Re: [LEAPSECS] ideas for new UTC rules

From: Rob Seaman <>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 23:27:57 -0700

> Only hours ago did I learn of the recent problems with D-Link routers.

Remarkable! Just imagine the logical disconnect at the product
development meetings. The marketing folks emphasizing the highly
desirable feature of NTP compliance and the tech folks tossing a list
of 50 servers into the center of the table - a list they probably
spent all of a half hour compiling immediately before the meeting.
Neither group pondering for even the briefest flicker what effect
their product and customers would have on the servers, or conversely,
what value the company was proposing to scavenge for free from using
those servers.

Even people in the internet industry appear to believe that it just
exists free for the picking. These bozos haven't a leg to stand on.
Am especially baffled at why it wouldn't occur to D-Link that it was
their responsibility to field their own NTP servers. This is even
more basic than the resource discovery issue. Hardwired host names -
bah! Hardwired host names belonging to somebody else? Absolutely

Not to give the slightest indication of blaming the victim, but am a
bit perplexed exactly why this devolves to an issue of Danish
infrastructure at all. Would think the EU would be the appropriate
entity to plan, specify, fund and deploy time servers. I heartily
applaud PHK for undertaking this volunteer commitment, but he's not
the first and won't be the last good samaritan to caught up in the
gears of commerce.

Received on Fri Apr 14 2006 - 23:28:10 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 04 2010 - 09:44:55 PDT