Luc Pardon wrote: > > > Harlan Stenn wrote: >> I'm not sure if multiple -I flags work or not. I know the command line >> supports it, but I'm not sure if the underlying code does the right >> thing or not. >> > > The current code seems to have only one variable (grep > specific_interface ntpd/*.c). In case of multiple -I flags it will > retain only one (most likely the last). > > For this box, one -I is fine with me. For others, that might be a > problem. > > In any case, it looks like it will always listen on 127.0.0.1 and on > the wildcard interface, there is no way to disable those. >
Right. That was deliberate. You always want to listen on those addresses as well as ::1 and ::. Is there and issue with that? > >>> I didn't want to report it, for several reasons. One is that I >>> wanted that "connection refused" strangeness out of the way ASAP. >>> Another one is I'm not even sure that this -I stuff is supposed to >>> work already - after all I pulled it out of dev. >> >> If it is in -dev it will soon be in -stable. >> > > Sure, but it might still be "work in progress". It seems so basic > that, if the problem is real, anybody who tried -I must have seen it, > including the developer(s). Usually that is an indication that the > problem is at this end. I would want to rule that out before wasting > people's time. Developers should develop sp we get new things to whine > about <g>. > No, currently it's not work-in-progress. It's awaiting time to get the listen-on address list into the config file as it really does not make a lot of sense to put those on the command line. Danny _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
