Re: [IPsec] [TICTOC] Review request for IPsec security for packet based synchronization (Yang Cui)

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Danny Mayer <mayer@ntp.org> wrote:
> On 10/18/2011 2:16 PM, Paul_Koning@Dell.com wrote:
>> Absolutely.  But if you allow, say, one second round trip time, you have
>> to assume that your time is off by that amount from the master.
>
> No, half that amount. Round trip means exactly that!

You're assuming symmetric routing...
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

• This message: [ Message body ]
• Next message: Paul_Koning_at_nospam: "Re: [IPsec] [TICTOC] Review request for IPsec security for packet based synchronization (Yang Cui)"
• Previous message: Danny Mayer: "Re: [IPsec] [TICTOC] Review request for IPsec security for packet based synchronization (Yang Cui)"
• In reply to: Danny Mayer: "Re: [IPsec] [TICTOC] Review request for IPsec security for packet based synchronization (Yang Cui)"
• Next in thread: Paul_Koning_at_nospam: "Re: [IPsec] [TICTOC] Review request for IPsec security for packet based synchronization (Yang Cui)"
• Reply: Paul_Koning_at_nospam: "Re: [IPsec] [TICTOC] Review request for IPsec security for packet based synchronization (Yang Cui)"

• Contemporary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]