Replacing C

[Eric S. Raymond]

Hal Murray <hmurray at megapathdsl.net>:
> We don't care about the timing in most of the code.  The only critical 
> section is the chunk between grabbing the time and sending the packet.  That 
> chunk is likely to involve crypto.
> 
> We could fix that with another packet.  The idea is that you get a time stamp 
> from the kernel on the transmit side.  Then you have to send another packet 
> to get that time stamp to the other end.
> 
> Maybe we should add that to the NTPv5 list.

No, I'd much rather put in a GC lockout on the critical region than
complicate the protocol.

That said, I continue to admire your cut right to the heart of the issue.
ntpd spends enough time in I/O waits that I do not think latency spikes
will otherwise induce any problems above measurement noise.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>