[172707] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Erroneous Leap Second Introduced at 2014-06-30 23:59:59 UTC
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Majdi S. Abbas)
Tue Jul 1 15:36:33 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 15:35:42 -0400
From: "Majdi S. Abbas" <msa@latt.net>
To: Tim Heckman <t@heckman.io>
In-Reply-To: <CAB=D40iOc5WXNrQyhb8UhibebkDHd4T5QDKCCoMaSeqxsKmY8g@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 12:20:12PM -0700, Tim Heckman wrote:
> Our systems all have loopstats and peerstats logging enabled. I have
> those log files available if interested. However, when I searched over
> the files I wasn't able to find anything that seemed to indicate this
> was the peer who told the system to introduce a leap second. That
> said, I might just not know what to look for in the logs.
Look at the status word in peerstats; if the high bit is
set, that's your huckleberry.
See: http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/decode.html
> Correct, I was hoping to determine which peer it was so I can reach
> out to them to make sure this doesn't bleed in to the pool at the end
> of the year. I was also more-or-less curious how wide-spread of an
> issue this was, but I'm starting to think I may have been the only
> person to catch it in the act. :)
You might want to upgrade to current 4.2.7 development code,
wherein a majority rule is used to qualify the leap indicator.
Cheers,
--msa
