Dave, David L. Mills wrote: > Serge, > > The behavior after a step is deliberate. The iburst volley after a step > is delayed a random fraction of the poll interval to avoid implosion > at a busy server. An additional delay may be enforced to avoid violating > the headway restrictions. This is not to protect your applications; it > is to protect the server.
Is it really necessary to insert a random delay after a step? There has already been a random delay immediately after startup, before the client has decided that a step was required. So even if a bunch of clients started up at the same time and had to step, they wouln't step at the same time, and thus wouldn't do the next iburst volley at the same time anyway. Martin -- Martin Burnicki Meinberg Funkuhren Bad Pyrmont Germany _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
