Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft 02: Expand upon why unix epoch rollover is not a problem #44

Closed
kyzer-davis opened this issue Jan 20, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed

Comments

@kyzer-davis
Copy link
Collaborator

Jim:

Section 6.1: Length: Perhaps directly address why the Unix epoch
rollover is not a concern here.

@kyzer-davis kyzer-davis changed the title Expand upon why unix epoch is not a problem Draft 02: Expand upon why unix epoch is not a problem Jan 20, 2023
@kyzer-davis kyzer-davis changed the title Draft 02: Expand upon why unix epoch is not a problem Draft 02: Expand upon why unix epoch rollover is not a problem Jan 23, 2023
@kyzer-davis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Had to dig deep but I knew we discussed this.
uuid6/uuid6-ietf-draft#23 (comment)

10889 AD for v7 at 48 bits and MS resolution
5623 AD for v1/v6 at 60 bits and 100-NS resolution

kyzer-davis added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 9, 2023
kyzer-davis added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 16, 2023
- Describe Nil/Max UUID in variant table #16
- Further Clarify that non-descript node IDs are the preferred method in distributed UUID Generation #49
- Appendix B, consistent naming #55
- Remove duplicate ABNF from IANA considerations #56
- Monotonic Error Checking missing newline #57
- More Security Considerations Randomness #26
- SHA265 UUID Generation #50
- Expand multiplexed fields within v1 and v6 bit definitions # 43
- Clean up text in UUIDs that Do Not Identify the Host #61
- Revise UUID Generator States section #47
- Expand upon why unix epoch rollover is not a problem #44
- Delete Sample Code Appendix #62
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant