In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Richard B. gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's a little less than clear what you hoped to accomplish by this and Making gross changes to the clock on a running machine is how people think they can test that ntpd is synchronising the clock, when what they should really be testing is the ability to track to 10ms, rather than the ability to cope with bad operator training or hardware that is only suitable for the scrapheap. > wondering why ntpd (not xntpd for many years now BTW, the version that I believe he really is using xntpd, not the version of ntpd that is misnamed as such. Obviously he should upgrade. > Ntpd will not "jump" your clock! After you miss-set your clock by 600 Normal configurations of ntpd will jump the clock if the error exceeds 128 ms, but some vendors choose to set it into a slew only mode. (The jump follows a sanity check that takes around quarter of an hour.) > seconds, ntpd will attempt to correct your clock at its maximum slew > rate of 500 Parts Per Million or 1/2 millisecond per second. plus/minus the actual hardware clock frequency error! _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
