[ntpwg] updated ntpv4 draft available

Jim Martin jim at daedelus.com
Thu Feb 1 11:37:53 PST 2007


Dr Mills,
	Thanks very much for starting the review. Your previous comments  
were very helpful in cleaning things up quite a bit. From todays  
comments,it seems there's more to be done, so I'd be happy to work  
with you in whatever way is easiest.

	As for the attribution, I think we'd be happy to reference your book  
as a non-normative informational reference, and your earlier report  
should indeed be mentioned in the acknowledgments.

	On a more general note to all list members, I just want to continue  
to stress the editing teams desire to finish up this document in a  
timely manner.  To that end, I again ask that people review and  
comment on the -04 draft and allow us to come up with a solid -05  
before the Prague cut off. That means getting reviews back with  
specific, detailed comments before February 26th, which would give  
the editors one week to integrate the changes and make the draft  
submission deadline. Karen, Brian, do you agree?

	- Jim

On Feb 1, 2007, at 11:00 AM, David L. Mills wrote:

> Guys,
>
> I've reviewed about a third of the document and made lots and lots  
> of markups. There are misplaced tables, figure descripancies and  
> figure errors. These are all fixable, but does call into question  
> the last call status. This is definitely not in last call status.  
> The most serious problems are inconsistent variable names.
>
> It would be a serious effort to list each and every markup; there  
> are dozens and dozens of them. What I propose is to mark up a copy  
> of the current document in ASCII and return it for diffing, further  
> markup and reformatting. I can do the text part, but not the table  
> and figure references and tables and figures themselves.
>
> I could simply send the paper markup, but even this is a lot more  
> work than I would like. I would rather speed through the edit with  
> my favorite eye-friendly editor and search and destroy  
> inconsistencies as I find them.
>
> It would be polite to reference my earlier report as a source of  
> much information included in the RFC. It would be of considerable  
> help to a serious implementer to point out, maybe in a footnote,  
> the detailed rationale and performance analysis for some of the  
> more intricate algorithms can be found in my book and/or the NTP  
> website.
>
> Dave
>
>  Odonoghue, Karen F CIV NSWCDD, W13 wrote:
>> Thanks Harlan!
>>
>> Karen
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.isc.org>
>> To: Brian Haberman <brian at innovationslab.net>
>> CC: Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.isc.org>; Odonoghue, Karen F CIV  
>> NSWCDD, W13; ntpwg at ntp.isc.org <ntpwg at ntp.isc.org>
>> Sent: Wed Jan 31 21:48:04 2007
>> Subject: Re: [ntpwg] updated ntpv4 draft available
>>
>> Brian,
>>
>> I've updated http://ntp.isc.org/IETF with the mailing list info.
>>
>> H
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ntpwg mailing list
>> ntpwg at support.ntp.org
>> https://support.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/ntpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntpwg mailing list
> ntpwg at support.ntp.org
> https://support.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/ntpwg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://support.ntp.org/pipermail/ntpwg/attachments/20070201/1b9e5b3b/attachment.html 


More information about the ntpwg mailing list