On 2012-02-09 10:41, Steven Bellovin wrote:
On Feb 7, 2012, at 2:12 59PM, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Tuesday, February 07, 2012 10:45 -0800 james woodyatt
<jhw(_at_)apple(_dot_)com> wrote:
...
TAI has a fairly stable foundation in non-relativistic
physics, which experience has shown to be somewhat resistant
to the power of political bodies to modify at will, so it
should be good enough for most running code on the Internet.
You obviously have not been in enough meetings in which
proposals were put forth, by political types with the best of
intentions, for regulations to improve the Internet...
regulations that would work really well if the speed of light
were adjusted upward by 10% or so and/or could be dialed up and
back by a bit to match regulatory convenience. :-(
What was that about a free lunch?
Yes. A line I heard recently (from someone else whom I think is
on this list) is that when you tell a politician that something
violates the laws of physics, that statement is taken as a negotiating
position.
I don't see the problem. An experiment in Italy has observed
super-luminal neutrinos, and a somewhat unlikely violation of
the 2nd law of thermodynamics would allow pigs to fly and all
NTP servers to update themselves simultaneously. Clearly these
are matters that any self-respecting politician could use in
negotiation.
I am much more worried about
http://internetsociety.org/events/internet-society-events/world-conference-international-telecommunications
than about UTC.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf