[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [cti-stix] Timestamps - Proposal (UTC)
On 06.12.2015 08:16:45, Eric Burger wrote: > If the goal is to work with a standard that works everywhere in the > world and is immune to local, flavor of the day definitions of > “local time,” the *ONLY* option is UTC. The world cannot agree to a > single repository to lookup what local time is. The Internet > community has put one up on a volunteer basis, but it explicitly > states that it is not normative, may be wrong, and will almost > certainly be out of date. > Hi, Eric - On a technical level, I agree with you 110%. But as the timestamp discussion was approaching Tolstoy's "War and Peace" in terms of wordcount, in the interest of achieving consensus I agreed with supporting multiple timezones. In your view, is the potential downside of *not* making UTC mandatory *so* detrimental as to justify reopening this debate, or can we live with the current consensus? -- Cheers, Trey -- Trey Darley Senior Security Engineer 4DAA 0A88 34BC 27C9 FD2B A97E D3C6 5C74 0FB7 E430 Soltra | An FS-ISAC & DTCC Company www.soltra.com -- "There's never enough time. Thank you for yours." --Dan Geer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]