Mike S wrote:
At 02:10 PM 12/4/2010, David Woolley wrote...
To a large extent I would agree with you, but the net effect of this
is to say "if you work for a marketing led company (probably true of
most of the Fortune 500), do not use NTP as it is almost certain that
your IT department has a strict Microsoft policy for their core
systems, and are not time synchronisation experts".
Your complaint is misplaced. NTPv4 is well defined, see RFC 5905 (
What is my complaint that is misplaced? I'm not complaining about
NTPv4. I am, to some extent complaining about Microsoft and I am
complaining about system admins who use w32time without actually
researching its capabilities. I'm also complaining to some extent about
NTPv4 supporters who don't seem to want to understand how NTP protocols
are used in the real world.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5905 ). The RFC states "In NTPv4, tau
ranges from 4 (16 s) to 17 (36 h)." Just as with many previous
things-MS, they've gone their own way, and are not following the
specification. They simply don't play well with others. Not following
the specifications (like using an improper addr-spec such as
"da...@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid" in an RFC 822 message) breaks things.
It uses a perfectly valid RFC 2606 domain name. See section 2.
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
