[LEAPSECS] Focus in the debate, alternative proposal

Paul Sheer p at 2038bug.com
Fri Jan 7 17:55:17 EST 2011


> Both sides of the transaction stamp the transaction with

> timestamps with microsecond resolution.

Is this a fact?

> When the trades are reconciled at the end of

> the day, these timestamps need to match with a fuzz factor

> that's in the sub-millisecond range

Is this too a fact in combination with the first statement?

Are the trades always automatically reconciled at the end of each day?

Our billing logs also need to be reconciled, and such clock
offsets also matter. But it only matters on the rare cases that
one is doing a *manual* investigation.




I read this as people fraudulantly finding out things ahead of time
using back channels.

I believe this is not a timestamp issue. It's a latency issue.


More information about the LEAPSECS mailing list