Subject: [AAA-WG]: Issue 260: SNTP referencing CLOSED

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 22:45:50 +0200

Hi all,

Text accepted and added to the base spec.

John

Issue 260: SNTP referencing 
Submitter name: Jari Arkko 
Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
Date first submitted: 02-Jan-02 
Reference: 
Document: Base 08 
Comment type: Technical 
Priority: S 
Section: 
Rationale/Explanation of issue: 
Current text reads as follows: 

The Time format is derived from the Unsigned32 AVP Base Format. 
This is 32 bit unsigned value containing the four most 
significant octets returned from NTP [18], in network byte 
order. 

This represent the number of seconds since 0h on 1 January 1900 
with respect to the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). 

On 6h 28m 16s UTC, 7 February 2036 the time value will 
overflow. NTP [18] describes a procedure to extend the time to 
2104. 

This has two problems. First, it is unclear whether NTP or SNTP 
is meant and what format is really used. Second, we don't 
mandate the extension to year 2104. 

Also, I find it easier to explain the format issue if Time 
is derived from OctetString, not Unsigned32. Bits on the wire 
are not changed. 

Proposed change: 

The Time format is derived from the OctetString AVP Base 
Format. The string MUST contain four octets, in the same 
format as the four first bytes are in the NTP Timestamp 
Format. The NTP Timestamp format is defined in Chapter 3 of 
reference [18]. 

This represents the number of seconds since 0h on 1 January 1900 
with respect to the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). 

On 6h 28m 16s UTC, 7 February 2036 the time value will 
overflow. SNTP [18] describes a procedure to extend the time to 
2104. This procedure MUST be used by all DIAMETER nodes.