"serverMime-Version: 1.0

[Gary E. Miller]

Yo Hal!

On Wed, 03 Apr 2019 04:19:08 -0700
Hal Murray via devel <devel at ntpsec.org> wrote:

> > Most of the thread was about trying all the possible IPv4 and IPv6
> > addresses returned for the NTPD server until one worked.  So
> > assuming IPv4 for the NTPD when the NTS-KE is IPv4 is not what the
> > WG expects.   
> 
> I didn't see any consensus that we have to implement all possible 
> combinations, but rather that the protocol has enough options to
> implement any combinations that make sense and probably many that
> aren't interesting.

Of course, but my idea of interesting is unlike yours...

> As Richard suggested, if we wanted to implement NTS-KE on -4 and NTP
> on -6, the syntax would be to add a -4 or -6 between ask/request and
> the name/address.  I don't see any reason to implement the
> ask/request options yet.

Don't let the far future block the present.  I need -4 and -6 for the
NTP side of an NTS connection to do testing.  And long term I would want
-4 and -6 independent of ask/require.

Why?  Well, my IPv6 connections have much less latency and jitter than
my IPv4 ones.  Without -4 and -6 on the NTP part of NTS I can't make
those comparisons easily.

RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
	gem at rellim.com  Tel:+1 541 382 8588

	    Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas?
    "If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it." - Lord Kelvin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 851 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ntpsec.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20190403/39f8e305/attachment.bin>