Portable general timestamp format, not 2038-limited

[Paul Rubin]

Martin Gregorie <martin at see.sig.for.address> writes:
> I don't recall the OP mentioning time interval computability - just a
> requirement for sub second accuracy timestamps.

That Y2038 is an issue suggests the OP wants a timestamp format that
is future-proof and that means it should be good for all plausible
applications.  That would include computing intervals.

> > If you want a precise timestamp and you don't
> > want to deal with leap seconds, TAI is one approach.
>  >
> TAI? Care to provide a reference?

Same one already given: http://cr.yp.to/proto/utctai.html