g...@rellim.com said: >> The pool command hasn't been in the middle of this sort of sharp eyed=20 >> scrutiny. I won't be surprised if there are bugs or quirks. > Well, if we can't prove it is better I would not be in a hurry to use it.
Please give it a try. We can't possibly prove anything if nobody tries it. I haven't noticed any problems other than the nopeer issue. g...@rellim.com said: > Do we need the 'restict nopeer'? From a quick google pretty much every one > says to use it. If we need nppeer, we can't use 'pool' until that bug is > fixed. > From what I can see the nopeer is to prevent DoS. We certainly do not > want to have a configuration that is know to allow DoS. > That pretty much makes up my mind. Until issue #79 is closed we can not use > 'pool'. I don't know of any DoS mechanism that nopeer would fix. You will probably find it in most examples along with the options that do block DoS mechanisms. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel