Minor grammar and spelling fixes. #1
Conversation
| Imagine that we have some mysterious mechanism to synchronize *A* and *B*. Mysterious as synchronizing clocks is hard, … really hard. For those that don't believe me, I recommend reading Lamport's [_Time, Clocks, and the Ordering of Events in a Distributed System_](https://web.archive.org/web/20211101121036/https://amturing.acm.org/p558-lamport.pdf) and Mills' [_A Brief History of NTP Time: Memoirs of an Internet Timekeeper_](https://web.archive.org/web/20220120075303/https://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/database/papers/history.pdf). | ||
|
|
||
| Anyways, back to assuming the existence of a mysterious synchronization mechanism. Such mechanism would allow *A* and *B* to dial each other "at the same time". | ||
| Imagine that we have some mysterious mechanism to synchronize *A* and *B*. Such a mechanism would allow *A* and *B* to dial each other "at the same time". |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why remove these further reading suggestions @johnnymatthews?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, my bad. Didn't meant to take it out. But I'm a bit confused why it's in here. What does this mysterious clock synchronisation have to do with the rest of this post? I might be missing something, but this felt very out of place, as was only put in here to mention these two articles from Lamport and Mills.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That makes sense. I think these are great papers to read on time synchronization. But as you say, time synchronization only plays a minor role in this blog post, thus referencing these is too much.
(Also don't want to come across as just name dropping.)
Thanks @johnnymatthews.
No description provided.