[LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 34, Issue 8

M. Warner Losh imp at bsdimp.com
Fri Oct 9 23:14:52 EDT 2009


In message: <4ACFF759.3090903 at rubidium.dyndns.org>
Magnus Danielson <magnus at rubidium.dyndns.org> writes:

: M. Warner Losh wrote:

: > In message: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456AFA8697A05 at EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>

: > Jonathan Natale <jnatale at juniper.net> writes:

: > : AFAIK, routers also just re-sych. The OS's are not capable of

: > : xx:xx:60 time. For reading router logs this is fine in most cases

: > : which is all NTP is really for. I don't think they simply step the

: > : time, I am pretty sure they do tweak the freq. I could be wrong and

: > : I am NOT representing Juniper here, just my thoughts. :-)

: >

: > FreeBSD will cope with the xx:xx:60 second correctly, assuming it is

: > told about the leapsecond soon enough. Not all other parts of the

: > system can cope with the xx:xx:60, but that's a posix time_t

: > limitation that you can't do anything about[*].

: >

: > Warner

: >

: > [*] The 'right' timezone files attempt to do things correctly, but in

: > doing so they break time_t definition...

:

: I assumed you meant to say that it breaks the POSIX time_t definition.


Yes. The most current time_t definition is the one codified by POSIX.
Older standards are fuzzier about what time_t really means.

Warner



More information about the LEAPSECS mailing list