Hello Tom you're right, were actually several network segments listed falsely together The .194 indeed should be .192. This is the complete listing:
145.47.51.[016-067] with netmask 255.255.255.128 => broadcast-address 145.47.51.127 145.47.51.[144-183] with netmask 255.255.255.128 => broadcast-address 145.47.51.255 145.47.52.[032-047] with netmask 255.255.255.128 => broadcast-address 145.47.52.127 145.47.53.[076-091] with netmask 255.255.255.192 => broadcast-address 145.47.53.127 >> - Does the above require me to use more than one broadcast-address? > Yes. >From the PC which I want to act as broadcaster I can reach all above network segments Assuming the switches/routers between these segements are configured to pass these broadcasts, can I therefore set up the following 4 lines of the "broadcast"-code in the ntp.conf-file ? broadcast 145.47.51.127 key 1 broadcast 145.47.51.255 key 1 broadcast 145.47.52.127 key 1 broadcast 145.47.53.127 key 1 Or did I understand you incorrectly ? > OK. Then if there is no legacy system to support, why don't > you just reconfigure the clients into something rational? > For example, get rid of the keys and the broadcast, and just > point each client to the server with a simple "server [address]" > declaration. I agree, yet, the specific systems involved are maintained / serviced by the company who built them. The changes required to change the way of time synchronisation are set under master user, yet password is not given to customer. This means, systems are (on Linux-level) as-is Thanks once again Erik _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
