Subj : Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year
To   : All
From : [email protected]
Date : Sat Dec 31 2016 05:42 pm

From: "James Wilkinson Sword" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year

On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 03:44:36 -0000, Char Jackson <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:57:25 -0500, Jason <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 17:40:35 -0500 "Jonathan N. Little"
>> <[email protected]> wrote in article <[email protected]>
>>> Neat idea. Although most services can handle a 1-second blip.
>>>
>>
>> Google reported that there is some kind of lock required with multiple
>> servers that can't handle the sudden 1-second change. That's what
>> motivated them to adopt the smearing scheme.
>
> For the networking gear that has an issue dealing with leap seconds,
> it's not the leap second itself that causes problems. It's the *notice*
> that a leap second is coming. Certain NTP clients totally choke when
> they get that flag. It doesn't seem like it would be a big deal, but
> it's a big deal, indeed. That's why leap smearing avoids the problem.
> With smearing, there's no flag.

Can you explain exactly why they get upset?

--
A.I.D.S. = Arsehole Injected Death Sentence

--- ViaMAIL!/WC v2.00
* Origin: ViaMAIL! - Lightning Fast Mailer for Wildcat!  (1:261/20)

You are viewing proxied material from cvs.synchro.net. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.