Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> For that matter, you could set up your own stratum one server! All it
> takes is a GPS Timing Receiver and a PC running Solaris or Linux and
> NTPD. Net investment is $100-$300 for the timing receiver, cable,
> connectors and a PC that might otherwise be acting as a
Rich wrote:
[]
> Recently, in order to spread out my time base somewhat, I tried adding
> some outside servers (using the *.pool.ntp.org DNS names) to my NTP
> configurations. Since doing this, I've noticed that the nearby
> (Stanford) servers are uniformly "off" by several milliseconds, in
> comp
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> The "Delay" values for some of the servers you have configured
> are large enough to suggest that they are poor choices!
Agreed. Please note, though, that I didn't explicitly choose
these particular servers -- they came from pools.
This does suggest that even servers
on 6/15/09 8:52 PM, Danny Mayer quoted Scott Haneda:
I am only looking for the basics of keeping my system clock in sync on
OS X 10.5. On OS X 10.5 the clock will drift badly on a machine that is
not logged in. If you log in, it is less of a problem, but the date and
time par
On 2009-06-15, Rich wrote:
> Since (as I understand) end-user clients should avoid dealing directly
> with stratum-1 servers, I assume this probably isn't as it should be.
> Is it, in fact, proper for a stratum-1 server to be registered as part
> of a pool?
Yes, if that's what the operator wants
Scott Haneda wrote:
> Hi Danny, thanks for your comments...
> Replies below...
>
> On Jun 14, 2009, at 9:00 PM, Danny Mayer wrote:
>
>> Scott Haneda wrote:
>>> I am only looking for the basics of keeping my system clock in sync on
>>> OS X 10.5. On OS X 10.5 the clock will drift badly on a machi
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Richard B.
Gilbert wrote:
> The best choices, other things being equal, are the servers with the
> lowest round trip delays.
As usual, though, all other things are not equal. Notice a number of
the nearby servers have higher apparent jitter in the peers billboard
tglassey wrote:
> Danny Mayer wrote:
>> Scott Haneda wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 15, 2009, at 8:59 AM, Todd Glassey CISM CIFI wrote:
>>>
>>>
> You should be running ntpd as a daemon. That will keep the clock in
> synch and you never have to touch it.
>
Which creates an audi
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Richard B.
Gilbert wrote:
> I wouldn't worry excessively about it! If there is a stratum one server
> in the pool, it's there because the owner wanted it there.
>
> What you should NOT do, is configure several of your machines to use it!
> If you have ONE server q
Rich wrote:
> Should I consider doing something in my ntp.conf so
> as to avoid bothering a server from a pool if it
> happens to be in stratum 1?
tos floor 2 ?
Not likely necessary,
if the server owner is the one who included their stratum
1 server in the pool, they would expect those using
Rich wrote:
> I'm running ntpd 4.2.4p4 on several Ubuntu 9.04 ("Jaunty") servers.
> I'm associated with Stanford University and have been depending
> primarily on Stanford's own pool of stratum-2 servers.
>
> Recently, in order to spread out my time base somewhat, I tried adding
> some outside ser
Rich wrote:
> I'm using ntpd 4.2.4p4 on several Ubuntu 9.04 ("Jaunty") servers.
>
> Recently, I've been reconfiguring some of my servers to use the "pool"
> DNS names (e.g., "server 0.us.pool.ntp.org"). I've noticed that I
> sometimes end up associating with a stratum-1 server from a pool. As
>
I'm running ntpd 4.2.4p4 on several Ubuntu 9.04 ("Jaunty") servers.
I'm associated with Stanford University and have been depending
primarily on Stanford's own pool of stratum-2 servers.
Recently, in order to spread out my time base somewhat, I tried adding
some outside servers (using the *.pool.n
I'm using ntpd 4.2.4p4 on several Ubuntu 9.04 ("Jaunty") servers.
Recently, I've been reconfiguring some of my servers to use the "pool"
DNS names (e.g., "server 0.us.pool.ntp.org"). I've noticed that I
sometimes end up associating with a stratum-1 server from a pool. As
an experiment, I specifi
Scott Haneda wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2009, at 8:59 AM, Todd Glassey CISM CIFI wrote:
>
>>> You should be running ntpd as a daemon. That will keep the clock in
>>> synch and you never have to touch it.
>>
>> Which creates an audit issue and security profile which always needs
>> to be watched. NTPD is
Hi Danny, thanks for your comments...
Replies below...
On Jun 14, 2009, at 9:00 PM, Danny Mayer wrote:
> Scott Haneda wrote:
>> I am only looking for the basics of keeping my system clock in sync
>> on
>> OS X 10.5. On OS X 10.5 the clock will drift badly on a machine
>> that is
>> not logge
On Jun 15, 2009, at 8:59 AM, Todd Glassey CISM CIFI wrote:
>> You should be running ntpd as a daemon. That will keep the clock in
>> synch and you never have to touch it.
>
> Which creates an audit issue and security profile which always needs
> to be watched. NTPD is not the answer for everyone
Grzegorz,
You didn't say whether that message came from the client or the server.
I assume you are running in client/server mode and that NTP works when
not authenticated or even as a sanity check whether it works with
symmetric key cryptography. We have been running it here in several
machine
Hi again,
I have one more question. In which situations I can get the
protocol_error in cryptostats file ? I read in the documentation that
this means 'The protocol state machine has wedged due to unexpected
restart.' However, what does it mean ? In which situations could this
happen ?
I'm tryi
19 matches
Mail list logo
