[ntp:questions] Re: GMT: UT1 vs UTC

Terje Mathisen terje.mathisen at hda.hydro.com
Fri Oct 31 21:01:58 UTC 2003

Michael Shields wrote:

> In article <bnt9v3$vd5$1 at osl016lin.hda.hydro.com>,
> Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen at hda.hydro.com> wrote:
>>With hindsight, which almost by definition is hard to get, it would
>>have been better to delay the last leap second by 6-18 months, that
>>way the current gap wouldn't have exposed that Oncore firmware bug.
> Although the Oncore is important, I don't think it would be a good
> precedent to start adjusting international timescales to work around
> bugs in one vendor's product.

Sorry, I didn't want to imply that!

As noted on one of those pages, Leap seconds used to be added 
preemptively, i.e. quite a while before the 0.5 second offset point, 
instead of closer to the final 0.9 second limit.

The last leap second we had was added 6-12 months too early, if the goal 
had been to minimize the UTC-UT1 at all times.

- <Terje.Mathisen at hda.hydro.com>
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

More information about the questions mailing list