Thank you. I'm not familiar with the 2039 problem. Or the
firmware/hardware clock issue. Come to think of it I haven't done much
research on the Y2000 problem period, but I know some of my customers
respond with, 'Well, if something breaks we'll find out", or "I won't be
here by that time anyway", or "We don't have Mainframes, so no problem".
Chilling. The IRSs' systems are supposedly vulnerable, and they don't have
the money (or talent) to fix it. Ditto with some medical care and food
distribution (non-computer centric) companies. Most Banks and financial
institutions (computer centric companies) seem to take the issue seriously
and are testing carefully.
Have any output available from your study?
Bill Stout
At 10:27 AM 6/12/97 -0700, you wrote:
>I haven't talked to any firewall vendor directly but....
>I was part of a year 2000 study for Washington State and at the time
>most versions of UNIX (AIX, HPUX, SunOS and Solarsis) were good until
>the year 2039 (that's when the seconds-since-UNIX variable overflows).
>Assuming Linix and BSD use the same time keeping method they should be
>okay too. NT is already 2000 compliant.
>
>The main issue we saw was with hardware platforms that would not roll
>the internal clock properly. If you are using NTP to keep your clocks up
>to date this isn't much of an issue either. The good news is...Jan 1,
>2000 falls on a Saturday and it's a three day weekend so you'll have two
>full days to fix ALL the problems!
>
>"Simplify - There is no value in complexity, it's too difficult to
>manage."
>Bill Stackpole, CISSP
>Seitel Leeds & Associates Voice: 206.283.4355
>2 Nickerson St. Suite 201 Email: bstackpole @
sla .
com
>Seattle, Wa 98109
Follow-Ups:
|
|
