On 2009-02-27, Nero Imhard wrote:
> Unruh schreef:
>
>> Well, there is that silly 11min setting of the kernel, which tried to reset
>> the rtc every 11 min if it decides that the kernel is synchronized.
>
> Silly indeed, but rather Linux-specific. No such kludge in FreeBSD afaik.
Why do you consi
Dave,
Dave Hart wrote:
> If you're using ntpd on Windows synchonizing to a stable local source
> (whether refclock or simply ntpd on a heretofore more-stable platform
> for timekeeping) I would appreciate your help testing my 20090226 test
> version. The approach to interpolating time using a hig
On Feb 26, 11:27 pm, "David J Taylor" wrote:
> Well, by observation, /all/ the servers are polled at 64s intervals, and
> not just the lan-gps-pps server.
Since your clients are naturally preferring the stratum 1 on the same
LAN, that server's poll interval is clamping your overall poll
interval
On Feb 27, 3:28 pm, Martin Burnicki
wrote:
> I've just installed your binary on one W2k and one Vista32 machine. I'll let
> it run over the weekend and report.
Great, thanks Martin.
> I've also got an old machine with 10 ms clock interval. However, I have
> installed NT4 on that one, and your bi
Dave Hart wrote:
> On Feb 26, 11:27 pm, "David J Taylor"
> wrote:
>> Well, by observation, /all/ the servers are polled at 64s intervals,
>> and not just the lan-gps-pps server.
>
> Since your clients are naturally preferring the stratum 1 on the same
> LAN, that server's poll interval is clamping
uot; regarding that marginally
stable LAN source.
Looking at a machine on a different network with a refclock, I noticed
a +/- 100 usec sawtooth with a 4 hour period:
http://davehart.net/ntp/refclock/20090227-refclock-dirty-sawtooth.jpg
Cheers,
Dave Hart
__
On Feb 27, 4:55 pm, "David J Taylor" wrote:
> > if you set minpoll 4 on a reference clock (and
> > no maxpoll) the similarly unselected internet servers are allowed to
> > progress to higher poll intervals. It may not be possible to achieve
> > the same without a reference clock.
>
> Thats doesn'
Steve Kostecke writes:
>On 2009-02-27, Nero Imhard wrote:
>> Unruh schreef:
>>
>>> Well, there is that silly 11min setting of the kernel, which tried to reset
>>> the rtc every 11 min if it decides that the kernel is synchronized.
>>
>> Silly indeed, but rather Linux-specific. No such kludge in
In article ,
Unruh wrote:
>alain.barthol...@eads.com (Bartholome, Alain) writes:
>
>>Hi,
>
>>The primary reason why I need NTP is the synchronization of the systems,
>>not the accuracy of time.
>
>>I need to simplify the maintenance of the systems as much as possible.
>
>>I would like to know if
On 2009-02-27, Unruh wrote:
> Steve Kostecke writes:
>
>>On 2009-02-27, Nero Imhard wrote:
>>
>>> Silly indeed, but rather Linux-specific. No such kludge in FreeBSD
>>> afaik.
>
>>Why do you consider a periodic update of the RTC to be a kludge?
>
> Because it does not allow one to determine the
On 2009-02-26, Bartholome, Alain wrote:
> The primary reason why I need NTP is the synchronization of the systems,
> not the accuracy of time.
NTP is designed to synchronize computer clocks to a common time base.
The most commonly used timebase is UTC acquired over a network or via a
radio ref
Dave Hart wrote:
[]
>> Thats doesn't seem to happen with my FreeBSD system, if I am
>> understanding you correctly. Admittedly I have ntpd 4.2.0-a, but all
>> servers have a 64s polls even though there is no minpoll or maxpoll
>> specified.
>
> I'm not sure how long ago the change happened, but it
Steve Kostecke wrote:
> On 2009-02-26, Bartholome, Alain wrote:
>
>> The primary reason why I need NTP is the synchronization of the systems,
>> not the accuracy of time.
>
> NTP is designed to synchronize computer clocks to a common time base.
>
> The most commonly used timebase is UTC acquir
Unruh wrote:
>
> Because it does not allow one to determine the frequency offset of the rtc,
> info which can be used to improve the starup accuracy of the system from
> the rtc. This is supported by both chrony and by the new (non-utils)
> hwclock. The 11 min mode completely destroys that. It wou
On 2009-02-27, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Steve Kostecke wrote:
>
>> On 2009-02-26, Bartholome, Alain wrote:
>>
>>> The primary reason why I need NTP is the synchronization of the
>>> systems, not the accuracy of time.
>>
>> NTP is designed to synchronize computer clocks to a common time base.
>>
>
Steve Kostecke writes:
>On 2009-02-27, Unruh wrote:
>> Steve Kostecke writes:
>>
>>>On 2009-02-27, Nero Imhard wrote:
>>>
Silly indeed, but rather Linux-specific. No such kludge in FreeBSD
afaik.
>>
>>>Why do you consider a periodic update of the RTC to be a kludge?
>>
>> Because it
On Feb 27, 5:38 pm, Dave Hart wrote:
> When Dr. Mills first announced the change allowing the other peers'
> intervals to go up with a refclock configuration, I believe he
> observed a benefit from the mixed poll intervals, but he was thinking
> at least two levels above my pay grade and the reaso
17 matches
Mail list logo
