NavList:

Zefram on the Leap Seconds Mailing List raised a good point, IMHO:

"If the intention is for UTC to track UT1 over the long term, even if it has a much greater tracking bound than previously, then we need to be prepared to handle leaps. In this context, there is a major disadvantage to the leap minute/hour proposals, and even to just embargoing leap seconds for a century: they would result in needing to handle a leap when no one has experienced a leap for decades. What are the chances of getting that right? If we're going to have leaps at all, it seems better to keep leaps reasonably frequent, and even to insert gratuitous leaps to make them more frequent than at present (see the "leap second every month" proposal). This way we would have a fair chance of making the leap-handling systems actually work."