[ntp:questions] Re: HOWTO prepare ntpd to the leap of a second
serge.bets at NOSPAM.laposte.invalid
Fri Dec 30 07:00:11 UTC 2005
On Thursday, December 29, 2005 at 22:54:20 +0000, David L. Mills wrote:
> You really should read the commentary in the NIST leapsecond file
Thanks for the hint. Latest leap-seconds.3331497600 comments:
| The following entry specifies the expiration date of the data in this
| file in units of seconds since 1900.0. This expiration date will be
| changed at least twice per year whether or not a new leap second is
And the important dates in order are:
| Last Update of leap second values: 28 July 2005
| [latest positive leap in table] 1 Jan 2006
| File expires on: 28 June 2006
> The file does not expire when the leap is inserted; it remains valid
> as a record of past TAI offsets until the next edition is issued.
Better than that: An issue remains completely valid until just before
next still uncertain event opportunity.
> When multiple valid sources display conflicting leap bits, the logical
> OR of these bits is used.
Currently one leap=01 source wins the consensus over any number of
leap=00 sources. That's fine, because many sources don't carry leap bits
at all. But that can be fooled, if the leap=01 source is wrong. Seen
here reports of this HP Zsomething, or that Truetime GPS, anouncing leap
or leaping themselves at a wrong date.
The NIST file could win consensus until expiration, making sure no
spurious leap second announcement is done.
Serge point Bets arobase laposte point net
More information about the questions