Can I ask my European fellow home connection folk that posted here to check
their graphs. Mine looks suspiciously more stable since midnight today
(Thursday)

http://www.pool.ntp.org/scores/82.70.138.66

I'll need to see how it pans out, but certainly looks like there was a very
very sudden change somewhere.

On 23 February 2017 at 22:38, Peter <[email protected]> wrote:

> OK. But at the moment you have the situation where you could be providing
> very good time, from a root source (in my case better than 1ms accuracy).
> But, the monitor station 10k miles away says, nah, no good.
>
> Meanwhile, someone with a terrible connection in LA, provides really good
> time to the monitoring station next door, but has absolutely terrible
> connectivity outside west coast is currently getting a solid 20.0.
>
> My point is, the current solution certainly isn't good, and your own
> reasoning says so.
>
> On 23 February 2017 at 22:21, Arnold Schekkerman <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 23-02-17 16:12, Peter wrote:
>> > But, in this case could it not be smarter? We have separate pools for
>> > worldwide, europe, country level already. Now, it seems to me that
>> around
>> > Europe my str 1 server provides very good timekeeping. Outside of Europe
>> > not so much.
>>
>> This is usually a temporary thing, affecting only a very limited number
>> of servers
>> (you can check the graphs like http://www.pool.ntp.org/zone/europe).
>>
>>
>> > What would be the problem (aside from the effort to set it up) to have
>> an
>> > "AND" system in tiers. So for example you have a monitoring station
>> > (trusted people with good connectivity can donate their server by
>> running
>> > it as a process) in at least all continents and preferably at the
>> country
>> > level. So, for country level you need to have a good rating with any
>> > monitoring stations in your country that checks you. At continent level
>> you
>> > must have a good rating for any in your continent that tests you, and at
>> > global pool level, you must always present a good result, whichever
>> station
>> > probes you.
>>
>> Doing an AND for each level is the only way to go in my opinion. That is,
>> if you
>> really, really want to put in the effort required for multiple monitors.
>> Do our
>> clients have any practical problem right now?
>>
>> What you are doing basically in this case is to set up multiple
>> independent pools
>> with their own local monitoring system. As far as I know, all software is
>> on
>> github, so you can test this relative easily. Ideally you deploy a
>> monitor in each
>> network of each company providing connectivity in that area.
>>
>> Note that this solution assumes connections are available from your
>> central
>> scoring/DNS system to each monitor. This, while you know you have
>> connectivity
>> issues to an NTP server in the very same network. What do you do if you
>> lose one
>> monitor? Take down the whole area?
>>
>> Anyway, if you are willing to experiment, I am very curious to the
>> results! I
>> expect scores to actually drop faster than they do now.
>>
>>
>> > That way, any server in the global pool, you know is on a well connected
>> > host. But, those that have bad transatlantic peering could still be
>> > providing really good results more locally.
>>
>> This brings one other aspect to mind. How many clients will benefit from
>> this
>> approach? Most clients simply use the pre-configured vendor pool or the
>> global pool
>> 'pool.ntp.org'. The clients taking the trouble to configure their
>> (s)ntp-client
>> with a country or continental pool usually know what they are doing and
>> configure
>> some more known servers as well. They deploy some kind of continuous ntpd
>> process
>> that does not even know whether a server is temporary out of the pool,
>> unless they
>> lose connectivity...
>>
>> I guess the only situation that benefits from a local, independent pool
>> system is
>> within countries where network traffic is actively filtered at the border
>> (China,
>> N-Korea, etc.)
>>
>> Arnold
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
pool mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool

Reply via email to