Why don't you test how well the laptop works as a "time transportation"
mechanism first?
And they can make their own decision about how well the alternatives work.
If the laptop does it for them, great.
If not, they might be able to use a modem driver or a low-cost (~US$80) GPS
receiver.
H
___
Henk Penning wrote:
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Uwe Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> I would however add that having time-zone aliases would make it easy
>>> for OS distributions to automatically configure the NTP servers. For
>
>> The next best thing imho would b
David Woolley wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>>jitter the other nodes are reporting from node-1? That is, is high
>>jitter contagious?
>
>
> I'm not sure how jitter gets reflected into the protocol responses, but it
> certainly ought to affect the time q
On 2007-09-09, Steve Kostecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [NOTE: My configuration suggestions are at the bottom of this rather
> long article]
Many thanks in advance, for the effort.
The precision desired here is one of human scale, not milliseconds
(or worse).
>>>
>>> Please define "
For the situation you describe I would recommend running the local refclock
on your master server at 2 stratum values "worse" than the worst upstream
server it would be talking to.
If you leave the local refclock stratum at 10 and this machine usually talks
to an S2 server, that means your master
On 2007-09-10, Danny Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve Kostecke wrote:
>
>> ATTRIBUTION MISSING wrote:
>>
>>> ATTRIBUTION MISSING wrote:
>>>
1. You need to have a drift file that contains an accurate
frequency.
>>>
>>> Not an option for me, too fussy.
>>
>> It's a requirement. The
>> Re the old versions thing - IBM seem to have a habit of using old
>> versions of software...
>I think just about all the vendors do this! It might have something to
>do with the fact that there is still no RFC for NTP V4.
I doubt if the RFC is a problem.
How about: If it aidn't broke, don
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> jitter the other nodes are reporting from node-1? That is, is high
> jitter contagious?
I'm not sure how jitter gets reflected into the protocol responses, but it
certainly ought to affect the time quality seen downstream. It is a
defin
> Have you looked at the 'preempt' keyword on the server config line?
>
> I think you'll find that it is pretty close to (at least parts of) what
> you're asking for.
Please, correct me if I'm mistaken, but once a server is "preempted"
or discarded, it won't be contacted ever again. If so, then "
I have a 10 node network, where each node is on the same same subnet
(and the same switch). The nodes are running FreeBSD. Node 1 is the
only node that uses an external NTP server (of stratum 2, and it's
really on the same subnet as the nodes). Node-1's ntp.conf is:
server ntp.xxx.com
"Harlan Stenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Clive George"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Clive> Turns out it's likely to be this problem:
>
> Clive> http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg1IY83597
>
> iburst was n
"Richard B. Gilbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> How about telling us what changed to make it stop working?
>>
>>
>> If I knew that, I'd have a rather better idea of what to do about it :-)
>>
>> I've not changed anything on the ntp side, nor am I aware of any
>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Woolley) writes:
>Clive George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 10 Sep 10:02:26 xntpd[1450078]: 3.4y
David> Version 3.4 is very obsolete and really is xntpd (some vendors
David> mis-label the current version as xntpd). Knowledge of this v
Henk Penning wrote:
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Uwe Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> I would however add that having time-zone aliases would make it easy
>>> for OS distributions to automatically configure the NTP servers. For
>
>> The next best thing imho would b
>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Clive George" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Clive> Turns out it's likely to be this problem:
Clive> http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg1IY83597
iburst was not available until the ntp4 release, as I recall. So it looks
like IBM has imported a fair
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Uwe Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I would however add that having time-zone aliases would make it easy
>> for OS distributions to automatically configure the NTP servers. For
>The next best thing imho would be to select by lowest hopcount a
Clive George wrote:
> "Danny Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> Clive George wrote:
>>
>>> "Jason Rabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
Which version of NTP are you using? Any output from the debug or
syslog?
>
"Danny Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Clive George wrote:
>> "Jason Rabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>> Which version of NTP are you using? Any output from the debug or syslog?
>>
>> I'm running the one which came with
Clive George wrote:
> "Richard B. Gilbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> Clive George wrote:
>>
>>> Hi -
>>>
>>> On one of our AIX 5.3 boxes, xntpd isn't very happy. If I run
>>>
>>> xntpd -l /home/cg5/a.a -dd
>>>
>>> it lasts about 10 seconds before h
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Clive George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 10 Sep 10:02:26 xntpd[1450078]: 3.4y
Version 3.4 is very obsolete and really is xntpd (some vendors mis-label
the current version as xntpd). Knowledge of this version has largely
expired, and the fix for any problem would
Clive George wrote:
> "Jason Rabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> Which version of NTP are you using? Any output from the debug or syslog?
>
> I'm running the one which came with our version of AIX 5.3 - I did try
> looking for a version command before askin
"Richard B. Gilbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Clive George wrote:
>> Hi -
>>
>> On one of our AIX 5.3 boxes, xntpd isn't very happy. If I run
>>
>> xntpd -l /home/cg5/a.a -dd
>>
>> it lasts about 10 seconds before hanging and not responding to any
>> r
>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Clive George" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Clive George wrote:
>>> Hi -
>>>
>>> On one of our AIX 5.3 boxes, xntpd isn't very happy. If I run
>>>
>>> xntpd -l /home/cg5/a.a -dd
>>>
>>> it lasts about 10 seconds before hanging and not responding to
"Jason Rabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Which version of NTP are you using? Any output from the debug or syslog?
I'm running the one which came with our version of AIX 5.3 - I did try
looking for a version command before asking the question :-) Any ideas how
24 matches
Mail list logo
