[190577] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Leap Second planned for 2016
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Harlan Stenn)
Fri Jul 8 20:49:40 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 17:50:25 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CAAeewD_kxj2g4=XaNk8jj5DCp8hEhtNY5JhAQesCyYGVy8Opew@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 7/8/16 4:47 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On 9 July 2016 at 02:27, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>> Time is actually harder than it seems. Many bits of software break in unexpected ways. Expect the unexpected.
>
> Aye. How many have written code like this:
>
> start = time();
> do_something();
> elapsed = time() - start;
>
> Virtually all code dealing with passage of time assumes time moves
> only forward, I'm amazed we don't see more issues during leap seconds.
> Portable monotonic time isn't even available in many languages
> standard libraries.
>
> Hopefully they'll decide in 2023 finally to get rid of leap seconds
> from UTC. Then GPS_TIME, TAI and UTC are all same with different
> static offset.
How about you run your systems on TAI or satellite time?
--
Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member!
