I agree: 5905 needs a bis before it should be considered for advancement. I wouldn't opposed advancing a well-written bis, but I'd prefer to to ship an NTPv5, let it bake as a proposed standard for a decade, and then revisit the issue.
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024, 20:07 Erik Kline <ek.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Is it also reasonable to consider advancing 5905 to Internet Standard?If the NTP wg wanted to consider it that could make some sense.I'm not 100% sure we could do that with a simple status change document, though. There are several errata [1], and we might have to go the route of producing a -bis that addresses them (most of them could be solved by removing the embedded source code, but ... still).
ntp mailing list -- ntp@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ntp-leave@xxxxxxxx
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
