I agree with Danny's assessment, and based on [1] I believe that "Obsolete" would be best for RFC 1305 (which is already the current status on Datatracker). I believe the message we are trying to send is "NTP clients SHOULD NOT use v3, but NTP servers MUST support v3". I do not think the reader can understand this message from the word "historic" or from [2] below. Cheers, Tal. [1] IESG Statement on Designating RFCs as Historic, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-statement-on-designating-rfcs-as-historic-20140720/ [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-ntpv2-ntpv3-to-historic/ On Sun, Jan 5, 2025 at 8:43 PM Danny Mayer <mayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I think the correct term is "Obsolete". Also just because a packet is > saying that it is a v3 (or v2) NTP packet doesn't mean that it actually > is one. > > This is somewhat in the weeds and we do need to actively say not to use > v3 NTP protocol. If some application is still using it we don't need to > support it in future versions of NTP. > > Danny > > On 12/24/24 1:20 AM, Tal Mizrahi wrote: > > Hi, > > > > According to [1], historic means "...no longer recommended for use". > > NTPv3 is a protocol that is still widely used, including in new > > devices and operating systems. > > I would suggest leaving the status of NTPv3 as-is and revisiting it in > > a few years. > > > > Cheers, > > Tal. > > > > [1] IESG Statement on Designating RFCs as Historic, > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-statement-on-designating-rfcs-as-historic-20140720/ > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 10:03 PM Erik Kline <ek.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Note that "historic" does not mean "unused on the Internet". > >> > >> See also RFC 2026 S4.2.4 and the IESG 20140720 statement on the topic. > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 2:43 AM Windl, Ulrich <u.windl@xxxxxx> wrote: > >>> Hi! > >>> > >>> I also tried to find out what NTP version Windows Domain Controllers use. Here it had been suggested to use them as primary servers for all (UNIX/Linux) clients (like "There won't be any more problems if all the world runs Windows"), but I could not even find out whether those support symmetric key authentication. So probably: NTPv3 isn't dead. > >>> > >>> Kind regards, > >>> Ulrich Windl > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Hal Murray <halmurray@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 10:44 AM > >>>> To: Tal Mizrahi <tal.mizrahi.phd@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Cc: last-call@xxxxxxxx; NTP WG <ntp@xxxxxxxx>; Hal Murray > >>>> <halmurray@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Subject: [EXT] [Ntp] Re: Last Call: Status Change of NTPv2 and NTPv3 to > >>>> Historic > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> It would be interesting to know to what extent NTPv3 is used these days. > >>>> >From a pool server, Dec 3-4, 2024 > >>>> > >>>> Quick answer, less than 20% > >>>> > >>>> Looks better in a fixed pitch font. My mail system will probably wrap > >>>> long lines. > >>>> > >>>> 48 byte packets. Total is 600154088: > >>>> NTPv0 NTPv1 NTPv2 NTPv3 NTPv4 NTPv5 NTPv6 NTPv7 total > >>>> 784 1401K 1 5 17 2 5 6 1402099 unspec > >>>> 7 49658 4 183450 7645 3 5 2 240774 > >>>> symm-act > >>>> 4 2 4 1 69 4 16 4 104 > >>>> symm-pass > >>>> 2 2625K 220483 100M 494M 3 13 2 598332715 Client > >>>> 5 24 6 63582 111181 5 6 5 174814 Server > >>>> 3 21 3 3324 3 3 6 2 3365 Bcast > >>>> 2 7 5 2 5 6 2 6 35 Mode6 > >>>> 6 2 7 148 4 5 5 5 182 Mode7 > >>>> 813 4076K 220513 101M 494M 31 58 32 total > >>>> > >>>> 48 byte packets, % of 600154088: > >>>> NTPv0 NTPv1 NTPv2 NTPv3 NTPv4 NTPv5 NTPv6 NTPv7 total > >>>> 0.000 0.233 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.234 unspec > >>>> 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.031 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.040 symm-act > >>>> 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 symm-pass > >>>> 0.000 0.437 0.037 16.795 82.427 0.000 0.000 0.000 99.697 Client > >>>> 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.029 Server > >>>> 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 Bcast > >>>> 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Mode6 > >>>> 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Mode7 > >>>> 0.000 0.679 0.037 16.837 82.447 0.000 0.000 0.000 total > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> These are my opinions. I hate spam. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> ntp mailing list -- ntp@xxxxxxxx > >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to ntp-leave@xxxxxxxx > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> ntp mailing list -- ntp@xxxxxxxx > >>> To unsubscribe send an email to ntp-leave@xxxxxxxx > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
