[invalid William has been trimmed from the cc list] Harlan Stenn <st...@ntp.org> writes:
> William Unruh writes: >> I do not mean the default in the config file, I mean the default if >> there is no config file or if nothing is set in the config file. > > Then ntpd won't connect to anything and there will be no data to report. This is a ridiculous strawman. The ntp project is abdicating its responsibility to provide sane default behavior by claiming that no default behavior can make everyone happy and therefore it's not their fault. The notion that OS packagers somehow have a better idea of usage is also specious. Really, ntpd should, when run with a config file of only server 0.pool.ntp.org server 1.pool.ntp.org server 2.pool.ntp.org behave relatively sanely, including declining to respond to packets that could be amplification attacks, while being usable as a s2/s3 to other nearby nodes. This notion of good behavior under minimal config seems really obvious to me, yet there is a huge resistance to it, with the notion that every end user should invest the time to be an expert. And, as far as I can tell, seems to be as simple as 'restrict noquery' as a compiled-in default before any restrict statements are given. Yet that does not happen. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions