My understanding is that ntpd, as opposed to ntpdate, is supposed to synchronize continuously.. for some definition of "continuously" :)
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 10:42:15AM +0100, Adam Duck wrote: > Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> I thought about that. But wouldn't you still have a consistent, > >> detectable skew, at least most of the time? > > > > You think so? Caused by what? > > If you don't synchronize often enough. From page 10 of the paper in > question: > > --- > "As the horizontal line in Table 3 indicates, we divide our > experiments into two sets. In the first set, our experiments last for > three hours and exchange one TCP packet every minute (we do this by > performing a sleep(60) on host1). For the second set of experiments, > the connections last for 30 minutes, and a packet is exchanged at > random intervals between 0 and 2 seconds, as determined by a usleep on > host1. With few exceptions, the packets from laptop are all ACKs with > no data." > --- > > The clock skew estimates are roughly the same. And I always found > that synching one time a day would be enough, well... > > bye, Adam. > > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat@freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
