In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Richard B. Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The local clock driver
> is harmless as long as people configure it to stratum 10!
This very thread demonstrates a case where it wasn't harmless!
What has happened her
Danny Mayer wrote:
> Jan Ceuleers wrote:
>> This means that there is no need to allocate memory for constructing the
>> reply packet, no need to copy data from received to transmitted packet, etc.
>
> This is also false. That's not what the code does. The recvbuf structure
> is not even the same
venu gopal wrote:
> Hi Hal,
> The custom NMEA format has GPS time unlike standard NMEA which give
> UTC. And the baudrate cannot be changed to 4800, it only works at 9600.
> Things are not as simple as we think and we need to work to make things simple
> I am looking for people who can help me
Does NTP include SNMP support (on Windows), and if not, are there any
plans to add support?
Thanks,
David
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "David J Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
David> Does NTP include SNMP support (on Windows), and if not, are there any
David> plans to add support?
I gather nobody has written the .whatever file to build the current sntp
code under windows.
We are (slowly)
On 2007-12-07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> you see no reason, why a ntp-client that does not serve its time to
> someone else should have a local clock configured?
> did i get this right?
The only reason to use the Undisciplined Local Clock (127.127.1.x) is on
an ntpd which mu
Brian,
I beg to differ with your beg to differ. RFC 768 requires that the UDP
checksom includes the pseudo header, which itself contains the IP source
and destination addresses. Technically speaking the addresses don't have
to mean anything, but it would be pretty silly for a RPC server not to
Hi,
thank you very much for your responses.
summary:
you see no reason, why a ntp-client that does not serve its time to
someone else should have a local clock configured?
did i get this right?
i will change my configuration and try that.
does anyone of you have details regarding my original
