Are the people involved in that consensus engineering types? ----- Original Message -----
From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <lists@packetflux.com> To: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@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@iecc.com> wrote:
General press loses its *mind*:
No more than usual. They're just rewriting this Facebook blog post:
https://engineering.fb.com/2022/07/25/production-engineering/its-time-to-lea...
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
It appears that Forrest Christian (List Account) <lists@packetflux.com> said: the
change.
That's what Facebook, Google, and AWS want, too. Who knows, for once they might be right.
-- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@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