Yes this is the server (192.168.1.140) which my clients will use.
I want to allow "unrestricted access" by 10.2.3.5 host (my private 'source time server' ), because Server 10.2.3.5 will drive my server (192.168.1.140)
Do you think it's unnecessary option ?



NTP documents says:

1- Add the following line to allow unrestricted access by a specific host (e.g. the sysadmin's workstation):
IPv4: restrict w.x.y.z

2- restrict numeric_address [mask numeric_mask] [flag ...]
The numeric_address argument, expressed in dotted-quad form, is the address of a host or network. The mask, also expressed in dotted-quad form, defaults to 255.255.255.255, meaning that the numeric_address is treated as the address of an individual host. A default entry (address 0.0.0.0, mask 0.0.0.0) is always included and, given the sort algorithm, is always the first entry in the list. Note that, while numeric_address is normally given in dotted-quad format, the text string `default', with no mask option, may be used to indicate the default entry. In the current implementation, flag always restricts access, i.e., AN ENTRY WITH NO FLAGS INDICATES THAT FREE ACCESS TO THE SERVER IS TO BE GIVEN. ....





----- Original Message ----- From: "Mischanko, Edward T" <edward.mischa...@arcelormittal.com>
To: <ric.castell...@alice.it>; <questions@lists.ntp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 2:46 PM
Subject: RE: [ntp:questions] Offset is always increasing


Why are you doing this?

restrict 10.2.3.5

This is the server you want your clients to sync to, isn't it?

Regards,
Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: questions-bounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormittal....@lists.ntp.org
[mailto:questions-
bounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormittal....@lists.ntp.org] On Behalf Of
Riccardo Castellani
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 6:58 AM
To: questions@lists.ntp.org
Subject: [ntp:questions] Offset is always increasing

I'm using n. 1 ntp server (XNTPD daemon on HP-UX, called FORCLIENTS,

192.168.1.240) for my clients and I'm obtaining the message
"synchronization
lost" about every 20 minutes.
Source time is another server (MASTER) on my lan
which updates its time
directly from Internet servers.


MASTER is OK

FORCLIENTS has a high offset !


ntp.conf of FORCLIENTS (192.168.1.240):


restrict default ignore
server 10.2.3.5
driftfile /etc/ntp.drift
restrict
127.0.0.1
restrict 127.127.1.1
restrict 10.2.3.5
restrict 192.168.1.240

restrict 192.168.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0 nomodify noquery
server 127.127.1.1
fudge
127.127.1.1 stratum 10 # show poor quality



ntp.conf of MASTER (10.2.3.5):


restrict default ignore
restrict 127.0.0.1
restrict 192.168.1.240 mask
255.255.255.255 nomodify
restrict ntp1.inrim.it mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify
noquery notrap nopeer
restrict ntp2.inrim.it mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify
noquery notrap nopeer
restrict ntp1.fau.de mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify
noquery notrap nopeer
restrict ntp2.nl.net mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify
noquery notrap nopeer
restrict 127.127.1.0 mask 255.255.255.255
server ntp1.
inrim.it
server ntp2.inrim.it
server ntp1.fau.de
server ntp2.nl.net
server
127.127.1.0
fudge 127.127.1.0
driftfile /var/lib/ntp/drift







My server log
shows:


20 May 14:38:20 xntpd[19386]: synchronized to LOCAL(1), stratum=10
20
May 14:39:23 xntpd[19386]: synchronized to 10.2.3.5, stratum=2
20 May 14:54:18
xntpd[19386]: time reset (step) -1.014343 s
20 May 14:54:18 xntpd[19386]:
synchronisation lost
20 May 14:58:35 xntpd[19386]: synchronized to LOCAL(1),
stratum=10
20 May 14:59:38 xntpd[19386]: synchronized to 10.2.3.5, stratum=2
20
May 15:14:33 xntpd[19386]: time reset (step) -1.010761 s
20 May 15:14:33 xntpd
[19386]: synchronisation lost
20 May 15:16:08 xntpd[13208]: logging to file
/var/adm/syslog/ntp.log
20 May 15:16:08 xntpd[13208]: tickadj = 625, tick =
10000, tvu_maxslew =
61875
20 May 15:16:08 xntpd[13208]: precision = 6 usec
20
May 15:17:29 xntpd[14031]: logging to file /var/adm/syslog/ntp.log
20 May 15:17:
29 xntpd[14031]: tickadj = 625, tick = 10000, tvu_maxslew =
61875
20 May 15:17:
29 xntpd[14031]: precision = 10 usec
20 May 15:21:46 xntpd[14031]: synchronized
to 10.2.3.5, stratum=2
20 May 15:21:46 xntpd[14031]: time reset (step)
-0.216182 s
20 May 15:21:46 xntpd[14031]: synchronisation lost
20 May 15:26:03
xntpd[14031]: synchronized to LOCAL(1), stratum=10
20 May 15:27:06 xntpd
[14031]: synchronized to 10.2.3.5, stratum=2
20 May 15:42:01 xntpd[14031]: time
reset (step) -1.005840 s
20 May 15:42:01 xntpd[14031]: synchronisation lost
20
May 15:46:18 xntpd[14031]: synchronized to LOCAL(1), stratum=10
20 May 15:47:21
xntpd[14031]: synchronized to 10.2.3.5, stratum=2
20 May 16:02:16 xntpd[14031]:
time reset (step) -1.009925 s
20 May 16:02:16 xntpd[14031]: synchronisation
lost
20 May 16:06:33 xntpd[14031]: synchronized to LOCAL(1), stratum=10
20 May
16:07:36 xntpd[14031]: synchronized to 10.2.3.5, stratum=2



nptd -qn shows:




remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset
disp

==========================================================================
==
==

10.2.3.5 193.204.114.232 2 u 16 64 7 1.92 -158.96 3927.72
127.127.1.1
127.127.1.1 10 l 15 64 17 0.00 0.000
1885.01



My time source server is ok
(10.2.3.5) and I can exclude problems into my
lan.



remote local st poll
reach delay offset disp

=======================================================================
=ntp1.
nl.uu.net 10.2.3.5 1 1024 377 0.04411 -0.003625 0.12183
=ntp1.inrim.it 10.2.3.5
1 1024 377 0.01971 -0.000409 0.12172
*ntp2.inrim.it 10.2.3.5 1 1024 377 0.01923
-0.000046 0.12175
=LOCAL(0) 127.0.0.1 10 64 377 0.00000 0.000000 0.03072
=ntp1.
rrze.uni-e 10.2.3.5 1 1024 377 0.05191 -0.009084 0.12178





Can you indicate
suggestions please ? The problem is Offset bigger 128 ms
?!?! Offset is
increasing until to 700-800 ms.

I run ntpdate to update immediately clock and
I can see small offset but
after few minutes grows again until to exceed 128
ms.

How can I solve it ?
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions

_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions

Reply via email to