[ntp:hackers] Cool new stuff

David L. Mills mills at udel.edu
Tue Jul 25 19:13:32 UTC 2006


You are talking to the wrong guys. Talk to Dennis Fergusson, who has 
expressed interest in building a new implementation. Get some Gov't 
types to throw money at him and hire accountants, lawyers and program 
managers as needed. I don't intend to change my wicked ways. I haven't 
been able to get Harlan to change anything in the build process, much 
less explain why it is so frumiously complicated. Not that I want the 
last word, but I would like to ground my antennas on this topic.


todd glassey wrote:

> 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
>>> 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