Control Messages Protocol for Use with Network Time Protocol Version 4
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <email@example.com> To: IETF-Announce <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, The IESG <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, Karen O'Donoghue <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Document Action: 'Control Messages Protocol for Use with Network Time Protocol Version 4' to Historic RFC (draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds-08.txt) The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Control Messages Protocol for Use with Network Time Protocol Version 4' (draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds-08.txt) as Historic RFC This document is the product of the Network Time Protocol Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Erik Kline and Éric Vyncke. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds/
Technical Summary This document describes the structure of the control messages that were historically used with the Network Time Protocol before the advent of more modern control and management approaches. These control messages have been used to monitor and control the Network Time Protocol application running on any IP network attached computer. The information in this document was originally described in Appendix B of RFC 1305. The goal of this document is to provide a current, but historic, description of the control messages as described in RFC 1305 and any additional commands implemented in NTP. The publication of this document is not meant to encourage the developement and deployment of these control messages. This document is only providing a current reference for these control messages given the current status of RFC 1305. Working Group Summary The document has working group consensus for publication, and has been reviewed by several WG participants since its initial adoption as a working group item. Document Quality Are there existing implementations of the protocol? Have a significant number of vendors indicated their plan to implement the specification? Are there any reviewers that merit special mention as having done a thorough review, e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a conclusion that the document had no substantive issues? If there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type, or other Expert Review, what was its course (briefly)? In the case of a Media Type Review, on what date was the request posted? Personnel Karen O'Donoghue is acting as the Document Shepherd. Erik Kline is the Responsible Area Director. IANA Note This document makes no request of IANA.