On 2013-09-03, Magnus Danielson <mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org> wrote: > On 09/02/2013 02:33 PM, David Lord wrote: >> Harlan Stenn wrote: >>> David Lord writes: >>>> Magnus Danielson wrote: >>>>> server ntp1.kth.se iburst maxpoll 7 >>>>> server ntp2.kth.se iburst maxpoll 7 >>>>> server ntp3.kth.se iburst maxpoll 7 >>>>> server ntp1.sp.se iburst maxpoll 7 >>>>> server ntp2.sp.se iburst maxpoll 7 >>>> that seems too restrictive and possibly abusive if you do not >>>> yourself have control over those servers. >>> >>> iburst is not abusive. >>> >>> Perhaps you are thinking of burst? >> >> I was thinking about maxpoll 7 and the few stats that were >> given indicating the very poor reach for the configured >> servers. > There is good network connectivity to all 5 servers. > > If you advice us not to use maxpoll 7, then we naturally will learn from > it. I don't use it personally, but I didn't set this machine up. Would > be nice to hear your explanation thought.
Being nice to the people who are freely providing you with a resource. Think of 10,000,000 other machines all behaving in the same way ( and for a "major stratum 1 server" that can quite possibly be the case. Then 100,000 queries per second or 10000 queries per second can make a big difference. Of course if it is your own server, then none of the above applies and you could do maxpoll 4 if you wished. > > However, when doing the ntpdc peers command (in interactive mode), it > had all 5 servers available, and was tracking one (as indicated with = > and * at the beginning of the lines, I was told this over phone, so I > don't have visual memory of it all). So, I don't think bad connectivity > was the cause. It looked to a non-NTP expert like it had peers, was > happy with offsets (albeit it looked unexpectedly good at 0) but just > was plain way off in time. It took multiples querries with ntpdc peers > before it reacted on the time-offset, started to display big offsets and > eventually clean up itself. ntpdate -q did expose the time error of 6 days. Do you have the logs? Can you see it drifting off time? Can yousee the offsets getting bigger and bigger? It is really really hard to imagine a 6 day offset to accumulate over a time scale of less than 1000 years. for any resonable computer clock. > > Cheers, > Magnus _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
