Re: [ntp:questions] Time slew doesn't seem to work

2008-04-12 Thread Unruh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Murray) writes:


OK, so there was no magic in that 500PPM limit. Is there a difference
between the tick size adjustment and the frequency adjustment 
(CPU-counter-to-time conversion factor).

Limiting the slew rate to something like that means that
software that is timing things with code like:
  grab time, do something, grab time, subtract
gets a sane answer if it happens to be running while somebody
adjusts the time.

Do you know any code that cares if that is wrong by 10% (which would be
10PPM) Ie, is 10% error insane?

Is 1% (1PPM)?
Ie, .05% seems a bit extreme for that. 



-- 
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's.  I hate spam.

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] [Q] Why do many time servers time out on queries from ntpq -p?

2008-04-12 Thread Dennis Hilberg, Jr.
Maurice Volaski wrote:
 I've been trying the peers command in ntpq on a number of time 
 servers and finding that for as many that do respond, there are about 
 an equal number that do not. An example of a failing response is:
 
 ntpq host sundial.columbia.edu
 current host set to hickory.cc.columbia.edu
 ntpq peers
 hickory.cc.columbia.edu: timed out, nothing received
 ***Request timed out
 
 I can reproduce identical successes and failures from 3 computers 
 running different OSs on independent networks.
 
 These I've tried work just fine:
 timex.cs.columbia.edu
 time.euro.apple.com
 lain.ziaspace.com
 ntp.nblug.org
 ntp1.cs.wisc.edu
 clock1.unc.edu
 
 But these time out:
 sundial.columbia.edu
 time.apple.com
 morose.quex.org
 ntp.sycharlutheran.org
 ntp.bytestacker.com
 ntp1.kansas.net
 
 All of the above were tested and gave the same results on
 kennedy1.aecom.yu.edu (Linux with ntpq [EMAIL PROTECTED])
 fluxsoft.com (FreeBSD with ntpq 4.2.0-a)
 ool-45766590.dyn.optonline.net (Mac OS X with ntpq [EMAIL PROTECTED])

If the server operator has 'noquery' specified in the default restriction it 
will prevent the server from responding to ntpq and ntpdc.

Interestingly, I actually wrote a script that uses 'ntpq -pn' to randomly 
query client entries in my ntp_clients_stats log file. I've found that only 
about one percent respond on average.

Dennis

-- 
Dennis Hilberg, Jr. \  timekeeper(at)dennishilberg(dot)com
NTP Server Information:  \  http://saturn.dennishilberg.com/ntp.php

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Ntp in peer configuration

2008-04-12 Thread Steve Kostecke
On 2008-04-09, Ginni Misra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   I am trying to use NTP in peer configuration. 

In a time island.

 5. All machines on the network should have a common notion of time
 (offset not larger than 20ms) - not necessarily the 'correct' time(no
 need of getting time from external servers)

NTP synchronizes clocks to a _common_ _time_ _base_.  The time base that
is customarily used is UTC. UTC is ubiquitous (e.g. available via the
Internet, GPS, GPS over CMDA, HF Radio, ATCS dialup) and is relatively
inexpensive compared to the cost of generating a local time base of
similar stability.

So, to solve the above, I configured the 1st machine on the network
with reference clock as LOCL. So, when the 2nd device comes up, ntpdate
is successful. However, this introduces additional complexity like: 2

You're doing this the hard way.

An Orphan mesh (or web) is the preferred way to handle your situation;
assuming that you are using NTP 4.2.x.

Orphan mode is enabled by adding the following line to the ntp.conf of
all of your systems:

tos orphan 5

Then you need to choose the mode for your mesh: unicast, broadcast, or
multicast. Each system in the mesh needs to be configured to poll all of
the other systems.

You may wish to consult the following news-group articles for
configuration information:

https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/hackers/2007-March/002809.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/questions@lists.ntp.org/msg00986.html

Those articles do not address setting up a unicast (conventional
client/server) mesh. If you just have a small number of systems this may
be the the easiest solution as it avoids configuring NTP authentication.

Each system in a 4 node mesh could have an ntp.conf which looks like
this:

---8X---

driftfile /path/to/drift.file
tos orphan 5
server A iburst
server B iburst
server C iburst
server D iburst

---8X---

Make sure that ntpd is started with '-g' so that the initial time can
make an unlimited step.

-- 
Steve Kostecke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Problem with time synchronisaton

2008-04-12 Thread David J Taylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Greetings,

 I have ntpd installed (ntpq [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun  4 15:13:06 UTC
 2007 (1) and running but the time on the ntp host does not appear to
 be
 synching with the nominated external time references.  Any assistance
 much
 appreciated.

 Details as follows:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] etc]# ntpq -p
 remote   refid  st t when poll reach   delay   offset
 jitter
 ==
 wireless.org.au .INIT.  16 u-  25600.0000.000
 0.000
 pond.thecave.ws .INIT.  16 u-  25600.0000.000
 0.000
 cust6381.nsw01. .INIT.  16 u-  25600.0000.000
 0.000
 core.narx.net   .INIT.  16 u-  25600.0000.000
 0.000
 *LOCAL(0).LOCL.  10 l3   64  3770.0000.000
 0.001

 The logs don't seem to indicate a problem:

If the reach column is 0, then you are not seeing the remote servers.  You 
should see 377.  Look for a network or connectivity issue.  Can you ping 
the remote servers?  Ask them an NTP query like:

  ntpq -p wirelss.org.au

By the way, that query doesn't work for me, so are you sure that server is 
running NTP?  Do you have permission to access it?  You might be better 
off with pool servers:

  0.pool.ntp.org
  1.pool.ntp.org

Cheers,
David 


___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Ntp in peer configuration

2008-04-12 Thread David Woolley
Ginni Misra wrote:
   I am trying to use NTP in peer configuration. 

No.  You are trying to use NTP in an orphaned configuration, which has 
never had any parents!  NTP was not designed for that, although recent 
additions (ophan mode) make it just about workable.

Timed was designed for that, so you should be investigating that.

PS. Please restrict your lines to about 70 characters or use a user 
agent that that specifies format=flowed (these will automatically 
restrict the lengths of the lines, but a compatible user agent will 
merge and re-wrap then appropriately).

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Linux 11-minute mode (RTC update)

2008-04-12 Thread Serge Bets
 On Thursday, April 10, 2008 at 18:02:38 +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:

 This holds the clock for up to a second
 I am not sure what you mean

Anyway I experimented a little: This doesn't seem to work as I hoped.
And it can even lock the clock, requiring a oscillator reset. :-(

The idea was about the RTC_SET flag (bit #7 of register B). It suspends
clock updates, without any effect on the oscillator nor PIE. I was
hoping it would delay next updates by as long as it was asserted. But
no: the next update is either skipped, or happens at the usual time.


Serge.
-- 
Serge point Bets arobase laposte point net

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Time slew doesn't seem to work

2008-04-12 Thread Hal Murray
Do you know any code that cares if that is wrong by 10% (which would be
10PPM) Ie, is 10% error insane?

Is 1% (1PPM)?
Ie, .05% seems a bit extreme for that. 

I used to do a lot of performance measurements.

For the stuff I was doing, 10% is easy to spot.  1% is borderline.

-- 
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's.  I hate spam.

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Problem with time synchronisaton

2008-04-12 Thread David Woolley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I have ntpd installed (ntpq [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun  4 15:13:06 UTC 2007 

That is not a standard version number.  Who allocated the @1.1570-o 
part of the version number?  You may be better off getting support from 
them.

 (1) and running but the time on the ntp host does not appear to be 
 synching with the nominated external time references.  Any assistance much 
 appreciated.

That's because no (valid) replies have been received from any of them. 
The two common causes of this are over-aggressive restrict lines and 
firewalls.

I think your restrict lines may be OK, but I'd suggest confirming that 
it works without any.  Using pool servers limits your ability to use 
restrict and the defaults must permit your client to use any times it 
receives.

Another possibility is that they have restrict kod set on the servers, 
and you are using multiple clients and NAT, in a way that causes the 
rate limits to be exceeded.

People often overlook the Linux iptables firewall.

You should run ntpq rv on the associations from your servers, to see if 
they are responding, but the responses are being rejected, and if so 
why.  You should also try running tcpdump, etc., at appropriate places 
on the network to find out if they are getting blocked at some point.

 My ntp.conf file is out of thebox with the exception of the external time 
 servers

Whose box?  I believe the official box doesn't have a configuration file 
in it.

 # Permit time synchronization with our time source, but do not
 # permit the source to query or modify the service on this system.

Note this answers the recent question about ntpq peers not working!

 
 # Undisciplined Local Clock. This is a fake driver intended for backup
 # and when no outside source of synchronized time is available. 

This description is incomplete, and, in my view, no out of the box 
configuration should have these lines enabled.  They should only be 
enabled on servers and only if you understand the risks.  However, that 
is not an issue here.

 server  127.127.1.0 # local clock
 fudge   127.127.1.0 stratum 10

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Linux 11-minute mode (RTC update)

2008-04-12 Thread Serge Bets
 On Wednesday, April 9, 2008 at 18:18:15 +, Unruh wrote:

 But when one is advising someone, one must assume that they have at
 least the typical if not the worst condition

That's not false...


 How in the world did you the power off drift to 5 significant figures?

With two hwclock --systohc and awk over one real night, from halt to
soon after restart. I can't guarantee the 3rd decimal, though. Each
night has its own temperature.


Serge.
-- 
Serge point Bets arobase laposte point net

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Why do many time servers time out on queries from ntpq -p?

2008-04-12 Thread Ryan Malayter
On Apr 12, 12:29 am, Steve Kostecke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 The server operator has set a 'noquery' restriction.

I'll try to pre-emptively answer the next question, whcih is likely to
be why would they do that?

The answer is security. On our network, we follow the principle of
least privelege. That is, we enable or allow only that which is
required to perform a particular function, and nothing else. Some
people call this a default deny permissions model.

ntpq can leak information about your internal network structure that
could be useful to an attacker. It is also another bit of network-
enabled code that could have buffer overflows or other vulnerabilites.
ntp (the protocol) functions just fine with without mode 6/7 queries
enabled, so they are disabled.

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Problem with time synchronisaton

2008-04-12 Thread Richard B. Gilbert
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Greetings,
 
 I have ntpd installed (ntpq [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun  4 15:13:06 UTC 2007 
 (1) and running but the time on the ntp host does not appear to be 
 synching with the nominated external time references.  Any assistance much 
 appreciated.
 
 Details as follows:
 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] etc]# ntpq -p
  remote   refid  st t when poll reach   delay   offset 
 jitter
 ==
  wireless.org.au .INIT.  16 u-  25600.0000.000 
 0.000
  pond.thecave.ws .INIT.  16 u-  25600.0000.000 
 0.000
  cust6381.nsw01. .INIT.  16 u-  25600.0000.000 
 0.000
  core.narx.net   .INIT.  16 u-  25600.0000.000 
 0.000
 *LOCAL(0).LOCL.  10 l3   64  3770.0000.000 
 0.001
 
 The logs don't seem to indicate a problem:

The problem should be clear from the above ntpq -p banner!!  None of the 
servers you have configured have responded to requests sent by your system!

Can you ping these servers and get a response?  Do you have a firewall 
that is blocking Port 123?

BTW, if you didn't wait at least 30 minutes between starting ntpd and 
getting the ntpq banner, you wasted your time!  Ntpd generally requires 
about that much time to figure out exactly what time it is and to beat 
your clock into submission.

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Problem with time synchronisaton

2008-04-12 Thread Steve Kostecke
On 2008-04-12, David Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I have ntpd installed (ntpq [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun 4 15:13:06 UTC
 2007

 That is not a standard version number.

Really? On my system running 4.2.5p54 built from sources downloaded from
www.ntp.org I see:

$ ntpq -crv 0 version
assID=0 status=0654 leap_none, sync_ntp, 5 events, event_peer/strat_chg,
version=ntpd [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 22 14:26:20 UTC 2007 (2)

 Who allocated the @1.1570-o part of the version number?

ntp.org

 You may be better off getting support from them.

I believe he's in the right place.

 (1) and running but the time on the ntp host does not appear to be 
 synching with the nominated external time references.  Any assistance much 
 appreciated.

 That's because no (valid) replies have been received from any of them. 
 The two common causes of this are over-aggressive restrict lines and 
 firewalls.

 I think your restrict lines may be OK,

They are.

 but I'd suggest confirming that it works without any.

It won't.

 Using pool servers limits your ability to use restrict and the
 defaults must permit your client to use any times it receives.

They do.

 Another possibility is that they have restrict kod set on the servers, 
 and you are using multiple clients and NAT, in a way that causes the 
 rate limits to be exceeded.

If that were the case you would see .KOD. in the ntpq peers billboard.

 People often overlook the Linux iptables firewall.

Port 123/UDP must be open to receive packets from the remote time
servers.

-- 
Steve Kostecke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Problem with time synchronisaton

2008-04-12 Thread Harlan Stenn
 In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard B. Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 writes:

Richard BTW, if you didn't wait at least 30 minutes between starting ntpd
Richard and getting the ntpq banner, you wasted your time!  Ntpd generally
Richard requires about that much time to figure out exactly what time it is
Richard and to beat your clock into submission.

Which is why we recommend using 'iburst', as with a good drift file ntpd
will have everything ready to go in about 11 seconds' time.

-- 
Harlan Stenn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://ntpforum.isc.org  - be a member!

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Problem with time synchronisaton

2008-04-12 Thread David Woolley
Harlan Stenn wrote:
 
 Why do you have a local refclock configured?

Because he's using an out of the box configuration.  That, is probably 
the main reason that people have them configured.  You really need to 
ask the people who put in the box, but I suspect they don't know, either.

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Problem with time synchronisaton

2008-04-12 Thread Steve Kostecke
On 2008-04-12, David Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Harlan Stenn wrote:

 Why do you have a local refclock configured?

 Because he's using an out of the box configuration. That, is probably
 the main reason that people have them configured. You really need to
 ask the people who put in the box, but I suspect they don't know,
 either.

The problem here is that the distribution does not contain a decent
assortment of example configuration files for common configurations. So
the OS distributors/aggregators/vendors each cobble together their own
one size fits all configuration file.

-- 
Steve Kostecke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Problem with time synchronisaton

2008-04-12 Thread Hal Murray

The problem here is that the distribution does not contain a decent
assortment of example configuration files for common configurations. So
the OS distributors/aggregators/vendors each cobble together their own
one size fits all configuration file.

But does a local refclock make sense in a typical setup?

Does the wiki have a good collection of examples?  and the discussion
that goes with them?  How much effort would it take to make one?

Would it make sense to encourage distributions to include
a URL at the top of their prototype config file?

-- 
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's.  I hate spam.

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Problem with time synchronisaton

2008-04-12 Thread Steve Kostecke
On 2008-04-12, Richard B. Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 BTW, if you didn't wait at least 30 minutes between starting ntpd and 
 getting the ntpq banner, you wasted your time!

Nonsense.

After only two polls you can see if your ntpd is able to contact the
remote time servers. You don't need to wait 30 minutes for that.

As ntpd continues to poll you can see if a step was required or if
the clock is being steered in the right direction .

 Ntpd generally requires about that much time to figure out exactly
 what time it is and to beat your clock into submission.

That's not the issue here.

-- 
Steve Kostecke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions