Network Time Protocols (ntp) working group @ IETF 120

Monday, 22 July, 2024
17:30 - 18:30 PDT (00:30 - 01:30 UTC on 23 July 2024)
Plaza C

Draft Agenda

1. Administrative and Agenda Bashing (Chairs)

• No agenda bashing

2. NTP/TICTOC WG Document Status Review/Update (Chairs)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile/

• The Enterprise profile draft has gone through the IESG. Some
  balloting comments have to be worked on. But it is very close to be
  completed.
• Registries document: does nee some resolution of IESG ballot
  comments.
• NTS for PTP: Adopted by the WG
• NTP over PTP:
• The document raised several concerns from the 1588 Working Group
  (WG). A meeting together with 1588 leadership was held to discuss
  the concerns and propose a way forward. Specific steps were agreed
  upon to address the concerns. A consensus on the proposed way
  forward was reached. The concerns have been successfully resolved,
  and the document is ready for
  the next review phase by the IESG.
• Interleave mode (EK): I reviewed changes to Interleave mode. Some
  objections from operations personnel may still persist. The topic
  will be brought back to the telechat on August 22. It is hoped that
  the reviewer will be less skeptical this time, especially given that
  there are at least three implementations of Interleave mode.

3. NTPv5 Requirements

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv5-requirements/

• No update from the author since the last time we discussed this
  document.
• We have some additional changes we would like to have made.
• We want to have some editorial support for the author. Anyone who is
  interested in helping to work on this document we would appreciated
  it.
• At some point we talked about whether to publish this document or
  not. The chairs and Erik discussed this. We believe that we should
  go ahead and develop this document and deal with the question of
  publishing it at this stage. Because we still need some answers to
  questions in order to drive the NTPv5 document.
• There are no questions on the requirements document.

4. NTPv5 Protocol Document

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv5/
Miroslav is not able to attend this meeting. Karen summarise:

• There has been an update to the document.
• The lastest version of the document has a replacement of the Kiss'o
  death, a NTS NAK code. It improves NTPv5 negotiation, and it
  improves the specification of the correction EF.
• Remaining issues: Support of Reference ID for stratum 1 servers
  which have non NTP sources, like GNSS receivers or radio receivers;
  more testing of prevention of synchronisations loops.
• Additional editorial work is necessary; no objections of the design.
  Better introduction and explanations are needed.
• It is definitely not ready for WGLC. We need additional reviews and
  comments to move it forward.
• We hope to have a Hackathon project at IETF 121.

Discussion:

• (Erik) With respect to the NTPv5 requirements document: It should be
  publishable. But we don't have to publish it. If we don't publish it
  the protocol document should clearly explain why we are doing NTPv5.
  Otherwise somewhere in the IESG will ask why this cannot be done by
  other means. There is no need for a long text but a concise
  explanation why we are doing a whole revision instead of some
  extension.
• (Karen) For both documents (requirements and protocol) there is a
  lot of opportunity for someone to contribute text and get an
  acknowledgement. I'd like to see some more help for the authors.

5. NTP Over PTP

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp/

Karen: I already discussed the status of this document. Together with
the 1588 Group, we have found a good way to develop the document
further.

6. Roughtime

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-roughtime/

Watson:

• We have uploaded a new version. There were a lot of changes (on-list
  and off-list) to fix the remaining issues.
• My goal: The draft should be ready for a WGLC at the next IETF
  meeting.

Discussion:

• Karen: To clarify. This applies to the protocol draft?
• Watson: Yes. The problem with the ecosystem design is that there is
  not enough concrete implementation and interest.

7. Report out from informal discussion between NTP and PTP communities about PTP Security approach

Report of an informational 1588 and NTP discussion and a status on what
1588 is currently working on.

• For the next years we have the need for coordination of the two
  groups because we have a fair number of thinks that overlap
• Karen presents slides about the results of this meeting:
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/120/materials/slides-120-ntp-1588-status-update-and-report-from-informal-ntpptp-discussion-00

Discussion:

• (Erik) No hats. Is there anything in 1588.1 that should be
  considered in NTPv5?
• (Karen) Possibly, but the PAR has just been approved. This is too
  early to say. There are a couple to possible ways forward; three of
  them are from: Meta, Meinberg, and NTP over PTP might also be
  candidate. There is a design team working. But currently there are
  no proposed drafts yet.

8. NTS for PTP

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-langer-ntp-nts-for-ptp/
(Martin)

• Appreciate that the draft was adopted.
• Convinced that current security concerns can be resolved
• The last submitted version does not contain changes
• For the next version we want to add language of the document's
  scope. We want point out what can be protected by NTS for PTP. E.g.,
  one of the security concerns was about delay attacks and NTS for PTP
  cannot protect PTP for delay attacks, which requires always some
  kind of redundancy.
• This minor update will be submitted in two or three weeks.
• Implementation is ongoing. First tests in August or September.
• Thanks for all comments; also form the 1588 security subcommittee.
  We collect this comments for a major revision of the draft scheduled
  for March 2025. E.g., adding text to the means to protect for replay
  transmissions. Also, it is planned to shorten the document.

9. Any Other Business (AOB)

• Hackathon effort for IETF 121 in Dublin, IE

  • NTPv5
  • NTS for PTP (is a candidate)
  • Roughtime (Christopher Patton can provide a test server for the
    lastest Roughtime draft for the Hackathon)

• Interim Calls in September

• Adjourn 18:05