[LEAPSECS] Leap seconds ain't broken, but most implementations are broken

[Martin Burnicki]

Michael.Deckers. via LEAPSECS wrote:
>    Why doesn't the NTP message include the TAI - UTC offset used for
>    the UTC timestamp in the message?  Even a faultily configured server
>    knows when it changes this offset, and it could help avoid the
>    interpretation of incorrect warning bits.

I think nobody thought they had to deal with TAI when the packet format
was designed.

Support for TAI offset was introduced much later, in NTPv4, when autokey
and support for the NIST leap second file was introduced.

BTW, it's also an advantage that the packet format hasn't changed. With
PTP/IEEE1588, where not even PTPv2 is compatible with PTPv1, even though
both standards are new, compared to NTP, NTP packets have been
compatible across several protocol versions, for many many years.

Martin