Dave, The gateway chokes on signed mail and all of my mail is signed. As a result, I guess none of my messages will ever make it to the news group. :-(
I'm going to TRY to get my mailer to not sign this, but it may not make it either. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: +1 510 486-8634 Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751 > From: David Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 08:08:38 +0100 > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Firstly, the original of this thread root has been demimed out of > existence by the mail to news gateway. I thought the official line is > that what went out to the mailing list was the same that which went to > the newsgroup. > > All that remains is: > > > [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type multipart/signed] > > This can be confirmed on Google groups. > > Rob Neal wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Sep 2008, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > > >> We have a fairly large "mesh" of NTP servers spread across the > >> US. Almost all have PPS reference clocks and are quite > >> accurate. Recently one of the reference clocks located across the county > >> seems to have failed. Such is life. > >> > >> The problem is that the system's time started drifting and eventually > >> became far enough out of sync with the mesh to be marked as a bad > >> ticker. > >> > >> The only way I could get the clock to slew or step the time was to edit > >> the configuration and comment out the reference clock and PPS. It looks > >> like the system will only use the time from a reference clock when and if > >> the clock is configured, even if it can't be read. > > That should not be the case. Are you sure that the clock had stopped > responding and stopped providing a PPS signal? If it is still providing > PPS this will be used, and other clocks only to resolve the second > ambiguity. > > Another thing to check of is whether there was a local clock configured. > This can compromise fault recovery. > > What we really need is the contents of the configuration file and the > result of running ntpq peers. We may then ask you for the result of > running ntpq rv on the system and on each of its associations. > > Please reply in plain text, or directly to the newsgroup, otherwise > neither I nor the originator of NTP will see your reply. > > _______________________________________________ > questions mailing list > questions@lists.ntp.org > https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions > _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
