On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 02:18:18AM -0800, alan brown wrote:
I may be wrong but I think it's more generic than burning CD's. I've
heard it's related to SCSI drives. Just hearsay. Throw it into the
mix...
On the victim machine I'm using IDE drives with SCSI emulation for the
CD writer, no
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 04:14:32PM -0800, Bill Moseley wrote:
...
The other possibility, brought up by someone on this list, is that that
machine is used for burning CDs and that may cause the clock to get slow.
I have not check this, though.
I'll second that warning, as I saw just that
Michael == Michael D Schleif [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael imho, all isp's ought to be required to *have* time servers . . .
No, anyone who sells disk space should have a time server. I don't
care whether my time is exactly in sync with the ISP who provides my
internet connection, but
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-12-23 08:03:45 -0600]:
I think you'd stump the frontline staff at any isp with this one, and
it's not really important enough to email thier NOC about in the end...
Of course I'd stump the frontline staff of my ISP with questions about time
servers, and
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 04:08:34PM +0100, Chris Niekel wrote:
But indeed, time is of no critical importance to me, so maybe I should
just remove a few of the servers.
If you already have them listed, there's no real reason to remove
them, as it'll maintain reliability if the timeservers go out.
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 07:01:41PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
And that higher stratum server should be that of your ISP, if possible.
IMHO all ISPs should make time servers available to their customers.
The NTP-docs mention that you should not use only one server, but more.
I've added a few
Paul Johnson writes:
[A UBR is] part of a cable network.
Then my ISP doesn't have one.
I think you'd stump the frontline staff at any isp with this one, and
it's not really important enough to email thier NOC about in the end...
Of course I'd stump the frontline staff of my ISP with
Chris Niekel writes:
The NTP-docs mention that you should not use only one server, but more.
Is reliable time service of critical importance to you? Most systems can
go for days without contacting a timeserver and suffer no harm.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 08:09:41AM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
Chris Niekel writes:
The NTP-docs mention that you should not use only one server, but more.
Is reliable time service of critical importance to you? Most systems can
go for days without contacting a timeserver and suffer no harm.
Bob writes:
How does rdate compare to chrony and nptd?
Rdate uses the RFC868 protocol while Chrony and Ntp use the RFC1305 (NTP)
protocol. Look here http://www.boulder.nist.gov/timefreq/service/its.htm
for a comparison.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood,
On 22 Dec 2002 08:05:55 -0600
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's a UBR?
I'm pretty sure it does with the NTL cable system I'm on.
My ISP certainly doesn't, and I doubt that I could contact with anyone
there who knows what a time server is.
The local router that acts as your
I wrote:
What's a UBR?
Richard Kimber writes:
The local router that acts as your gateway.
No ntp service available there.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On Sun, Dec 22, 2002 at 08:05:55AM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
The local UBR should do that shouldn't it?
What's a UBR?
Back when I was working for @Home, I knew this. It's part of a cable
network.
My ISP certainly doesn't, and I doubt that I could contact with anyone
there who knows what
On Sun, Dec 22, 2002 at 03:17:50AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Shouldn't happen. Have you filed a bug report?
I'm not the administrator of the machines at my lab, so I couldn't
report any useful information.
Try typing bug at a shell prompt. If it works, you should be able to
at least
On Sun, 2002-12-22 at 01:47, John Hasler wrote:
Antoine writes:
I was one of the people using ntpdate in a cron job, although it was not
because I was lazy, all my servers have ntpd, I only used ntpdate on
clients.
Then your clients should have been connecting to the ntp daemons on your
On 21 Dec 2002 19:01:41 -0600
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And that higher stratum server should be that of your ISP, if possible.
IMHO all ISPs should make time servers available to their customers.
The local UBR should do that shouldn't it? I'm pretty sure it does with
the NTL cable
I wrote:
Then your clients should have been connecting to the ntp daemons on your
servers, so there should have been no impact on the public servers.
Antoine Jacoutot writes:
All my clients did ntpdate to local servers, and the servers (which were
using ntpd) are connecting to public servers.
I wrote:
And that higher stratum server should be that of your ISP, if possible.
IMHO all ISPs should make time servers available to their customers.
Richard Kimber writes:
The local UBR should do that shouldn't it?
What's a UBR?
I'm pretty sure it does with the NTL cable system I'm on.
My
How does rdate compare to chrony and nptd?
Regards,
Bob
--
_
|_) _ |_Robert D. Hilliard[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|_) (_) |_) 1294 S.W. Seagull Way [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Palm City, FL 34990 USA GPG Key ID: 390D6559
* Sonny Kupka [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-12-21 10:46:12 -0600]:
I have ntpdate installed on woody.. and it's not automagically keeping my
system in sync..
Contrary to what you may have heard, ntpdate does not keep your system
clock synced. Also ignore the foolish recommendations to run ntpdate
N. Thomas said:
* Sonny Kupka [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-12-21 10:46:12 -0600]:
I have ntpdate installed on woody.. and it's not automagically keeping
my system in sync..
Contrary to what you may have heard, ntpdate does not keep your system
clock synced. Also ignore the foolish
On Sun, 2002-12-22 at 00:51, N. Thomas wrote:
* Sonny Kupka [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-12-21 10:46:12 -0600]:
I have ntpdate installed on woody.. and it's not automagically keeping my
system in sync..
Contrary to what you may have heard, ntpdate does not keep your system
clock synced. Also
At 06:51 PM 12/21/02 -0500, N. Thomas wrote:
* Sonny Kupka [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-12-21 10:46:12 -0600]:
I have ntpdate installed on woody.. and it's not automagically keeping my
system in sync..
Contrary to what you may have heard, ntpdate does not keep your system
clock synced. Also ignore
On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, Bill Moseley wrote:
At 06:51 PM 12/21/02 -0500, N. Thomas wrote:
...
Anyway, here's all the logs I have:
$ fgrep ntp daemon.log.0 daemon.log | tail -10
daemon.log:Dec 16 02:20:12 burn ntpd[299]: ntpd 4.1.0 Mon Mar 25 23:39:47 UTC 2002
(2)
daemon.log:Dec 16
* nate [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-12-21 16:15:35 -0800]:
N. Thomas said:
Contrary to what you may have heard, ntpdate does not keep your
system clock synced.
it can, and does I've been using it for ages. I do not like to run
ntpd on everything[1]. The less daemons listening on ports the
At 04:27 PM 12/21/02 -0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
daemon.log:Dec 16 02:20:14 burn ntpd_initres[307]: couldn't resolve
`ntp1.mainecoon.com', giving up on it
daemon.log:Dec 21 14:30:29 burn ntpdate[6612]: step time server
63.192.96.2 offset 3203.797781 sec
sounds like you need to fix your dns ?? ( at
Nate writes:
If ntpd can be configured not to listen for connections on any port then
maybe I would use it...
Well, chrony certainly can: the default is to allow no access. You can
configure it to allow or deny access from just about any combination of
hosts, IPs, and subnets. It is simple to
Antoine writes:
I was one of the people using ntpdate in a cron job, although it was not
because I was lazy, all my servers have ntpd, I only used ntpdate on
clients.
Then your clients should have been connecting to the ntp daemons on your
servers, so there should have been no impact on the
N. Thomas said:
Why don't you just run ntpd on the one machine that talks to the higher
stratum servers and use ntpdate for your internal network?
this is infact, what I do[1] :) sorry if I wasn't clear. I run ntpd
on 1 machine(sometimes 1 machine per network). This syncs to some
external
John Hasler said:
Nate writes:
If ntpd can be configured not to listen for connections on any port then
maybe I would use it...
Well, chrony certainly can: the default is to allow no access. You can
configure it to allow or deny access from just about any combination of
hosts, IPs, and
N. Thomas writes:
Why don't you just run ntpd on the one machine that talks to the higher
stratum servers and use ntpdate for your internal network?
And that higher stratum server should be that of your ISP, if possible.
IMHO all ISPs should make time servers available to their customers.
--
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 07:01:41PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
N. Thomas writes:
Why don't you just run ntpd on the one machine that talks to the higher
stratum servers and use ntpdate for your internal network?
And that higher stratum server should be that of your ISP, if possible.
IMHO
John Hasler wrote:
N. Thomas writes:
Why don't you just run ntpd on the one machine that talks to the higher
stratum servers and use ntpdate for your internal network?
And that higher stratum server should be that of your ISP, if possible.
IMHO all ISPs should make time servers
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 07:28:20PM -0500, N. Thomas wrote:
Why don't you just run ntpd on the one machine that talks to the higher
stratum servers and use ntpdate for your internal network?
Won't that still be bad for the machines on the internal network? Their
clocks will regularly be
hi ya
On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, Bill Moseley wrote:
At 04:27 PM 12/21/02 -0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
daemon.log:Dec 16 02:20:14 burn ntpd_initres[307]: couldn't resolve
`ntp1.mainecoon.com', giving up on it
daemon.log:Dec 21 14:30:29 burn ntpdate[6612]: step time server
63.192.96.2 offset
Nate writes:
As above, only 1 system sync's to an external server, and it is a .gov
server, time.nist.gov or something.
I was about to write that you should not use a stratum 1 server, but this
page http://www.boulder.nist.gov/timefreq/service/its.htm implies that
NIST doesn't mind at all. I
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 18:51:24 -0500, N. Thomas wrote:
If you want to keep your clock in sync use ntpd -- that's what it was
designed for.
This is what is used on the machines at my lab, but the daemon
sometimes dies. So, I wouldn't say that this is a good solution,
unless there is a way to
* Lance Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-12-21 19:16:56 -0600]:
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 07:28:20PM -0500, N. Thomas wrote:
Why don't you just run ntpd on the one machine that talks to the
higher stratum servers and use ntpdate for your internal network?
Won't that still be bad for the
Lance Simmons writes:
Won't that still be bad for the machines on the internal network? Their
clocks will regularly be reset.
If he runs it frequently and the clocks in the clients aren't too bad the
changes will be less than a second and therefor unlikely to damage
anything. He'd be better
Vincent writes:
This is what is used on the machines at my lab, but the daemon sometimes
dies.
Shouldn't happen. Have you filed a bug report?
So, I wouldn't say that this is a good solution, unless there is a way to
restart ntpd automatically (by cron?) when it dies.
man inittab
Or try
On Sat, 2002-12-21 at 17:51, N. Thomas wrote:
Contrary to what you may have heard, ntpdate does not keep your system
clock synced. Also ignore the foolish recommendations to run ntpdate
from a cron job.
ntpdate works like date(1), but it sets your clock's time to that of an
ntp server (or
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 19:50:39 -0600, John Hasler wrote:
Vincent writes:
This is what is used on the machines at my lab, but the daemon sometimes
dies.
Shouldn't happen. Have you filed a bug report?
I'm not the administrator of the machines at my lab, so I couldn't
report any useful
Vincent writes:
Does [chrony] set the hardware clock?
It can, using the 'trimrtc' directive (this is not properly documented: a
bug).
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
* Kirk Strauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-12-21 19:56:20 -0600]:
Contrary to what you may have heard, ntpdate does not keep your system
clock synced.
In fact, you can *force* ntpdate to slew the clock rate to achieve
accuracy rather than stepping it; see the '-B' option.
Yes, but this only
N. Thomas wrote:
* Kirk Strauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-12-21 19:56:20 -0600]:
Contrary to what you may have heard, ntpdate does not keep your system
clock synced.
In fact, you can *force* ntpdate to slew the clock rate to achieve
accuracy rather than stepping it; see the '-B'
Michael D. Schleif writes:
granted, wherever feasible, ntpd is technically the best . . .
Do you know of some benchmarks comparing ntp and chrony?
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 10:12:56PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
Michael D. Schleif writes:
granted, wherever feasible, ntpd is technically the best . . .
Do you know of some benchmarks comparing ntp and chrony?
I thought chronyd did not implement all of the time protocol RFC and had
fewer
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 04:15:35PM -0800, nate wrote:
it can, and does I've been using it for ages. I do not like to run
ntpd on everything[1]. The less daemons listening on ports the better for me.
ntpd is more accurate then ntpdate, but doing a ntpdate timeserver;
hwclock --systohc works
48 matches
Mail list logo
