Re: [ntp:questions] ntp.org's ntpd not to set the hardware clock
Ivan Shmakov wrote: I wonder, how do I configure ntpd(8) (as of the Debian Wheezy ntp package [1]) /not/ to touch the hardware clock? ntpd does not set the hardware clock. That is done by the Linux kernel, when the clock is disciplined by anything. It's a long time since I looked at that code, but there may be a kernel build time option, and you can always delete the code from the kernel. I assume you mean the 32kHz RTC, sometimes called TOY. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
[ntp:questions] ntp.org's ntpd not to set the hardware clock
I wonder, how do I configure ntpd(8) (as of the Debian Wheezy ntp package [1]) /not/ to touch the hardware clock? [1] http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/ntp -- FSF associate member #7257 http://sfd.am-1.org/ ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] ntp.org's ntpd not to set the hardware clock
> David Woolley writes: > Ivan Shmakov wrote: >> I wonder, how do I configure ntpd(8) (as of the Debian Wheezy ntp >> package [1]) /not/ to touch the hardware clock? > ntpd does not set the hardware clock. That is done by the Linux > kernel, when the clock is disciplined by anything. ACK, thanks. I've suspected something like this may be happening. > It's a long time since I looked at that code, but there may be a > kernel build time option, and you can always delete the code from the > kernel. For a one-time task, re-building the kernel doesn't seem like a sensible choice. Perhaps there's a sysctl(8), or a /proc (/sys) interface to disable it? Or perhaps "disable kernel" within /etc/ntp.conf will do the thing? > I assume you mean the 32kHz RTC, sometimes called TOY. Yes. -- FSF associate member #7257 http://sfd.am-1.org/ ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
[ntp:questions] FreeBSD ntpd 4.2.7p303 (ntp-devel port) unexpected dying
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Colleagues, Upgraded to ntpd 4.2.7p303 from p295 two days ago and twice now it has died unexpected with the following error: 12 Sep 23:40:26 ntpd[83434]: 86.47.187.7 local addr 172.16.2.10 -> 12 Sep 23:40:48 ntpd[83434]: ntp_monitor.c:136: ENSURE(punlinked == mon) failed 12 Sep 23:40:48 ntpd[83434]: exiting (due to assertion failure) Startup seems to be optimal: 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27478]: ntpd 4.2.7p303@1.2483-o Tue Sep 11 17:25:12 UTC 2012 (1): Starting 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: proto: precision = 1.676 usec (-19) 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: Listen and drop on 0 v4wildcard 0.0.0.0:123 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: Listen and drop on 1 v6wildcard [::]:123 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: Listen normally on 2 bge0 172.16.2.10:123 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: Listen normally on 3 lo0 [fe80::1%8]:123 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: setsockopt IPV6_MULTICAST_IF 0 for fe80::1%8 fails: Can't assign requested address 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: Listen normally on 4 lo0 [::1]:123 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: Listen normally on 5 lo0 127.0.0.1:123 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: peers refreshed 13 Sep 11:31:49 ntpd[27479]: Listening on routing socket on fd #26 for interface updates 13 Sep 11:34:40 ntpd[27479]: 83.71.171.237 local addr 172.16.2.10 -> This has only happened since I have upgraded from p295 three days ago. P295 was not experiencing this difficulty. My platform is FreeBSD-8.3, and this port is ntp-devel. Suggestions for the cause? Thanks, Ron - -- Ron Hahn, CISA, CISSP, ITIL-F Rose Hill Rosslare Strand, Wexford, IRELAND -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQUb8tAAoJEJMEFOwWFWJ1sVsIAIp0eAVQ/71vbk5r7YDBsrnj qUp+ZETUIXOA8UzBAA9Hay2QrnwvuEAaNCm2NafIvGp5YPnAfH3DUXfcJ3X0gt2z xI0cOwm2vsdx9bqXSCjg80R/MPzalCkRVRbxLA8yWr4smE0Nsc1LurAhGxGHnrjf N0uwdh3m7zjcM19Vqb+9lu5NdCadRW8JIlcbvjgSE+6BfUE6Ik0PYxTJVa9QsTSw 0c7k45UkhuqX0XjPaO+7VZGkAX5kSAzp8SA5L1tOa6Io/82zyOcFPzx00Qw/R7TT R9aft6zq3e9vsWtc4FZO0NT0AXsiCMCRkTTJO8VkvQi476QcolWpY0J47CDYNE8= =O1m3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Testing throughput in NTP servers
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:28:24PM +0200, Ulf Samuelsson wrote: > Anyone knows if there are any available Linux based S/W to test the > throughput of NTP servers? > I.E: > > packets per second? > % of lost packets > etc? I've used tcpdump and tcpreplay to measure the maximum packet rate ntpd can handle. IIRC, the ntpd process itself needed only a couple of percent of the CPU, I think the bottleneck is always in the kernel or the NIC. -- Miroslav Lichvar ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] FreeBSD ntpd 4.2.7p303 (ntp-devel port) unexpected dying
Ron Hahn writes: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Colleagues, > > Upgraded to ntpd 4.2.7p303 from p295 two days ago and twice now it has > died unexpected with the following error: > > 12 Sep 23:40:26 ntpd[83434]: 86.47.187.7 local addr 172.16.2.10 -> > 12 Sep 23:40:48 ntpd[83434]: ntp_monitor.c:136: ENSURE(punlinked == > mon) failed > 12 Sep 23:40:48 ntpd[83434]: exiting (due to assertion failure) > > This has only happened since I have upgraded from p295 three days ago. > P295 was not experiencing this difficulty. > > My platform is FreeBSD-8.3, and this port is ntp-devel. > > Suggestions for the cause? Please open a bug report at http://bugs.ntp.org . In the "flags" section, please "Request blocking 4.2.8". How busy is this server? Thanks... H ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
