In message <43BAFFEA.9010006_at_edavies.nildram.co.uk>, Ed Davies writes:
>Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>> If we can increase the tolerance to 10sec, IERS can give us the
>>> leapseconds with 20 years notice and only the minority of computers
>>> that survive longer than that would need to update the factory
>>> installed table of leapseconds.
>
>PHK can reply for himself here but, for the record, I think RS's
>reading of what he said is different from mine. My assumption is
>that PHK is discussing the idea that leaps should be scheduled many
>years in advance. They should continue to be single second leaps -
>just many more would be in the schedule pipeline at any given
>point.
>
>Obviously, the leap seconds would be scheduled on the best available
>estimates but as we don't know the future rotation of the Earth this
>would necessarily increase the tolerance. In theory DUT1 would be
>unbounded (as it sort of is already) but PHK is assuming that there'd
>be some practical likely upper bound such as 10 seconds.
>
>Am I right in this reading?
yes.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk_at_FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Tue Jan 03 2006 - 15:33:27 PST