On Wednesday 22 February 2006 13:13, "Brandon Enright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote about 'RE: [gentoo-user] NTP problem':
> Anthony E. Caudel wrote:
> I can't speak for others but my experience with pool.ntp.org has been
> very poor. Some of the servers
Anthony E. Caudel wrote:
> Brandon Enright wrote:
>
> >
> > So from your output a couple issues stick out. You're only peering with
> > one machine which generally doesn't work so well. You're probably
> > better off just using ntpdate periodically if you are only going to
> > sample one server.
On Wednesday 22 February 2006 12:38, "Anthony E. Caudel"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] NTP problem':
> Brandon Enright wrote:
> Well, overnight it only reset twice; - some improvement!
>
> Here is my complete ntp.conf:
> # Name of the
Brandon Enright wrote:
>
> So from your output a couple issues stick out. You're only peering with
> one machine which generally doesn't work so well. You're probably
> better off just using ntpdate periodically if you are only going to
> sample one server.
>
> Also, the delay on the server yo
On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 02:41 -0600, Anthony E. Caudel wrote:
> Brandon Enright wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 01:32 -0600, Anthony E. Caudel wrote:
> >
> >>My system was off about 10 days and when I turned it back on, I began
> >>getting these messages in my logwatch:
> >>
> >>"Time Reset
> >>
Brandon Enright wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 01:32 -0600, Anthony E. Caudel wrote:
>
>>My system was off about 10 days and when I turned it back on, I began
>>getting these messages in my logwatch:
>>
>>"Time Reset
>> time stepped -0.133773
>> time stepped -0.662954
>> time stepped +0.2711
On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 01:32 -0600, Anthony E. Caudel wrote:
> My system was off about 10 days and when I turned it back on, I began
> getting these messages in my logwatch:
>
> "Time Reset
>time stepped -0.133773
>time stepped -0.662954
>time stepped +0.271164
>time stepped +0.4612
try 'dhcpcd_eth0="-dRNDt 5"'
ntp will refuse to sync if it sees too much drift/too much time
difference between itself and the upstream. Its not overly verbose in
telling you this however.
add "tinker panic 0" as the first line to each ntp.conf (inc your
server)
Its also a good idea to add a de
> From:: Bruno Lustosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] ntp problem
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:50:43 -0300
> On 8/23/05, Michael Kintzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Have you set all the internal clien
On 8/23/05, Michael Kintzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have you set all the internal clients up as stratum 3, your internal
> server as stratum 2 and your external reference timeservers as stratum
> 1?
No, but do I have to do this manually?
It seems ntp can discover the stratum of the servers b
> -Original Message-
> From: Bruno Lustosa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 23 August 2005 15:30
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] ntp problem
>
>
> On 8/23/05, Uwe Thiem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > timeserver
On 8/23/05, Uwe Thiem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> timeserver 217.160.252.229 3 u 26 64 3770.214 46927.6
> ^^^
> This isn't 192.158.7.1.
Yes, I know. This is the external reference ntp server used by the
timeserver, not by the client. This ip is on th
Just as a sidenote. My machine is running dhcpcd, and it sometimes
overwrites /etc/ntp.conf for some reason, even though I have
'dhcpcd_eth0="-N"' on /etc/conf.d/net.
I don't know how to make dhcpcd leave /etc/ntp.conf alone OR make it
write a correct ntp.conf (without a bunch of 'restrict' lines).
On 8/23/05, krzaq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> H...
> If you specify one timeserver, ntp cannot tell which clock is drifting
> away (local
> or remote). Ntpd trusts the local clock more than the remote one.
> Large offsets cause ntpd to discard 192.168.7.1 as reliable timesource.
> Try adding o
On 8/23/05, Bruno Lustosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/23/05, kashani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That offset looks rather large. NTP really wants to make constant small
> > changes, not a single huge change. This is why the ntpd setup allows for
> > an immediate sync via ntpdate before sta
On 23 August 2005 13:36, Bruno Lustosa wrote:
> Hello. I'm running ntpd as server on one of my machines, and it keeps
> itself in sync with 6 time servers around the globe. The
> synchronization works very well.
> The problem is when I try to get the other machines on the network to
> sync themselv
Bruno Lustosa wrote:
Hello. I'm running ntpd as server on one of my machines, and it keeps
itself in sync with 6 time servers around the globe. The
synchronization works very well.
The problem is when I try to get the other machines on the network to
sync themselves with this one server. Most of
On 8/23/05, kashani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That offset looks rather large. NTP really wants to make constant small
> changes, not a single huge change. This is why the ntpd setup allows for
> an immediate sync via ntpdate before starting the daemon. To fix this
> I'd shut down ntpd, run ntpda
On 8/23/05, krzaq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am no NTP expert, but there may be nothing wrong with your configuartion.
> NTP is a complex protocol. The machine has decided not to sync
> with the requested server. It thinks that the provided server is inacurate
> (the
> machine's internal clock
On 8/23/05, Bruno Lustosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello. I'm running ntpd as server on one of my machines, and it keeps
> itself in sync with 6 time servers around the globe. The
> synchronization works very well.
> The problem is when I try to get the other machines on the network to
> sync t
20 matches
Mail list logo
