Hi
i have a GPS which is connected to the PC1 via serial port , PC1 can
synchronize itself with GPS, now i want other PCs be synchronized with
PC1 by LAN. i have no restriction on ntp.conf.but they doesn't
synchronzie with PC1.
ntp.conf- on client
server 192.168.5.30 pr
Folkert,
Take a look at http://www.cnssys.com/cnsclock/CNSClockII.html.
Paul
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Dave,
David L. Mills wrote:
> Serge,
>
> The behavior after a step is deliberate. The iburst volley after a step
> is delayed a random fraction of the poll interval to avoid implosion
> at a busy server. An additional delay may be enforced to avoid violating
> the headway restrictions. This is
Noosh,
Your server is not synchronised. You can see that from the ntpq> ass
printout: condition=reject.
Also, the ntpq> pe printout will show an asterisk in the left column
when NTP is synchronised.
There's no asterisk, so NTP is not synchronised.
You have an offset of around 3,600,000 millisecon
Harlan Stenn wrote:
>
> For the general use case (LAN and/or WAN and/or jerky path) ntpd behaves
> well.
We are talking typical rather than general cases. In the typical case,
1ms after 1 second is a reasonable expectation on a WAN, especially when
a site is restarting, e.g. after a power fail
Dave,
David L. Mills wrote:
[...]
> The ntpd time constant is purposely set somewhat large at 2000 s, which
> results in a risetime of about 3000 s. This is a compromise for stable
> acquisition for herky-jerky Internet paths and speed of convergence for
> LANs. For typical Internet paths the Alla
Hello,
Can anyone tell me if a time shift greater than 2s per day is ""normal""
on a linux system that has no "external" synchronisation (ntp)?
I tryied "adjtimex -a" which gives unreliable results: it worked fine on
one machine (less than 1s shift / day) and badly on another one
(several s
Hi all,
I am running ntp 4.2.0 on FC5.
Two time sources:
- embedded GPS board(Meinberg board)
- remote Radio clock synchronized ntp server (stratum 1)
It seems that the Radio clock has 50ms offset compared to the GPS
source, which leads a failure in synchronisation.
I am looking
Can NTP use both GPS and a higher stratum server as
sources?
The intention is to use the higher stratum as a
backup.
Mark
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Unruh wrote:
> David Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Harlan Stenn wrote:
>>> For the general use case (LAN and/or WAN and/or jerky path) ntpd behaves
>>> well.
>
>> We are talking typical rather than general cases. In the typical case,
>> 1ms after 1 second is a reasonable expectation
Bill,
>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Unruh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Unruh> Why not? The power comes on on your computer farm of 2000 machines,
Unruh> all the clients are the same type so the bootup sequence is
Unruh> identical. They all start ntp at the same time, to within a second or
Un
>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Laws) writes:
Peter> Looking for a reference on geographical diversity of Stratum 1
Peter> servers (GPS appliances, in this case). We have two clocks now (an
Peter> old Datum TymServ with a Symetricom sticker) and another unknown
Peter>
On 2008-02-12, Nick Bright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The resolution ended up being to comment out:
>
> restrict default ignore
>
> from the default ntpd.conf
Unfortunately the one bit of information you did _not_ post was your
ntp.conf. So no one here would have seen that.
> After I commented
Maarten,
No. However, there is a small dither of a few percent at all poll
intervals to resist self-synchronization.
Dave
Maarten Wiltink wrote:
> "David L. Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>>No, there is no random delay at startup. Each association sta
Nick,
Even better would be for folks to visit:
http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Support/AccessRestrictions
--
Harlan Stenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://ntpforum.isc.org - be a member!
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp
Unruh,
Depends who the clients are. An ntpd client will not come up in the
first second, although successive associations will come up at 2-s
intervals. I would not expect 2000 clients to come up at the same exact
time anyway due ordinary latency variations in the boot process. I would
be more
>I was talking about what people could expect from software that behaved
>well; I think you are describing what ntpd actually does here. My point
>was that ntpd's ability to tolerate really rotten links is irrelevant
>for most users, who are only about 20ms away from their ISP's time
>server,
Looking for a reference on geographical diversity of Stratum 1 servers (GPS
appliances, in this case). We have two clocks now (an old Datum TymServ
with a Symetricom sticker) and another unknown brand. We'd like to add a
third at a completely different facility a mile or more away.
What, oth
noosh wrote:
> how can i synchronize my server. i have set the server(anothor PC as a
> server) to Local clock but and set my time if pc to GMT, but again
> nothing is synchronized
The PC should be set to show the correct time for the timezone for which
you have configured it. I suspect you hav
noosh wrote:
> ntpq> rv 12516
> status=9014 reach, conf, 1 event, event_reach,
> srcadr=MAIL, srcport=123, dstadr=192.168.4.18, dstport=123, leap=00,
> stratum=2, precision=-6, rootdelay=31.250, rootdispersion=10932.175,
stratum 2 is inconsistent with your claim that the server is
synchronized to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Can NTP use both GPS and a higher stratum server as
> sources?
>
> The intention is to use the higher stratum as a
> backup.
>
> Mark
Yes. GPS will be at "stratum 0" if it's working and makes your computer
stratum 1. If GPS fails, NTPD shoul
The resolution ended up being to comment out:
restrict default ignore
from the default ntpd.conf
After I commented out that line, I was able to get updates from the
servers I had configured, as well as provide updates to client devices.
For those coming upon this in a search engine result, ple
Hello David,
On Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 15:04:45 +, David L. Mills wrote:
> Serge Bets wrote:
>> ntpd -q can make use of the driftfile to set the kernel frequency
> That was removed as a significant security hazard.
Why exactly?
> If you want to rxplicitly set the frequency, use ntp
Unruh wrote:
> Any place where these different clock models is described?
> And defined (what is tsc?)
>
tsc refers to the counter in recent Intel Architecture chips that counts
the processor clock cycles. It is somewhat vulnerable to power management.
__
Martin Burnicki wrote:
> Wouldn't it make sense to adjust the time constant depending on the time
> after startup, and/or the quality of the responses from the upstream
> servers?
>
It does get adjusted. We are talking about the minimum value!
___
ques
Any place where these different clock models is described?
And defined (what is tsc?)
Martin Burnicki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Thierry,
>Thierry MARTIN wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Can anyone tell me if a time shift greater than 2s per day is ""normal""
>> on a linux system that has no "external"
Thierry MARTIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Hello,
>Can anyone tell me if a time shift greater than 2s per day is ""normal""
>on a linux system that has no "external" synchronisation (ntp)?
Sure. In fact that is small. 2s/day is 20PPM , and I have machines which
have a 80PPM drift. Also some wi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Folkert,
>Take a look at http://www.cnssys.com/cnsclock/CNSClockII.html.
Of course that is $1400 rather than $60. For that $1300 you could probably
hire a neighborhood kid to do the soldering for you.
>Paul
___
questions m
Martin Burnicki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Dave,
>David L. Mills wrote:
>> Serge,
>>
>> The behavior after a step is deliberate. The iburst volley after a step
>> is delayed a random fraction of the poll interval to avoid implosion
>> at a busy server. An additional delay may be enforced to
David Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Harlan Stenn wrote:
>>
>> For the general use case (LAN and/or WAN and/or jerky path) ntpd behaves
>> well.
>We are talking typical rather than general cases. In the typical case,
>1ms after 1 second is a reasonable expectation on a WAN, especially wh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Murray) writes:
>>So, no, I am comparing apples to apples ( the offsets as determined from
>>the ntp packet exchange mechanism which both use and both report).
>Another approach is to setup a 3rd machine to watch both.
There is no "both". ntp and chrony are run consecuti
Hello again Thierry,
On Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 10:58:32 +0100, Thierry MARTIN wrote:
> Can anyone tell me if a time shift greater than 2s per day is
> ""normal"" on a linux system that has no "external" synchronisation
> (ntp)?
Absolutely normal: that's only 23 PPM, nothing. I have seen
Hi
> Neither the GPS nor the ADAM are NTP servers, so why should a client find
> it?
if i do the following
GPS---> PC(NTP)
Serial Port
the time is synchronized by GPS.
>
> What might be possible is to configure the local NTP daemon to read the
> "serial" r
"David L. Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> No, there is no random delay at startup. Each association starts one
> second after the previous one. The random backoff occurs only after a
> step.
Is there also a random backoff after an increase of the polling inter
Thanks François. That is what I experience.
François Meyer a écrit :
> Thierry MARTIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Can anyone tell me if a time shift greater than 2s per day is ""normal""
>> on a linux system that has no "external" synchronisation (ntp)?
>
> I would say 2s/day is
Thierry MARTIN wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am running ntp 4.2.0 on FC5.
> Two time sources:
> - embedded GPS board(Meinberg board)
> - remote Radio clock synchronized ntp server (stratum 1)
>
> It seems that the Radio clock has 50ms offset compared to the GPS
> source, which leads a failure i
noosh wrote:
> Hi
>
> i have a GPS which is connected to the PC1 via serial port , PC1 can
> synchronize itself with GPS, now i want other PCs be synchronized with
> PC1 by LAN. i have no restriction on ntp.conf.but they doesn't
> synchronzie with PC1.
> ntp.conf- on cl
Serge,
That was removed as a significant security hazard. If you want to
rxplicitly set the frequency, use ntptime -f. Ths scheme is designed so
you can run ntpd until the kernel frequency has stabilized, then kill
ntpd and run SNTP client at regular intervals. I surely wouldn't
recommend that
Serge,
No; the server will detect that as a headway violation and drop the
packets with, if configured, a KoD.
Come to think of it, randomization is not really required in the latest
snapshot, since it knows about headway and will throttle accordingly.
Only in your case where the daemon is sto
Martin,
The time constantis automatically adjusted for prevailing network jitter
and oscillator wander. THe question is what choice in the configuration
file. In the latest snapshot you can use the discard average command to
override the minimum poll from 4 (15s) to 3 (8s), which results in a
On 2008-02-12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Take a look at http://www.cnssys.com/cnsclock/CNSClockII.html.
Is it really worth spending $1400 instead of $100 just to avoid soldering?
--
Steve Kostecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/
__
Hello David,
On Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 3:03:37 +, David L. Mills wrote:
> The behavior after a step is deliberate. The iburst volley after a
> step is delayed a random fraction of the poll interval to avoid
> implosion at a busy server.
Ah OK, I understand now! Thank you.
This makes
Hello David,
On Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 2:43:06 +, David L. Mills wrote:
> Just for clarity, neither the daemon nor kernel frequency is adjusted
> in any way with ntpd -q.
ntpd -q can make use of the driftfile to set the kernel frequency:
| # ntpd -q -d | grep frequency
| addto_syslo
Serge Bets wrote:
> Hello Thierry,
>
> On Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 10:39:21 +0100, Thierry MARTIN wrote:
>
>
>>It seems that the Radio clock has 50ms offset compared to the GPS
>>source, which leads a failure in synchronisation.
>
>
> Radio clocks may need a fudge factor, typically aroun
Hello Thierry,
On Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 10:39:21 +0100, Thierry MARTIN wrote:
> It seems that the Radio clock has 50ms offset compared to the GPS
> source, which leads a failure in synchronisation.
Radio clocks may need a fudge factor, typically around 20 ms, to report
the right time. T
Hi,
noosh wrote:
> Hi again
>
> this is my first time that i have to work with ADAM 4577. it is 1 port
> universial serial gateway.now it is like this
>
> GPS ->ADAM 4577 ->PC1
>serial Port LAN
>
> unfortuna
Hi,
Are there any known issues in using NTP in RTOS ?
Venu
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Hi again
this is my first time that i have to work with ADAM 4577. it is 1 port
universial serial gateway.now it is like this
GPS ->ADAM 4577 ->PC1
serial Port LAN
unfortunatelly PC cann't find ADAM as its NT
Noosh,
You need to set the time on the client to within 1000s
of the time on the server before you start NTP
on the client.
This is documented here:
http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/ntpd.html#op
(How NTP Operates, second paragraph).
BTW: Did you get NTP running with your Hopf 6842?
Are
Hi,
As per the ntpq output given, the initial offset is too high (in bold
below).
ntpq> rv 12516
status=9014 reach, conf, 1 event, event_reach,
srcadr=MAIL, srcport=123, dstadr=192.168.4.18, dstport=123, leap=00,
stratum=2, precision=-6, rootdelay=31.250, rootdispersion=10932.175,
refid=DC1, reac
Thierry,
Thierry MARTIN wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can anyone tell me if a time shift greater than 2s per day is ""normal""
> on a linux system that has no "external" synchronisation (ntp)?
>
> I tryied "adjtimex -a" which gives unreliable results: it worked fine on
>one machine (less than 1s shift
Hi Thierry,
Thierry MARTIN wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am running ntp 4.2.0 on FC5.
> Two time sources:
> - embedded GPS board(Meinberg board)
> - remote Radio clock synchronized ntp server (stratum 1)
>
> It seems that the Radio clock has 50ms offset compared to the GPS
> source, which leads a failu
On Feb 12, 11:43 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Noosh,
>
> Your server is not synchronised. You can see that from the ntpq> ass
> printout: condition=reject.
> Also, the ntpq> pe printout will show an asterisk in the left column
> when NTP is synchronised.
> There's no asterisk, so NTP is not synch
Hi All
Iam trying to install ISC NTP-4.2.4 on RHEL 4. But Im not able to start
the services.
I firstly removed the default rpm and then compiled the latest version,
configured the ntp.conf file, but Iam not able to start the service. I
give the command /etc/init.d/ntpd start. # prompt comes bac
Hello Harlan,
On Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 3:22:59 +, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> Interesting script - thanks. Would you like me to put it in the
> distribution?
Excellent idea! As contrib example, or installed in bindir along with
ntp-wait?
> what benefit do we get by using the script to
Martin,
No, there is no random delay at startup. Each association starts one
second after the previous one. The random backoff occurs only after a
step. The fact that the initial backoff is small means that the client
population is crudely synchronized and could well gang up after a step.
Ther
56 matches
Mail list logo
