Richard, A symmetric active association "peer xxx" will cause the authenticated peer to mobilize a symmetric passive association no matter what the stratum is. The selection algorithm will treat a symmetric passive associaiton in the same way as client associations. either or both the symmetric associations lose or gain outside sources or each other, they will reconfigure as expected by the particular stratum assignments.
I would think most configurations intended for mutual backup would use explicit symmetric active configurations and avoid symmetric passive as a fallback mode. Dave Richard B. Gilbert wrote: > Ronan Flood wrote: > >> "Richard B. Gilbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> Is "symmetric passive" different from just saying, in ntp.conf: >>> "server sunblok iburst"? For the record, that works without >>> problems too! >> >> >> >> "server xxx" establishes you as a client, "peer xxx" tries to establish >> you as a peer. If ntp.conf on box A has "peer B" and ntp.conf on box B >> has "peer A", that is symmetric-active: each actively requests to peer >> with the other. If box A has "peer B" but box B has no reference to A, >> then B can either treat A as a client (usual behaviour), or in the right >> (or wrong!) circumstances can accept A as an unconfigured peer, and that >> is symmetric-passive. That seems to be what's happening with the >> original >> poster's setup, with all those extras listed in ntpq -p. Generally it is >> not desirable ... >> > > Some of those lines in the ntpq -p banner were stratum two and could > have been peers. The rest were stratum three so I don't see how they > could have been peers; don't peers have be of equal strata? > _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
