Re: [LEAPSECS] ideas for new UTC rules

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:43:45 +0200

In message <>, Steve Allen writes:

>======During the second five years after the date of adoption.
>(YA+5 through YA+9)
>On a semi-annual basis the IERS should publish an immutable schedule
>of leap seconds predicted for five years into the future.

This would be a big improvement.

>Along with the five-year immutable schedule published monthly, the
>IERS should continue to publish the provisional schedule of leap
>seconds for the next ten years.

I'm not sure I see how this is useful other than judging how well
the predictions turn out.

If you put a provisional table of leapseconds into your products and
reality turns out differently, who is liable for the discrepancies ?

Anyone can attempt to make their own provisional table already now,
yet nobody does it or at least nobody has admitted that they do so,
so I somehow doubt that it will catch on later.

If you add 10 more leapsecond opportunities per year you will
decrease reliability of the provisional table, compared to if
there is only two opportunities per year.

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 Fri Apr 14 2006 - 00:54:05 PDT

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