[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]
Versions: 00 01 02 03 04
ARTWG J. Touch
Internet Draft
Intended status: Best Current Practice January 19, 2018
Expires: July 2018
Resolving Multiple Time Scales in the Internet
draft-touch-time-03.txt
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified,
and derivative works of it may not be created, and it may not be
published except as an Internet-Draft.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as
reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on July 19, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
respect to this document.
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
Abstract
Internet systems use a variety of time scales, which can complicate
time comparisons and calculations. This document explains these
various ways of indicating time and explains how they can be used
together safely. This document is intended as a companion to
Internet time as discussed in RFC 3339.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................2
2. Conventions used in this document..............................4
3. Terminology....................................................4
4. Background.....................................................5
4.1. Time uses and properties..................................6
4.2. Time scales...............................................7
4.3. Comparison of properties..................................8
5. Systems that report time.......................................9
6. Computing time.................................................9
6.1. Conversion...............................................10
6.1.1. Continuous and uniform..............................10
6.1.2. Uniform but not continuous..........................11
6.1.3. Not uniform.........................................11
6.1.4. Ordering............................................12
6.2. Calculating intervals....................................13
7. Advice........................................................14
7.1. Selection advice.........................................14
7.2. Hazards..................................................15
8. Security Considerations.......................................15
9. IANA Considerations...........................................15
10. References...................................................15
10.1. Normative References....................................15
10.2. Informative References..................................15
11. Acknowledgments..............................................18
1. Introduction
A popular proverb reads, "a person with one clock always knows what
time it is; a person with two clocks is never sure." Unfortunately,
Internet systems rely on a variety of time references that often
need to be reconciled. This document attempts to explain this issue
and provide advice on how to avoid temporal ambiguity.
There are various standards for expressing time, including Universal
Coordinated Time (UTC) [ITU02], local time (UTC adjusted for time
zone location and daylight saving time shifts), and Unix time
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
[OG08], as well as many others. Although the Internet has a standard
for expressing time [RFC3339], this document explains the
complexities of using any single such time scale and describes how
to safely apply any one time scale and to accommodate concurrent use
of different time scales. In particular, it focuses on the
difficulties using a single time scale to indicate dates to users,
to order events, and to measure intervals. This document ignores
general and special relativistic effects.
Many time frames contain discontinuities, some of which are regular
(e.g., time zones, leap days, and daylight saving time shifts),
whereas others are irregularly introduced as needed (e.g., leap
seconds). These discontinuities complicate interval computation, the
latter requiring externally provided context (a table of mandated
leap seconds and their scheduled occurrences). Other fine frames are
non-uniform, in which the duration of an interval (e.g., a day, a
year, or even a second) varies depending on its offset.
Despite many attempts, there is no single time scale that supports
all common uses easily and without the need for updated external
information. As a preview, this document makes the following
recommendations for system designers:
1. System designers SHOULD NOT invent their own time scale. There
are no simpler solutions and more than enough existing variants,
although there is no known reason to exclude new variants.
2. System designers SHOULD use one time scale as their primary
reference and derive all other time scales by conversion, to
avoid confusion. Exceptions might optimize for more than one use.
3. System designers SHOULD use UTC as their primary time scale
because it is most commonly accepted by governments and the basis
for the Internet time [RFC3339] (based on ISO 8601 [ISO98]) and
the Network Time Protocol (NTP) [RFC5905]. Exceptions optimize
computation, e.g., to use TAI [BI06] for interval calculation or
local time [ISO98] for user interaction, e.g., calendars.
4. System designers SHOULD include location context (e.g., location
or zone) as a part of all dates and MUST include that information
if conversion to and between civil and local time is required.
5. System designers SHOULD maintain updated information regarding
leap seconds and time zones and MUST maintain that information if
accurate intervals or civil conversions are required.
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
6. System designers SHOULD be explicit about indicating whether
intervals are inclusive or exclusive of start and end dates.
Doing otherwise is an opportunity for ambiguity.
7. System designers SHOULD be very clear about whether timers expire
on a date or when an interval has passed, to help understand the
impact of continuous and monotonic aspects of time scales.
2. Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
In this document, these words will appear with that interpretation
only when in ALL CAPS. Lowercase uses of these words are not to be
interpreted as carrying significance described in RFC 2119.
3. Terminology
o Instant: a specific moment in time.
o Time scale: a system for assigning names to intervals and dates.
o Interval: the elapsed time between instants.
o Date: the name of an instant in a time scale, typically indicated
as an interval from an epoch.
o Epoch: an instant used as the origin of a time scale.
o Clock: a mechanism indicating the current date in a time scale.
o Civil time (or date): a time scale (or date) selected by a
government authority.
o Solar day: a unit of time defined as the interval of one rotation
of the earth as measured between the repeated position of the sun
in the sky as viewed from a fixed location. Solar time relative
to a single daily position is "apparent solar time". Solar time
indicated as a mean over a year (one orbit of the earth around
the sun) is "mean solar time". A given solar day can vary by as
much as 30 seconds vs. the mean.
o Tropical year: a unit of time defined by the interval of one
rotation of the earth around the sun as measured using the
position of the sun in the sky in the same way as a solar day.
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
o Second: the unit of time, which has multiple definitions whose
values differ:
o 1/(24 * 60 * 60) of a solar day.
o 1/(31,556,925.9747) of a tropical year as of the instant of
1900 "January 0" (i.e., December 31) at 12:00:00 Ephemeris
time (Ephemeris time is defined later herein) [C61].
o Exactly 9192631770 periods of the radiation corresponding to
the hyperfine transition of the ground state of cesium 133 at
0K (as an SI unit of time) [BI06].
o Leap seconds: an extra second irregularly inserted into or
removed from the UTC time scale (based on SI seconds, see Sec.
4.2) to maintain it within 0.9 SI seconds of UT1 (based on solar
days, see Sec. 4.2).
o Offset: an interval added or subtracted from a date or clock to
convert between time scales with different epochs and leap
seconds.
o Local time: a variation of a time scale intended to approximate
that time scale at a given geographic location relative to that
time scale at a reference geographic location, indicated as an
offset.
o Time zone: an offset defined within a geographic region, used to
compute local time.
4. Background
There are a variety of types of time scales in widespread use for
scientific, civil, and computational purposes. Scientific time is
based on the International System (SI) standard definition of a
second based on atomic clocks, and its goal is to provide a uniform
standard for the passage of time. Civil time is based on the
rotation of the earth, and its goal is to ensure that a single
geographic location has the same reference to the sun at the same
time each day, including variations that support localized time to
approximate that effect for other locations around the earth.
Computational time is an approximation of civil time that is
intended to be inexpensive for computers to maintain without
external information.
Each of these time scales has different properties. Scientific time
is intended to be continuous and uniform, so that one second of
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
elapsed time always has the effect of moving a scientific clock
forward one second. Civil time can be non-continuous, such as when
leap seconds or leap days are added to compensate for the difference
between elapsed time and the rotation of the earth relative to the
sun. Computational time can be non-uniform, such as when Unix system
clocks are sped up to synchronize with civil time in a way intended
to avoid discontinuity.
Each of these types of time scales also has different primary uses.
Scientific time ensures uniform comparison of elapsed time and event
ordering. Civil time is used by people and their governments.
Computational time is used by computers to approximate other time
systems. Time represented in each of these systems can be converted
to other representations, given sufficient additional information.
Time is used throughout the Internet, to govern protocols (e.g.,
timers in TCP [RFC793]), to improve efficiency (e.g., TCP RTT
estimation using timestamps [RFC7323]), as well as to indicate a
correlation with civilian time (e.g., NTP [RFC5905] and calendars
[RFC5545]). Each of these types of uses has distinct requirements on
the kind of time used.
4.1. Time uses and properties
Protocols use time for three primary purposes:
o Ordering: to determine the relative sequence of events across
systems, such as with Lamport clocks [La78].
o Determining intervals: to determine actions to occur in a
protocol in the absence of user requests and received messages
(e.g., timers in TCP [RFC793]), to interact with physical systems
(e.g., generating symbols at a given rate on a link), or to
determine performance.
o Interacting with people: to exchange dates with the real world,
as when indicating the civil date of an email transmission
[RFC3339], web page [ISO98], or managing calendars [RFC5545].
Each of these uses mandates a key property. Ordering requires that a
time reference is monotonic and increasing, such that the time
reference values change between any two events whose order needs to
be established. Accurate interval calculation requires that a time
reference also be continuous and uniform, such that the calculated
differences between any two dates separated by the same interval
yield the same value. Interacting with people requires the use of a
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
time reference they already use, so that expressed dates have known
meaning.
These properties are not all supported by the variety of time
references in widespread use. Some insert leap seconds and leap
days, introducing discontinuities. Some vary their basic interval
unit (e.g., to accommodate astronomical variances), which undermines
their uniformity. These issues affect the choice of time reference
and conversion between time references.
4.2. Time scales
The following is a description of the time scales in widespread use:
o TAI (International Atomic Time) [BI06]: a time scale based on the
SI second at mean sea level ("on the geoid"), determined post-
facto as a weighted average of a set of particular atomic clocks,
adjusted to account for relativistic effects.
o UT (Universal Time) [Mc09][Sa78]: a time scale based on the solar
day using zero degrees longitude as the earth location and a
specific astronomical location (originally the sun, but now more
distant objects). UT has several variants, of which the most
common is UT1 (where UT is often synonymous with UT1), which
includes corrections for earth axis variations.
o UTC (Coordinated Universal Time) [ITU02]: an approximation of UT
based on TAI adjusted with leap seconds.
o Ephemeris time [C61]: an astronomical time reference, originating
in Newcomb's tables [Ne1898] and standardized in 1952.
o Unix [OG08]: the POSIX/IEEE standard for Unix-based operating
system software, in which dates are defined as the number of
seconds that have elapsed since UTC 1970-1-1 00:00:00, increased
by exactly 86,400 seconds per day (note that neither 'day' nor
'second' is defined in Unix time). Note that this is not the same
as the POSIX time API (application programmer interface), which
provides access to a variety of time scales.
The following are somewhat secondary to the time scales above:
o DUT1 [IERS]: the number of leap seconds between the current TAI
date and the UTC epoch.
o GPS [Ha01]: the US Global Positioning System, defined as tracking
time as TAI + 19 SI seconds.
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
o GLONASS [RI98]: Russia's satellite clock system, defined as
tracking UTC.
o IRNSS/NAVIC [IRNSS]: The Indian Regional Navigation System.
o BeiDou-2 (prev. COMPASS) [NAE12]: China's satellite clock system.
o Galileo [Ga17]: the European Union's satellite clock system.
o NTP [RFC5905]: the Network Time Protocol, used in the Internet to
synchronize local clocks, in which dates are indicated by UTC
values. NTP times track the time of the clock they connect to.
4.3. Comparison of properties
Time scales can be compared using the following properties, in
addition to their epoch and the interval used as their unit of time:
o TAI error (Terr): a measure of the typically bounded precision on
dates in the given time scale vs. TAI.
o Continuous (Cont): are dates in this time scale continuous, i.e.,
so that intervals can be calculated directly from the difference
in dates.
o Uniform (Unif): are dates in this time scale uniform, i.e., so
that all intervals of the same size represent the same amount of
time.
The table below describes the time scales considered herein. All
time scales use fixed epoch values except GLONASS, which reports
dates relative to the current UTC. UT can drift in comparison to TAI
by up to 0.9s, at which point a leap second is added. The satellite
systems (BeiDou-2, Galileo, GPS, GLONASS, and IRNSS/NAVIC) attempt
to track TAI, each with particular variances as design goals. NTP
varies from TAI because of network latency variations, except where
smearing is used [Go17]. Unix clocks typically use local quartz
oscillators as clocks, which can drift from TAI by 1-2s/week unless
continuously corrected, e.g., by NTP over the network.
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
Time scale Epoch Unit Terr Cont Unif
--------------------------------------------------------
TAI 1977-01-01 SI - Yes Yes
UT 1582-10-15 solar 0.9s Yes No
UTC 1582-10-15 SI - No Yes
Unix 1970-01-01 undef ~100s Yes undef
(1) As specified [RFC5905], error as per the FAQ [NTPfaq]
(2) Some servers, notably Google's, 'smear' leap seconds [Go17]
* TAI comparisons from [Sa11]
TAI was designed to be both continuous and uniform. UT was designed
to be both uniform and track the solar day. The difference is
addressed in different ways in other time scales, which are largely
derived from these two.
Unix time does not specify the definition of a 'second' or 'day',
and so it is not clear whether it intends to track SI seconds (where
time would be uniform) or solar time (where it would not).
5. Systems that report time
Time scale Epoch Unit Terr Cont Unif
--------------------------------------------------------
BeiDou-2 2006-01-01 SI 100ns* Yes Yes
Galilelo 1999-08-22 SI 50ns* Yes Yes
GLONASS UTC SI 1ms* No Yes
GPS 1980-01-06 SI 25ns* Yes Yes
IRNSS/NAVIC ? SI ? Yes Yes
NTP(1) 1900-01-01 SI ~100ms No Yes
NTP-smear(2) 1900-01-01 SI 1.1s Yes No
(1) As specified [RFC5905], error as per the FAQ [NTPfaq]
(2) Some servers, notably Google's, 'smear' leap seconds [Go17]
* TAI comparisons from [Sa11]
6. Computing time
The concurrent use of multiple time scales results in the need to
coordinate clocks and convert dates, and can complicate ordering.
Conversions require more context than just the time units and
epochs. It is also useful to be able to calculate the interval
between two dates within a single time scale. Each of these
calculations can require context, some of which cannot be statically
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
encoded. Ordering depends on monotonically increasing clocks, which
some time scales do not support.
6.1. Conversion
Dates in different time scales can be converted precisely as long as
both time scales are uniform. When both time scales are also
continuous, conversion is simple and relies only on the
specification of the time scales. If either time scale is
discontinuous, an additional table of discontinuities is required.
When either time scale is non-uniform, precise conversion is not
defined unless the non-uniformity is also precisely indicated. The
following subsections address each of these cases.
6.1.1. Continuous and uniform
For continuous and uniform time scales sharing the same unit of
time, the difference in epoch is sufficient to convert one scale to
the other, e.g.:
TS2_date = TS1_date - TS1_epoch + TS2_epoch
This conversion assumes both epochs are indicated in the same time
scale (or can be converted to such - if not, no conversion is
possible). For example, GPS reports the TAI date as an interval from
January 6, 1980, whereas TAI reports the date as an interval from
January 1, 1977, and both epochs are indicated in solar time. The
difference between those two epochs is exactly 95,040,019 SI
seconds, which is the total of 1,100 days of 86,400 SI seconds each
and an additional 19 SI seconds, needed to align the epochs
indicated as solar dates. As a result, dates indicated in
year/month/day/second format need only have their seconds values
adjusted as follows:
GPS_date = TAI_date + 19s
If time scales do not share the same unit of time, the conversion
needs to account for the difference in the intervals from epoch. For
example, a solar day is composed of 86,400 'solar seconds', but
approximately 86,400.002 SI seconds. Conversion now requires that
the epochs and units are expressed in a common time scale, and can
be computed as follows:
TS2_date = (TS1_date - TS1_epoch)/TS1_unit * TS2_unit + TS2_epoch
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
Converting a common time frame to local time further requires
knowing the location of each date and consulting a time zone
database, which is also available online [tzdb] [RFC7808]. In this
way, UTC can be converted to its local equivalent using a similar
lookup operation (where TZDB is the time zone database):
UTC_localdate = UTC_date + TZDB[UTC_date, local_location]
6.1.2. Uniform but not continuous
Changes in the rotation of the earth cause variations in the
difference between the unit of a second as defined by solar day,
tropical year, and SI methods. These differences are corrected by
introducing "leap seconds", which are added (or removed) on specific
dates [IERS]. E.g., UTC adds or removes leap seconds (known as DUT1)
to TAI on specific dates to help it approximate UT.
Leap second dates can be approximated using a known calculation, but
the exact date is determined administratively (rather than by
calculation). Those dates are announced several months in advance
and can be obtained online [tzdb][RFC6557][RFC7808]. As a
consequence, conversion accounting for leap seconds requires a
lookup operation (where "leapDB" is a database that indicates the
number of leap seconds added since the epoch):
UTC_date = TAI_date + leapDB[TAI_date]
Between dates when leap second dates, precise differences in solar
vs. SI time scales can be computed below 1s by accounting for the
ratio between a solar second and an SI second, but this is rarely
considered.
6.1.3. Not uniform
Some time scales are not uniform, i.e., the duration of an interval
is indicated in units that vary and so are not easily directly
comparable. Solar days vary by as much as 50 SI seconds because of
the earth's variation in its axis of rotation. Because a solar day
is defined as a fixed number of (solar) seconds, one solar second
varies by as much as 0.06%. This variability is not simple to
compute, but can be averaged out over long periods, but only in
hindsight. Similarly, the earth's orbit around the sun varies and is
slowing over time, resulting in an increasing stretching of a solar
second.
Some time scales replace discrete leap seconds with a leap smear,
stretching the interval of one second over 10-20 hours before the
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
corresponding leap second date [Go17]. This allows a time scale to
avoid discontinuities and non-conventional interval values (e.g.,
minutes with 59 or 61 seconds). Smearing causes non-uniformity of
intervals that span the smear, especially because there is no
current standard for the smear interval or algorithm.
Additionally, some time scales have no precise conversion, e.g., GPS
is coordinated to within 25ns of TAI, but the exact difference is
known only as a post-facto measurement relative to NIST time (a
subset of the clocks used to compute TAI) [NG]. This occurs because
GPS uses its own set of atomic clocks rather than using the TAI
directly, and the same is true for other satellite systems. Other
time scales are imprecise by definition, as with Unix time, which is
based on clocks that vary widely by instance and with changes in
temperature.
6.1.4. Ordering
Events in a distributed system often require ordering to ensure
consistent views of their aggregate state [La78]. It can be
important to know whether a bank deposit occurs before a withdrawal
or if a license application has been submitted before a deadline.
Time scales that are continuous enable easy ordering of dates, e.g.,
all dates comparisons correctly either indicate concurrence (when
dates match) or a specific order. Time scales that are discontinuous
can give false results, such as during a leap second. Consider the
UTC date encodings indicated in Figure 1.
Instant TAI date UTC encoding (61s minute)
--------------------------------------------------------
A 2016-01-01T00:00:34.0 2016-12-31T23:59:59.0
B 2016-01-01T00:00:34.5 2016-12-31T23:59:59.5
C 2016-01-01T00:00:35.0 2016-12-31T23:59:60.0
D 2016-01-01T00:00:35.5 2016-12-31T23:59:60.5
E 2016-01-01T00:00:36.0 2016-01-01T00:00:00.0
Figure 1 Leap seconds with long minutes
In both cases, two SI seconds progress between instants A and E.
However, the last minute before midnight on December 31, 2016 has a
minute that lasts 61 seconds (0..61), rather than 60. Ordering of
these instants is unambiguous in this example.
Consider instead a system that cannot represent minutes with more
than 60 seconds. In such systems, the clock is either stalled or
delayed during a leap second insertion, resulting in repeated values
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
(Figure 2). Here, the order of instants B, C, and D cannot be
established accurately from the dates. Additionally, intervals that
span this "reset" are inaccurately calculated from date differences
unless explicitly corrected.
Instant TAI date UTC encoding (60s minute)
--------------------------------------------------------
A 2016-01-01T00:00:34.0 2016-12-31T23:59:59.0
B 2016-01-01T00:00:34.5 2016-12-31T23:59:59.5
C 2016-01-01T00:00:35.0 2016-12-31T23:59:59.0
D 2016-01-01T00:00:35.5 2016-12-31T23:59:59.5
E 2016-01-01T00:00:36.0 2016-01-01T00:00:00.0
Figure 2 Leap seconds with repeating dates
Ordering can be restored using leap smear, as shown in Figure 3, but
at the expense of complicating the computation of intervals that
span the smear.
Instant TAI date UTC encoding (60s minute)
--------------------------------------------------------
A 2016-01-01T00:00:34.0 2016-12-31T23:59:59.0
B 2016-01-01T00:00:34.5 2016-12-31T23:59:59.25
C 2016-01-01T00:00:35.0 2016-12-31T23:59:59.5
D 2016-01-01T00:00:35.5 2016-12-31T23:59:59.75
E 2016-01-01T00:00:36.0 2016-01-01T00:00:00.0
Figure 3 Leap seconds with smear
6.2. Calculating intervals
Intervals can be calculated directly between two dates of a uniform
time scale directly as the difference between two dates A and B as
follows (where "abs" is the absolute value function):
interval = abs(dateA - dateB)
It is important that the specification of an interval indicate
whether its endpoints are included or not, e.g., whether the
interval is open, half-open, or closed. In common mathematical
notation, the interval [1:24.00, 1:25.00] includes both 1:24.00 and
1:25.00. The interval [1.24.00, 1:25.00) starts at the instant of
1:24.00 and ends just before the instant of 1:25.00, i.e., 1:25.00
is excluded from the interval. System designers SHOULD clearly
indicate whether intervals include or exclude their start and end
instants.
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
A non-continuous time scale requires external information, e.g., the
leap second dates that occur during the interval. Computing
intervals in these time scales requires that the representation does
not repeat or smear time. The interval is computed by converting
non-continuous time to continuous time by removing the effect of
leap seconds and proceeding as with the continuous case, as follows:
interval = abs((dateA - leapDB(dateA)) - (dateB - leapDB(dateB)))
Non-uniform time scale intervals can sometimes be calculated, but
this is rarely supported.
7. Advice
No single time scale serves all purposes. Use of multiple time
scales requires conversion, which often requires external
information. Maintaining accurate clocks can also require external
information (to insert leap seconds), as can the computation of
intervals.
7.1. Selection advice
A primary time scale SHOULD be chosen from among existing time
scales, if possible. Creating a new time scale increases complexity
and is unlikely to avoid the issues already present with existing
time scales, e.g., being continuous, uniform, requiring conversion,
or needing external information for conversion or interval
computation.
A primary time scale SHOULD be chosen to minimize the need for
repeated conversion and/or to minimize the complexity of computing
intervals, depending on the expected frequency of these operations.
For example, if synchronizing clocks with other systems using NTP is
the primary goal, implementers would probably select UTC [RFC5905].
If user presentation is primary, as for email or calendaring,
implementers would probably select local time [RFC5545]. If interval
computation is primary, implementers would probably select TAI.
As a consequence, in most cases, implementers SHOULD select either
TAI or UTC, or a system that closely approximates these (e.g., GPS-
like systems or NTP), and expect to maintain updated leap second
information [RFC7808].
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
7.2. Hazards
Incorrect time scale selection can result in increased computational
overhead and the need for increased storage. External information
might be needed for conversion, or conversion or calculation may not
be possible (as with smearing).
Implementers SHOULD NOT use time scales that smear, for two reasons.
First, there is no current standard for leap smearing, so the same
time scale implemented on different systems are likely to indicate
incorrect relative dates (i.e., incorrectly indicating instance
ordering). Second, leap smearing complicates interval measurements
computed over the smear which can be difficult to compensate.
8. Security Considerations
Time is used within security systems for a variety of reasons,
including indicating the validity of certificates used for
encryption and authentication [RFC5280]. Inaccurate dates,
intervals, or ordering can affect the ability to use these
protocols.
As a result, it can be important to secure the protocols used to
coordinate time [RFC7384]. NTP, the most common such protocol,
supports secure operation [RFC5905].
9. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA considerations. This section should be
removed prior to publication as an RFC.
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
10.2. Informative References
[BI06] Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (International
Bureau of Weights and Measures), "The International System
of Units (SI)," 8th Edition, 2006.
[C61] http://www.bipm.org/en/CGPM/db/11/9/ Comptes Rendus de la
11e CGPM (1960), 1961, p.86
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
[Ga17] Galileo system web pages, http://galileognss.eu/gst-
galileo-system-time/
[Go17] Google's approach to NTP leap smearing, proposed in 2017.
https://developers.google.com/time/smear
[Ha01] Hoffman-Wellenhof, B., H. Lichtenegger, J. Collins. Global
positioning system: theory and practice. New York,
Springer-Verlag, 2001.
[IERS] International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service
(IERS). https://www.iers.org/
[IRNSS] Global Indian Navigation Satellites: Constellation
studies, August ISRO-ISAC-IRNSS-TR-0887, 2009.
[ISO98] International Standards Organization, "Data elements and
interchange formats - Information interchange -
Representation of dates and times", ISO 8601, 1988.
[ITU02] International Telecommunication Union, "Standard-frequency
and time-signal emissions," ITU-R Recommendations and
Reports, TF.460-6, 2002.
[La78] Lamport, L., "Time, Clocks, and the Ordering of Events in
a Distributed System," Communications of the ACM, V21 N7,
Jul. 1978, pp. 558-565.
[Mc09] McCarthy, D., P. Seidelmann, "Time Applications," in Time
- From Earth Rotation to Atomic Physics, Wiley-VCH, 2009.
doi: 10.1002/9783527627943.ch19
[NAE12] National Academy of Engineering, "Global Navigation
Satellite Systems," National Academies Press, ISBN 978-0-
309-22275-4, 2012.
[Ne1898] Newcomb, S., Tables of the Four Inner Planets," Second
Edition, 1898.
https://ia801005.us.archive.org/11/items/06AstronomicalPap
ersPreparedForTheUse/06-
Astronomical_Papers_Prepared_for_the_Use_text.pdf
[NG] NIST vs. GPS time, https://www.nist.gov/pml/time-and-
frequency-division/services/gps-data-archive
[NTPfaq] NTP FAQ pages, http://www.ntp.org/ntpfaq/NTP-s-algo.htm
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
[OG08] The Open Group, "Base Specifications, Issue 7, 2016
Edition," IEEE Std 1003.1 / POSIX.1-2008, 2008.
[RFC793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol" RFC 793,
September 1981.
[RFC3339] Klyne, G., C. Newman, "Date and Time on the Internet:
Timestamps," RFC 3339, July 2002.
[RFC5280] Cooper, D., S. Santesson, S. Farrell, S. Boeyen, R.
Housley, W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
(CRL) Profile," RFC 5280, May 2008.
[RFC5545] Desruisseaux, B. (Ed.), "Internet Calendaring and
Scheduling Core Object Specification (iCalendar)," RFC
5545, Sep. 2009.
[RFC5905] Mills, D., J. Martin (Ed.), J. Burbank, W. Kasch, "Network
Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms
Specification," RFC 5905, June 2010.
[RFC6557] Lear, E., P. Eggert, "Procedures for Maintaining the Time
Zone Database," RFC 6557, BCP 175, Feb. 2012.
[RFC7323] Borman, D., R. Braden, V. Jacobson, R. Scheffenegger
(Ed.), "TCP Extensions for High Performance," RFC 7323,
Sep. 2014.
[RFC7384] Mizrahi, T., "Security Requirements of Time Protocols in
Packet Switched Networks," RFC 7384, Oct. 2014.
[RFC7808] Douglass, M., C. Daboo, "Time Zone Data Distribution
Service," RFC 7808, Mar. 2016.
[RI98] Russian Institute of Space Device Engineering, "GLONASS
Interface Control Document", 1998.
[Sa78] Sadler, D., "Mean Solar Time on the Meridian of
Greenwich," Quarterly Journal of the Roayal Astronomical
Society, V19, Sept. 1978, p.290.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-
bib_query?bibcode=1978QJRAS..19..290S
[Sa11] Sanz Subirana, J., J. Juan Zornoza, M. Hernandez-Pajares,
"Time References in GNSS," Navipedia web pages, 2011.
http://www.navipedia.net/index.php/Time_References_in_GNSS
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
[tzdb] Time zone database, https://www.iana.org/time-zones
11. Acknowledgments
This work originated in response to a proposal for a new continuous
time scale by Phillip Hallam-Baker, and benefitted from discussion
on the IETF list, notably Steve Allen, Patrik Falstrom, Tony Finch,
Nicholas Mailhot, Michael Thornburgh, and Nico Williams.
This work is partly supported by USC/ISI's Postel Center.
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
Authors' Addresses
Joe Touch
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 USA
Phone: +1 (310) 560-0334
Email: touch@strayalpha.com
Change Log:
draft-touch-time-03:
Revise doc to more clearly target summarized recommendations.
Sec 4.2 definitions revised based on feedback:
- solar day now defined as two different things?
- another scrub of existing definitions
draft-touch-time-02:
Sec 4.2 definitions revised based on feedback
Explain difference between Unix time and POSIX time API
draft-touch-time-01:
Sec 1 expanded to include list of recommendations.
Sec 5.2 more detailed description of intervals.
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Resolving Multiple Time Scales January 2018
draft-touch-time-00:
(original version)
Touch Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 19]
Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from
https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/