On Thu, 18 Mar 2010, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > Now, it is true that Ken Seidelmann is an astronomer, and he is > against the change, but that is mostly in a "if is isn't broke, don't > fix it" mode, and also because he is thinking of the long term (in 500 > to 600 years the UT1-TAI offset should be order an hour, and people > can be expected to start complaining). UT1 - TAI = 1h is more like 1000 years. See http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/dutc.html#dutctable > I used to say that computer time should be TAI (closest to the actual > clocks, easy to calculate elapsed times), but that never seem to get > any traction. At the moment it's best to see what the interminable and impenetrable ITU-R process decides. You never know, the Unix time_t and NTP model of time might turn out to have been the right thing all along :-) Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <dot@xxxxxxxx> http://dotat.at/ GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER: SOUTHWEST 5 TO 7. MODERATE OR ROUGH. SQUALLY SHOWERS. MODERATE OR GOOD. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf