right now is the answer and its this code-body that a large
> > percentage of the world is using - but it could just as easily use
> > NIST's code base and well - then where would the ISC and this WG be
> > since Judah's team is not directly tracking these enhancements for the
> > official NIST Code Releases and that also is an issue that this group
> > MUST deal with at some point - or the Audit Community will deal with
> > it for you and that will mean that this groups code will be
> > recommended against use - since the Audit Community will have NO
> > CHOICE BUT TO GO WITH THE FEDERAL CODE to meet Federal Audit
> > Requirements.
> >
> > Further Judah's code ***is*** owned by the people of the US with the
> > possible exception of my claims against it as well so... there is
> > another issue. By the way Judah - if You and Mike Rubin want to draft
> > a release for NIST from me that washes my claims to the Code Base for
> > the additions that were made to support the CommonView Operations in
> > Exodus Tokyo then lets go ahead and do that...
> >
> >
> > By the way - its much safer to be able to say to a Court that one
> > relied on Judah's code and it screwed up... rather than this WG's. In
> > fact one would have to be an idiot to put code from this WG into
> > production in any form as its never been audited. No one has certified
> > it, and well, no one here has the ability to do that except possibly
> > me and several others (Wyatt Starnes people at SignaSure etc)... as
> > certified auditors.
> >
> > Sorry - the reality is the reality and you folks need to wake up and
> > smell the coffee... or you need to let the rest of us run this to
> > produce a formalized certified codebase footprint for NTP, and build
> > an Ivory Tower for you if that's what you want. Personally I dont see
> > any problem with that as I did in CertifiedTime Inc...
> >
> > Todd Glassey
> >
> >> Dave
> >>
> >> todd glassey wrote:
> >>
> >>> Unfortunately Dave its not quite that easy its not just the
> >>> republication
> >>> rights that are at play here especially for the commercial players.
The
> >>> Copyright/Use License also pertains to derivative implementations as
> >>> well
> >>> one would think including the code-base that is checked into the ISC.
So
> >>> the question is - who actually owns the code the ISC and this
> >>> collective are
> >>> working on? - You - UDel? those collective Sponsor's
> >>>
> >>> Sorry to be the IP guy but...
> >>>
> >>> Todd
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "David L. Mills" <mills at udel.edu>
> >>> To: <hackers at ntp.org>
> >>> Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 12:23 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: [ntp:hackers] Cool new stuff
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Paul,
> >>>>
> >>>> Read my lips very carefully. I have said nothing about licensing. I
> >>>> don't care about licensing. All I care about is the IBM lawyer who
> >>>> showed up in my office demanding I sign a release specific to IBM and
I
> >>>> would not do that. If Sun and HP and IBM and everybody else on the
> >>>> planet can guarantee hassle-free use of any code, then I and UDel
have
> >>>> no problem with that.
> >>>>
> >>>> There is no question about ownership here and I really would like to
> >>>> spare further discussion on that issue. You will note the copyright
> >>>> page
> >>>> says nogthing about licensing, only copyright. How about the IBM
> >>>> lawyer?
> >>>> How about the embedded products like my Xerox printer and Symmetricom
> >>>> GPS servers? If none of these guys has any problem, then I and UDel
> >>>> don't either. Finally, note I and UDel don't own anything, just the
> >>>> copyright notice asserting authorship of various parties.
> >>>>
> >>>> Dave
> >>>>
> >>>> Paul Vixie wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> If not, this makes vendors such as Sun and HP and
> >>>>>> Symmetricom mighty nervous.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> sun and hp have already imported isc/lib/log.c (and eventlib) and
> >>>>> vetted
> >>>>> the license. but if that's a problem, feel free to fork the code,
and
> >>>>
> >>> ISC
> >>>
> >>>>> will send UDel a letter donating a copy of the source without its
> >>>>
> >>> license,
> >>>
> >>>>> so that UDel can own its own copy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> let's be done, for once and for all time, with any concern about
> >>>>
> >>> licensing
> >>>
> >>>>> of ISC code for use in NTP. we're wasting time and missing
> >>>>
> >>> opportunities.
> >>>
> >>>>> i am particularly upset since my use of and work on NTP predates
> >>>>> my use
> >>>>
> >>> of
> >>>
> >>>>> and work on BIND, and my inspiration to use a BSD-derived license
> >>>>> on all
> >>>>> of my work (and later, all of ISC's work) came from my appreciation
of
> >>>>
> >>> NTP
> >>>
> >>>>> and the license it used. dr. mills, every time you complain about
> >>>>> ISC's
> >>>>> license, it feels like i somehow missed the point of your work,
> >>>>> and i do
> >>>>> not think that i have. i am one of your followers. stop yelling at
me
> >>>>> for trying to follow in your footsteps.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> hackers mailing list
> >>>> hackers at support.ntp.org
> >>>> https://support.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/hackers
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> hackers mailing list
> >> hackers at support.ntp.org
> >> https://support.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/hackers
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> hackers mailing list
> hackers at support.ntp.org
> https://support.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/hackers



More information about the hackers mailing list