F-ckin Leap Seconds, how do they work?
avg at kotovnik.com
Wed Jul 4 01:55:29 UTC 2012
On 7/3/2012 6:28 PM, Steve Allen wrote:
> On 2012 Jul 3, at 18:13, Vadim Antonov wrote:
>> PS. I would vote for using TAI instead of UTC as the
>> non-relativistic time base in computer systems.
> A problem with the use of TAI is that the BIPM and CCTF (who make
> TAI) expressed strongly that they do not want it used as a system
> time in document CCTF09-27
> so strongly that they end by contemplating the discontinuation
> of TAI.
There's always a possibility of using pseudo-TAI internally by
reconstructing it from UTC. This is not the best solution (because it
requires systems to have long-term memory of past leap seconds, or
ability to access a reliable storage of such), but at least this removes
the burden of doing complicated time handling from application software.
Actually, what they are saying is that they would discontinue TAI *if*
definition of UTC is amended to remove future leap seconds. The
document makes it clear that they recognize the necessity of continuous
coordinate time standard.
More information about the NANOG