[Nut-upsdev] Should NUT have a way to optionally report last-update timestamps (or equivalent deemed safe)?

[Jim Klimov]

Hello all,

 During an issue discussion I began wondering why we don't report any sort
of last-update timestamp that consumers could read and decide whether to
process the rest of info, for example (similar to HTTP-304). Then I thought
it might be unsafe to expose a server timestamp, or service uptime,
generally nowadays (especially with NUT read-only access being anonymous) -
so it should be hidden by default and only users who want/need the data can
enable their drivers to report it (troubleshooting, development, secure
LAN...) - and then there's more specific info we could show, like the age
of each reading individually.

  One of the hardest IT problems then rears its head - namely Naming :)

  I posted some ideas I've had about this at
https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/issues/2810 and invite you to share
your thoughts here or there.

WDYT?
Jim Klimov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/nut-upsdev/attachments/20250223/42d86536/attachment.htm>