In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Svein Skogen) writes:
Svein I've kept out of this topic on purpose, simply because I did not want
Svein to add anything that people would take as a personal attack (and I
Svein failed to see how I could vent my feelings without looking like I was
Harlan Stenn wrote:
[]
Without my looking at the code or the RFC, I believe this means it
will send a request to the listed host(s) and set the time to the
first answer it receives, and then exit. If the time is stepped it
will DTRT regarding writing appropriate accounting messages
John Zornig wrote:
Enabled
interface 7: fd=23, bfd=-1, name=eth1, flags=0x19, scope=0
sin=10.1.1.9 bcast=10.1.1.255, mask=255.255.255.0
It's failed to find the interface on which you are listening. Why so
many? Is the target interface real?
I seem to remember there
I am actually using three seperate BU 303 GPS devices pointing in
different directions.
Beware of the leap-second bug.
I don't have a BU 303, but all the other SiRF units I've tried
are off by a second for some strange pattern.
http://www.megapathdsl.net/~hmurray/ntp/leap-gps.gif
That happens
John Zornig wrote:
The client system is an uptodate Red Hat 5.2 system. The ntp.x86_64
version installed is 4.2.2p1-8.el5
^
That's relatively old. libisc/ifiter_ioctl.c, the most likely source of
the problem on Linux, was updated in December 2006, or later.
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:47:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Zornig) wrote:
receive: at 35 10.10.1.9-10.10.9.1 flags 39 restrict 000
receive: at 35 10.10.1.9-10.10.9.1 mode 5 code 6 keyid 0002 len
48 mac 20 auth 2
Your server is adding an MD5 key to the time packet but the client isn't
On 2008-10-20, John Zornig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Full ntp.conf file
Are you positive there are no other restrict lines?
logconfig all
restrict 10.10.9.1
restrict 127.0.0.1
These restrict lines drop all restrictions for the listed IP addresses.
They are meaningless
DTRT = ?
Do The Right Thing
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nicola Berndt) writes:
Unruh schrieb:
I see, that's too bad then.. :( I am already using minpoll 4 maxpoll 4
OK, But that should have a convergence of minutes not hours. Mind you NTPs
habit of throwing away 7 out of 8 queries of the clock does not help.
(clock
We target for millisecond accuracy. As I understand, the oscillators on
standard PCs are mostly cheapest crap and there are way better
oscillators I could use to replace the original. Is that correct?
There are two parts to that crap.
One is that the actual frequency doesn't match the number
Hal Murray wrote:
DTRT = ?
Do The Right Thing
Thanks, Hal. I've not seen that one before!
Cheers,
David
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Unruh wrote:
The way better oscillators I think is primarily oscillators which are
temp controlled (yes heaters) and selected/adjusted.
Nowadays they are as likely to be TCXO's, temperature compensated
crystal oscillators, in which the temperature is measured and used to
drive a varicap
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 10:24:22 GMT, David McConnell wrote:
The driftfile also sometimes seems to do more harm than good - especially
after a reboot.
Some kernels do a calibration of clock against RTC clock. This will make
driftfile misleading.
/hjj
___
The driftfile also sometimes seems to do more harm than good - especially
after a reboot.
Some kernels do a calibration of clock against RTC clock. This will make
driftfile misleading.
There is a bug in the Linux calibration routine for the TSC mode
clock. It doesn't get a consistent answer.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Murray) writes:
The driftfile also sometimes seems to do more harm than good - especially
after a reboot.
Some kernels do a calibration of clock against RTC clock. This will make
driftfile misleading.
There is a bug in the Linux calibration routine for the TSC mode
Two of my systems injected leap seconds at the end of Aug and Sep.
A couple of others didn't.
I thought I saw some discussion of this, but I can't find it. Has
anybody else seen this? Was I dreaming about seeing something here?
Is the bug in the Linux kernel for not waiting until December, or
and where do I get it?
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
Nicola Berndt wrote:
Unruh schrieb:
I see, that's too bad then.. :( I am already using minpoll 4 maxpoll 4
OK, But that should have a convergence of minutes not hours. Mind you NTPs
habit of throwing away 7 out of 8 queries of the clock does not help.
(clock filter). Especially for a
Richard B. Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nicola Berndt wrote:
Unruh schrieb:
I see, that's too bad then.. :( I am already using minpoll 4 maxpoll 4
OK, But that should have a convergence of minutes not hours. Mind you NTPs
habit of throwing away 7 out of 8 queries of the clock does
A termistor on the crystal on the other hand might be useful to compensate
the temperature ( there is an alteration of ntp which also calculates the
temp compensation of the crystal and uses that to calculate the required
drift rate.-- unfortunately I do not remember its name of location on the
20 matches
Mail list logo
