IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...
Jay R. Ashworth
jra at baylink.com
Mon Aug 8 15:33:22 UTC 2022
Are the people involved in that consensus engineering types?
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <lists at packetflux.com>
> To: "John Levine" <johnl at iecc.com>
> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog at nanog.org>
> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 4:51:42 PM
> Subject: Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...
> Having at least a part of one foot in the global time and frequency
> community I'd say that it seems that the consensus is building toward
> eliminating leap seconds.
> There was a vote planned in 2012 to do so after a straw poll showed that
> most member countries was in favor to do so. But in a typical committee
> move they elected to study it more before making a decision.
> Hopefully there will be some movement next year when they're scheduled to
> discuss it again. It's unfortunate that the first negative leap second
> is likely to occur before then.
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2022, 11:32 AM John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
>> >> > General press loses its *mind*:
>> No more than usual. They're just rewriting this Facebook blog post:
>> It appears that Forrest Christian (List Account) <lists at packetflux.com>
>> >Personally I'd like to see the UTC timescale be fixed to the TAI timescale
>> >with a fixed offset determined by whatever the offset is when they make
>> That's what Facebook, Google, and AWS want, too. Who knows, for once they
>> might be right.
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra at baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
More information about the NANOG