Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
In article 49428c05$0$2861$ba620...@news.skynet.be, Jan Ceuleers janspam.ceule...@skynet.be writes: Jan Syslog (and SNMP) are among the most widely deployed monitoring Jan mechanisms out there. I submit that leveraging this is beneficial, Jan particularly because doing so has a lower threshold than having Jan administrators rely on ntpd-specific monitoring infrastructure. ntp-dev now contains ntpsnmpd, which is an SNMP agent for monitoring NTP. Heiko Gerstung wrote it during GSoC 2008. Please beat on it... -- Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org http://ntpforum.isc.org - be a member! ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Hal Murray hal-use...@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net wrote in message news:fpadnsquvyltjt_unz2dnuvz_uadn...@megapath.net... I think you are assuming here, that the servers will fail one by one with no one noticing or correcting the problems. This scenario seems rather unlikely to me. Any publicly available server has hundreds or even thousands of clients keeping an eye on it. If it goes belly up the failure will surely be noticed. What if the failure is the company going out of business or a policy change or ... ...Or a change of IP address. Or what I think might be the worst one: your own NTP server accidentally running into a transient 1001-second offset and exiting. A year ago. (Sure it's unlikely. But how do you *know*? Answer: through monitoring.) Groetjes, Maarten Wiltink ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Hal Murray wrote: I think you are assuming here, that the servers will fail one by one with no one noticing or correcting the problems. This scenario seems rather unlikely to me. Any publicly available server has hundreds or even thousands of clients keeping an eye on it. If it goes belly up the failure will surely be noticed. What if the failure is the company going out of business or a policy change or ... IF I depended on servers owned/operated by a single company, I might worry about it. If the U.S. Government goes belly up, I'll have more serious problems! ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Jan Ceuleers wrote: Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Sorry, it's the orthogonal part that's bothering me. My dictionary says pertaining to or composed of right angles. It's frequently used as a buzz word but seems to be without content in the context of NTP. It also means independent or uncorrelated. For example see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthogonal#Computer_science So Uwe's point is correct: designing an NTP hierarchy to be a failsafe system (up to a point) does not preclude it from also reporting failures even if they are not (yet) service-affecting. In fact, (and Uwe also made that point in his RAID analogy) _not_ reporting failures gives the administrator a false sense of security. So +1: ntpd should report failures to syslog. The question is what sorts of things it should be reporting. Things that I can think of: - synchronisation not achieved within the expected period after startup; - stratum higher than expected - smaller than expected number of servers reachable - the set of reachable servers consists of exactly two servers of equal stratum (which is the worst case) Okay, but . . . . Somebody has to be checking syslog fairly frequently. You'd better believe that there are machines out there that could catch fire without anyone noticing. Some of them may be serving time and even keeping time well. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Thanks for the info. ntpd will add a no servers reachable message to the syslog when no servers are reachable. How long should I expect to wait for ntpd to log the failure to syslog, as I've not seen such a syslog message after 10 minutes? All the best, Chris. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Chris Dew [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for the info. ntpd will add a no servers reachable message to the syslog when no servers are reachable. How long should I expect to wait for ntpd to log the failure to syslog, as I've not seen such a syslog message after 10 minutes? If like many, you made the mistake of haveing one of the servers be the Local server, you will wait forever. All the best, Chris. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
If like many, you made the mistake of haveing one of the servers be the Local server, you will wait forever. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# cat /etc/ntp.conf server 192.168.1.133 restrict 192.168.1.133 mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify notrap noquery I had included the config in a post above. Is the local server added as a source by default, as I have not explicitly added it? Thanks, Chris. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Richard B. Gilbert wrote: The source to ntpd is available! If you wish it to write something to syslog, please feel free to download the source, make the necessary modifications, and try it. It should not be too difficult. Making it work for EVERY platform is going to be a massive project. What about platforms that don't *have* syslog? I don't think Windows does and I'm fairly sure that VMS does not although their may be reasonable facsimiles in both cases. I'll think about it. There were a couple of other things on my mind at the time when working ntp was current for me ( customer is out of funding so I am busy elsewhere ) 1. log errors to syslog 2. have ntpd listen to signals ( poll now, reenumerate interfaces, ..) 3. be able to strip out all attached device ref clock drivers for a minimal slave uwe ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Hal Murray wrote: I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't synchronise the time. snip You probably want to know if one of the servers you are using has died so you can switch to another before too many more die. That's why you normally configure four, five, or seven servers. These magic numbers protect you against the failure of one, two, or three servers respectively. Failure can mean anything from not responding to responding with the wrong year! ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Hal Murray wrote: I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't synchronise the time. snip You probably want to know if one of the servers you are using has died so you can switch to another before too many more die. That's why you normally configure four, five, or seven servers. These magic numbers protect you against the failure of one, two, or three servers respectively. Failure can mean anything from not responding to responding with the wrong year! Doing a FAIL save setup is orthogonal to announcing failures (early). Compare to RAID devices: If the user is not informed about failure of any one of the redundant devices the final failure will be as catastrophic as a plain storage device. ( actually it will be more hurtfull due to the user having been assured that his disks are fail save obviating the need for independent backup. ) uwe ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Hal Murray wrote: I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't synchronise the time. snip You probably want to know if one of the servers you are using has died so you can switch to another before too many more die. That's why you normally configure four, five, or seven servers. These magic numbers protect you against the failure of one, two, or three servers respectively. Failure can mean anything from not responding to responding with the wrong year! Doing a false save setup is orthogonal to announcing failures (early). Compare to RAID devices: If the user is not informed about failure of any one of the redundant devices the final failure will be as catastrophic as a plain storage device. ( actually it will be more hurtfull due to the user having been assured that his disks are fail save obviating the need for independent backup. ) uwe ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Chris Dew wrote: If like many, you made the mistake of haveing one of the servers be the Local server, you will wait forever. r...@server:~# cat /etc/ntp.conf server 192.168.1.133 restrict 192.168.1.133 mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify notrap noquery I had included the config in a post above. Is the local server added as a source by default, as I have not explicitly added it? Thanks, Chris. I believe you mean local clock rather than local server. The local clock is NOT a server by default You can configure the local clock as a server of last resort when no other server is reachable. This will keep your clocks in synchronization and more or less correct for a few hours but *very few*! Synchronization will last but correctness will not. If you really need the correct time you DO NOT want to rely on the local for any longer than absolutely necessary. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Uwe Klein wrote: Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Hal Murray wrote: I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't synchronise the time. snip You probably want to know if one of the servers you are using has died so you can switch to another before too many more die. That's why you normally configure four, five, or seven servers. These magic numbers protect you against the failure of one, two, or three servers respectively. Failure can mean anything from not responding to responding with the wrong year! Doing a false save setup is orthogonal to announcing failures (early). Would you mind translating the above sentence into English? What is a false save setup? snip ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Chris Dew cms...@googlemail.com writes: If like many, you made the mistake of haveing one of the servers be the Local server, you will wait forever. r...@server:~# cat /etc/ntp.conf server 192.168.1.133 restrict 192.168.1.133 mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify notrap noquery I had included the config in a post above. Is the local server added as a source by default, as I have not explicitly added it? No it has to be explicit. But many distributions have it automatically included in their ntp.conf files by default. The problems with your listing is that it is not clear that you listed the whole file, and not just what you thought was relevant. If you do not have a any line like server 127.127.1.0 then my hypothesis fails. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Richard B. Gilbert rgilber...@comcast.net writes: Chris Dew wrote: If like many, you made the mistake of haveing one of the servers be the Local server, you will wait forever. r...@server:~# cat /etc/ntp.conf server 192.168.1.133 restrict 192.168.1.133 mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify notrap noquery I had included the config in a post above. Is the local server added as a source by default, as I have not explicitly added it? Thanks, Chris. I believe you mean local clock rather than local server. The local clock is NOT a server by default You can configure the local clock as a server of last resort when no other server is reachable. This will keep your clocks in synchronization and more or less correct for a few hours but *very few*! Synchronization will last but correctness will not. If you really need the correct time you DO NOT want to rely on the local for any longer than absolutely necessary. Even stronger, you do not want the local clock at all except in the rare case where your machine serves a bunch of other machines and yo u want it to pretend to be up and synchronized even when it is not. The local clock will freewheel whether you have the 127.127.1.0 as a server or not. It does absolutely nothing good for you. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Richard B. Gilbert wrote: What is a false save setup? snip He? sorry, that any better( I canceled that post and fixed the spelling in a new post ..): Doing a FAIL save setup is orthogonal to announcing failures (early). Compare to RAID devices: If the user is not informed about failure of any one of the redundant devices the final failure will be as catastrophic as a plain storage device. ( actually it will be more hurtfull due to the user having been assured that his disks are fail save obviating the need for independent backup. ) uwe ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
In article 73ab7a34-49a8-472a-9d9a-9f6288624...@i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com, Chris Dew cms...@googlemail.com writes: Steve Kostecke wrote: ntpd will add a no servers reachable message to the syslog when no servers are reachable. Chris How long should I expect to wait for ntpd to log the failure to Chris syslog, as I've not seen such a syslog message after 10 minutes? I think you might do better with an ongoing monitoring system. There are links to some of these at: http://support.ntp.org/Support/MonitoringAndControllingNTP -- Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org http://ntpforum.isc.org - be a member! ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
That's why you normally configure four, five, or seven servers. These magic numbers protect you against the failure of one, two, or three servers respectively. Failure can mean anything from not responding to responding with the wrong year! That's missing the point I was trying to make. Let me try again. If you have a system with redundancy, you also need a layer of monitoring to see if it is working correctly. Otherwise, when something breaks, the system will take advantage of the redundancy and keep working. If nobody knows about the problem, it won't get fixed. After a while something else breaks. Eventually you run out of working redundancy and the system stops working. There are all sorts of reasons why NTP servers might stop working. The RAID example was a good one. -- 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] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Hal Murray wrote: That's why you normally configure four, five, or seven servers. These magic numbers protect you against the failure of one, two, or three servers respectively. Failure can mean anything from not responding to responding with the wrong year! That's missing the point I was trying to make. Let me try again. If you have a system with redundancy, you also need a layer of monitoring to see if it is working correctly. Otherwise, when something breaks, the system will take advantage of the redundancy and keep working. If nobody knows about the problem, it won't get fixed. After a while something else breaks. Eventually you run out of working redundancy and the system stops working. There are all sorts of reasons why NTP servers might stop working. The RAID example was a good one. I think you are assuming here, that the servers will fail one by one with no one noticing or correcting the problems. This scenario seems rather unlikely to me. Any publicly available server has hundreds or even thousands of clients keeping an eye on it. If it goes belly up the failure will surely be noticed. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Uwe Klein wrote: Richard B. Gilbert wrote: What is a false save setup? snip He? sorry, that any better( I canceled that post and fixed the spelling in a new post ..): Doing a FAIL save setup is orthogonal to announcing failures (early). Compare to RAID devices: If the user is not informed about failure of any one of the redundant devices the final failure will be as catastrophic as a plain storage device. ( actually it will be more hurtfull due to the user having been assured that his disks are fail save obviating the need for independent backup. ) uwe Sorry, it's the orthogonal part that's bothering me. My dictionary says pertaining to or composed of right angles. It's frequently used as a buzz word but seems to be without content in the context of NTP. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
I think you are assuming here, that the servers will fail one by one with no one noticing or correcting the problems. This scenario seems rather unlikely to me. Any publicly available server has hundreds or even thousands of clients keeping an eye on it. If it goes belly up the failure will surely be noticed. What if the failure is the company going out of business or a policy change or ... -- 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
[ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
I'm new to setting up ntpd. When ntp works successfully, it logs that fact to syslog. When it fails (because I've provided a deliberately bogus timeserver), it sends nothing to syslog, even 10 minutes after boot. What should its behaviour be, when it can't contact its timeserver(s)? Thanks, Chris. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# cat /etc/ntp.conf server 192.168.1.133 restrict 192.168.1.133 mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify notrap noquery [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# ntpq ntpq peers remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter == 192.168.1.133 .INIT. 16 u- 6400.000 0.000 0.000 ntpq as ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt === 1 57087 8000 yes yes nonereject ntpq pe remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter == 192.168.1.133 .INIT. 16 u- 6400.000 0.000 0.000 ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Chris Dew wrote: I'm new to setting up ntpd. When ntp works successfully, it logs that fact to syslog. When it fails (because I've provided a deliberately bogus timeserver), it sends nothing to syslog, even 10 minutes after boot. What should its behaviour be, when it can't contact its timeserver(s)? snip There is not much it CAN do. It tells you, if you are paying attention, that it cannot reach a server to synchronize with. Paying attention means making some use of the monitoring tools provided; e.g. ntpq and ntpdc. Note that ntpd is a slow starter it will typically take about thirty minutes from a cold start to get your clock well synchronized. A warm start should be a little faster. Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your network people should be working like beavers to fix it! ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Thanks for your reply. I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't synchronise the time. I had assumed it would - and therefore we would be able to see such a problem through off-box syslog analysis. If it doesn't log such a failure itself, I'll need to add a monitoring script (which *will* log to syslog). My enquiry was to whether I'd got something wrong, in either the configuration of ntpd or in my assumptions about it's behaviour. Thanks, Chris. On Dec 10, 4:39 pm, Richard B. Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris Dew wrote: I'm new to setting up ntpd. When ntp works successfully, it logs that fact to syslog. When it fails (because I've provided a deliberately bogus timeserver), it sends nothing to syslog, even 10 minutes after boot. What should its behaviour be, when it can't contact its timeserver(s)? snip There is not much it CAN do. It tells you, if you are paying attention, that it cannot reach a server to synchronize with. Paying attention means making some use of the monitoring tools provided; e.g. ntpq and ntpdc. Note that ntpd is a slow starter it will typically take about thirty minutes from a cold start to get your clock well synchronized. A warm start should be a little faster. Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your network people should be working like beavers to fix it! ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your network people should be working like beavers to fix it! How should they know if ntp is mum about that failure? uwe ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Richard B. Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Chris Dew wrote: I'm new to setting up ntpd. When ntp works successfully, it logs that fact to syslog. When it fails (because I've provided a deliberately bogus timeserver), it sends nothing to syslog, even 10 minutes after boot. What should its behaviour be, when it can't contact its timeserver(s)? snip There is not much it CAN do. It tells you, if you are paying attention, that it cannot reach a server to synchronize with. Paying attention means making some use of the monitoring tools provided; e.g. ntpq and ntpdc. He is suggesting that it CAN log the fact that the server does not exist to syslog. Note that ntpd is a slow starter it will typically take about thirty minutes from a cold start to get your clock well synchronized. A warm start should be a little faster. It will never get it well synchorinized if it has no server. Note that that time scale is 10 hr, not 30 min., if for example the drift file is out by 30PPM( as can happen on Linux with the tsc clock driver). Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your network people should be working like beavers to fix it! ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Uwe Klein wrote: Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your network people should be working like beavers to fix it! How should they know if ntp is mum about that failure? uwe IF NTP IS THE ONLY THING FAILING, they won't know. It's probably not their problem. If you have four servers configured and you can't reach any of them, it's almost certainly a network problem and your networking people should know about it! If you MUST have NTP working at all times, you need to build a defense in depth. That means one or more hardware reference clocks and/or four, five, or seven upstream servers. I use a GPS timing receiver as the source for one of my servers, a WWV/WWVH radio clock for another, and several internet servers as backup/sanity check. And I'm just a hobbyist these days! But I'm a hobbyist who knows what time it is! :-) ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Uwe Klein wrote: Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your network people should be working like beavers to fix it! How should they know if ntp is mum about that failure? uwe IF NTP IS THE ONLY THING FAILING, they won't know. It's probably not their problem. If you have four servers configured and you can't reach any of them, it's almost certainly a network problem and your networking people should know about it! If you MUST have NTP working at all times, you need to build a defense in depth. That means one or more hardware reference clocks and/or four, five, or seven upstream servers. I use a GPS timing receiver as the source for one of my servers, a WWV/WWVH radio clock for another, and several internet servers as backup/sanity check. And I'm just a hobbyist these days! But I'm a hobbyist who knows what time it is! :-) So, you are a hobby rocket scientist? ;-) back to the topic: with firewalls, overintelligent switches, NAT and nutty admins it is no longer a given that reaching a host via ping, traceroute or http means it works globally and you can now savor your next cigar. I prefer information push of failures ( like to syslog ) to information pull ( like in writing utilities that monitor uncooperative apps and which I have to setup as a cronjob . ) syslog already is a very flexible tool for monitoring and problem escalation. uwe ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Uwe Klein wrote: Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Uwe Klein wrote: Richard B. Gilbert wrote: Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your network people should be working like beavers to fix it! How should they know if ntp is mum about that failure? uwe IF NTP IS THE ONLY THING FAILING, they won't know. It's probably not their problem. If you have four servers configured and you can't reach any of them, it's almost certainly a network problem and your networking people should know about it! If you MUST have NTP working at all times, you need to build a defense in depth. That means one or more hardware reference clocks and/or four, five, or seven upstream servers. I use a GPS timing receiver as the source for one of my servers, a WWV/WWVH radio clock for another, and several internet servers as backup/sanity check. And I'm just a hobbyist these days! But I'm a hobbyist who knows what time it is! :-) So, you are a hobby rocket scientist? ;-) back to the topic: with firewalls, overintelligent switches, NAT and nutty admins it is no longer a given that reaching a host via ping, traceroute or http means it works globally and you can now savor your next cigar. I prefer information push of failures ( like to syslog ) to information pull ( like in writing utilities that monitor uncooperative apps and which I have to setup as a cronjob . ) syslog already is a very flexible tool for monitoring and problem escalation. uwe The source to ntpd is available! If you wish it to write something to syslog, please feel free to download the source, make the necessary modifications, and try it. It should not be too difficult. Making it work for EVERY platform is going to be a massive project. What about platforms that don't *have* syslog? I don't think Windows does and I'm fairly sure that VMS does not although their may be reasonable facsimiles in both cases. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
On 2008-12-10, Chris Dew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't synchronise the time. I had assumed it would - and therefore we would be able to see such a problem through off-box syslog analysis. ntpd will add a no servers reachable message to the syslog when no servers are reachable. -- 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
