On 2011-12-21, Chris Albertson <albertson.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:25 AM, ben slimup <slimu...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> i m currently working on some project that needs a particular ntp >> distribution design: >> >> i have to site with 4 public ip address, that can be used on both site, i >> need to serve between 100000 client to 1 million. > > You have 1,000,000 computers under your control? really? The > hardest job will be to distribute 1M config files. With 1M computyrs > I'd assume you will have multiple hardware failures every day. > > Why not direct all those computers to use the public NTP servers? Why > do they need to look at your NTP servers?
NONONONONONONO. Why in the world would you advise him to completely overload a bunch of public servers. He is being responsible and overloading his own machines which is much much better. While I agree that the chances that he really has 1 million machines he should be serving them himself. > > OK assuming that you really do have 1M client computers and they need > to look at your NTP server then you need to build a set of NTP servers > much like the public NTP server pool. What is different about NTP > servers from web servers is with NTP you do NOT need a fail-over > system. Instead what you do is point each of the 1M computers to > several of your NTP servers and then each client will figure out which > of your servers are the "best". So you can take down any NTP server > and add another and not disrupt anything. > > If fact automatic switch over, like is done by ome network switches is > not a good thing with NTP. Let the client determine the server is > faulty. > > You will need about a half dozen NTP servers. I would distribute them > geographically > > > Chris Albertson > Redondo Beach, California _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
