Subj : Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year To : All From : Imvalid@somewear.com Date : Sat Dec 31 2016 17:42:00 From: "James Wilkinson Sword" Subject: Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 03:44:36 -0000, Char Jackson wrote: > On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:57:25 -0500, Jason wrote: > >> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 17:40:35 -0500 "Jonathan N. Little" >> wrote in article >>> Neat idea. Although most services can handle a 1-second blip. >>> >> >> Google reported that there is some kind of lock required with multiple >> servers that can't handle the sudden 1-second change. That's what >> motivated them to adopt the smearing scheme. > > For the networking gear that has an issue dealing with leap seconds, > it's not the leap second itself that causes problems. It's the *notice* > that a leap second is coming. Certain NTP clients totally choke when > they get that flag. It doesn't seem like it would be a big deal, but > it's a big deal, indeed. That's why leap smearing avoids the problem. > With smearing, there's no flag. Can you explain exactly why they get upset? -- A.I.D.S. = Arsehole Injected Death Sentence --- ViaMAIL!/WC v2.00 * Origin: ViaMAIL! - Lightning Fast Mailer for Wildcat! (1:261/20) .