Nero Imhard <n...@pipe.nl> writes: >Unruh schreef:
>> And you miss the point-- ntp itself should be doing that. It is a >> program that is supposed to discipline the clock. It should not ask you >> to do part of its job. >We might even agree. It could be appropriate for ntp to include a >configurable frequency offset that can be used on OSs that lack such a >feature. That's much more reasonable than to stretch the frequency error >limit used in the disciplining algorithm. >So if anything in ntp needs to be changed for this, I'd rather see en >extra tuning knob. Again, a human should not be needed to turn that knob. It should be automated. ntp knows ( or can be programmed to know) if such an adjustment is needed, and can supply it. As I said, currently ntp uses the frequency in two distinct ways-- to eliminate offsets, and the correct for clock drift. It does not distinguish them. Thus use of the 500PPM limit for the former case gets in the way of its use for the latter. >N _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
