On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 25 August 2011 12:24, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Since several RFCs rely on UTC and leap seconds (3339, 4765, 5905,
> etc), this questionnaire may be of interest for some persons
So UTC would become a YATSCOT (Yet another time scale with a constant offset to TAI.)
By my count, that would make 4 (not counting time zone offsets).
I would contend that RFCs relying on UTC would be unaffected and SHOULD NOT change :
- the leap seconds will just stop. Since they are unpredictable, that is really no change. (I.e., the Earth already could chose to rotate in such a
fashion as no new leap seconds were ever needed.) That just means little bits of code that won't be executed any more. Not changing the RFCs will future proof you from # 2.
- If it is decided in 1000 years to put in a leap hour, that is just so many leap seconds.
- UTC would remain civil time (the time computers and networks will mostly be set to, modulo time zone offsets).
- I am not aware of any RFCs for sextant based celestial navigation (which WILL have to change).
Regards
Marshall
Thanks for info.
MJD 55798.740729 <URL:http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/cgi-bin/daterdnm.sh>
-Frank
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf