Subject: Re: [ntpwg] NTP WG Last Call:draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-proto-10.txt

From: Danny Mayer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:06:11 -0400

I have reviewed the document and believe it's ready for advancement. I 
have a couple of nits (mainly word corrections) below but I that 
shouldn't hold up advancement.

P17. Figure 6
VERSION should be described as "NTP version number" (add NTP)

P17. Section 7.3. First paragraph
Last word refers to the RFC as a report. Replace "report" with "RFC".

P26 Section 8 Paragraph 2
At end of paragraph please add the sentence "Any other non-allocated 
multicast address may also be used in addition to these allocated 
multicast addresses.

P26 Section 8 first full paragraph at top of page
This doesn't look quite right to me. If (T4-T1) is 64 seconds that's a 
huge delay in getting a response. Is this right or am I misunderstanding 
the whole paragraph?

P56. Section 16.
Replace the following:
"IANA is requested to establish and maintain a registry for Extension 
Field Types associated with this protocol, populating this registry with 
no initial entries."
with:
"IANA is requested to establish and maintain a registry for Extension 
Field Types associated with this protocol, populating this registry 
reserving Field Types 0-7 for the autokey protocol (see RFC xxxx)."

or is that done with the Autokey protocol document?

Danny
_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/ntpwg

---

From: "David L. Mills" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:58:51 +0000

Danny,
I think you mean the formula on p. 29

delta = T(ABA) = (T4-T1) - (T3-T2)

This is the first mention of T4 in a formul. That formula is correct.

Dave

---

From: Danny Mayer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 17:15:22 -0400

Dave,

No, I really meant the discussion on P.30 which confuses me (sorry for 
the misdirection):
"In some scenarios where the initial frequency offset of the client is
    relatively large and the actual propagation time small, it is
    possible for the delay computation to becomes negative.  For
    instance, if the frequency difference is 100 PPM and the interval
    T4-T1 is 64 s, the apparent delay is -6.4 ms. "

That's what I really didn't understand. Not something to hold up the 
document of course.

Danny

---

From: "David L. Mills" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 03:13:47 +0000

Danny,

The easy way to see this is to assume the delays are zero and the B 
clock runs faster than the A clock.

Dave

Danny Mayer wrote:

>>> with