Re: [ntp:questions] NTP on small 100% Linux LAN : reasonable access control policy ?

On 8/3/2010 3:25 AM, Rob wrote: > Danny Mayer wrote: >>> Server : grossebertha, 192.168.1.252 >>> >>> # /etc/ntp.conf >>> >>> driftfile /var/lib/ntp/drift >>> logfile /var/log/ntp.log >>> >>> server 0.fr.pool.ntp.org >>> server 1.fr.pool.ntp.org >>> server 2.fr.pool.ntp.org >>> server 3.fr.pool.nt

Re: [ntp:questions] Outrageous delay syncing WinXP to Linux with ntp4.2.6p2

Cindy Huyser wrote: > One of the things I'm concerned about here is > why 4.2.4p8 will allow IPv4 synchronization > and 4.2.6p1 and p2 will not The changes to autokey ? -- E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists. ___ questions

Re: [ntp:questions] Advice for a (LAN-interconnected) WLAN Testbed w/ ARM nodes

Guys, May I suggest you review the definitions of system offset (THETA), root distance (LAMBDA) and system jitter (PSI) in Section 11.2 of rfc5905. Dave David Woolley wrote: Miroslav Lichvar wrote: But there will be more clock updates. Noise in frequency may go up, but the offset will be

Re: [ntp:questions] Outrageous delay syncing WinXP to Linux with ntp4.2.6p2

Cindy Huyser wrote: Well, one of the things I'm concerned about here is why 4.2.4p8 will allow IPv4 synchronization and 4.2.6p1 and p2 will not, with relative time differences between server and client roughly the same, and the same configuration file being used. I don't know how it's related (

Re: [ntp:questions] Outrageous delay syncing WinXP to Linux with ntp4.2.6p2

On Aug 3, 5:23 pm, David Woolley wrote: > E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists wrote: > > > > >>      remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay > >> offset  jitter > >> == > >> *LOCAL(

Re: [ntp:questions] Advice for a (LAN-interconnected) WLAN Testbed w/ ARM nodes

Miroslav Lichvar wrote: But there will be more clock updates. Noise in frequency may go up, but the offset will be the same or better, unless there are network congestions that last longer than the clock filter can handle (8 * poll interval). The "offset" may be better, but offset is not the of

Re: [ntp:questions] Outrageous delay syncing WinXP to Linux with ntp4.2.6p2

E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists wrote: remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter == *LOCAL(0).LOCL. 10 l 56 6410.000 0.000 0.

Re: [ntp:questions] Advice for a (LAN-interconnected) WLAN Testbed w/ ARM nodes

On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 09:14:34PM +0100, David Woolley wrote: > Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > >The most important thing is to set minpoll and maxpoll for the server > >specified in ntp.conf. Generally, lower is better unless the network > >load to the NTP server is a concern. With ntp-4.2.4 the allowe

Re: [ntp:questions] Advice for a (LAN-interconnected) WLAN Testbed w/ ARM nodes

Miroslav, David, Thank you both very much for your input. I will try Miroslav's suggestions tomorrow or the day after, and report the results. About the GW2348-4 RTC: I cannot use it at all with ntpd, right? I couldn't find anything on the web, but then again ntp is pretty new to me. Probably I m

Re: [ntp:questions] Outrageous delay syncing WinXP to Linux with ntp4.2.6p2

Cindy Huyser wrote: > With the 4.2.4 binaries, my output from ntpq -p is: > > remote refid st t when poll reach delay > offset jitter > == > LOCAL(0).LOCL. 10 l 50 6470.0

[ntp:questions] Outrageous delay syncing WinXP to Linux with ntp4.2.6p2

I have a Windows XP box (running Win XP Pro SP 3) that connects to a couple of Linux machines, all of which are not connected to the Internet. I am using one of the Linux boxes as a time server, and the other Linux system has no trouble getting time from it via IPv4 or IPv6. Not so, with the Windo

Re: [ntp:questions] Advice for a (LAN-interconnected) WLAN Testbed w/ ARM nodes

Miroslav Lichvar wrote: The most important thing is to set minpoll and maxpoll for the server specified in ntp.conf. Generally, lower is better unless the network load to the NTP server is a concern. With ntp-4.2.4 the allowed minimum is 4, with 4.2.6 and it's 3. This is not the official poli

Re: [ntp:questions] General ntp architecture question

Danny Mayer wrote: > Ryan Malayter wrote: >> PCI requirements > Ryan can you please give quote the reference to this document? > You also didn't state in what jurisdiction this is valid. Compliance is mandated by the payment c

Re: [ntp:questions] General ntp architecture question

konsu wrote: > for the rest, I do not see any reason why synchronization to the > internet would be an issue. Synchronization to the Internet is probably fine, but you should select your own servers manually and not leave this decision to the pool. The pool is nice for home users who want zero-c

Re: [ntp:questions] Advice for a (LAN-interconnected) WLAN Testbed w/ ARM nodes

On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 10:10:15PM +0200, Florian Sesser wrote: > Do you have advice for me how to improve the accuracy on the nodes to > the order of 1 ms (or below)? I have googled quite a bit, but the amount > of information is overwhelming, and I cannot afford nor attach GPS or > other external

Re: [ntp:questions] General ntp architecture question

On Aug 2, 7:37 am, konsu wrote: > Thanks for your answers. Actually I do not know what are the criteria > to consider in deciding time requirements. This is a bank , we will > deploy VOIP soon and we have some dealers connected to reuters > network  {I am checking whether they have their own time

Re: [ntp:questions] NTP on small 100% Linux LAN : reasonable access control policy ?

On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 17:24:56 +0200 Niki Kovacs wrote: > I experimented for a few hours with a local "sandbox" network, and > here's the configuration I finally found out. That is similar, but not exactly the same to the template we have here if you'd like to compare:

[ntp:questions] Advice for a (LAN-interconnected) WLAN Testbed w/ ARM nodes

Dear experts! I am conducting a series of experiments in a testbed created for measuring the performance of WLAN mesh routing algorithms (and everything distantly related) [1]. Having (partially) implemented IPMP [2], synchronised clocks would be of great help: Every IPMP-enabled node appends a s

Re: [ntp:questions] NTP on small 100% Linux LAN : reasonable access control policy ?

Kiss Gabor wrote: > In article , > Rob writes: restrict default 127.0.0.1 mask 255.0.0.0 >> >> It should be: restrict 127.0.0.1 mask 255.0.0.0 > > Do you mean "restrict 127.0.0.0 mask 255.0.0.0"? :) > Several IP stack implementations refuse 1 bits on masked out positions. Well that m

Re: [ntp:questions] NTP on small 100% Linux LAN : reasonable access control policy ?

In article , Rob writes: >>> restrict default 127.0.0.1 mask 255.0.0.0 > > It should be: restrict 127.0.0.1 mask 255.0.0.0 Do you mean "restrict 127.0.0.0 mask 255.0.0.0"? :) Several IP stack implementations refuse 1 bits on masked out positions. Gabor _

Re: [ntp:questions] General ntp architecture question

Danny Mayer wrote: Ryan can you please give quote the reference to this document? You didn't include it. You also didn't state in what jurisdiction this is valid. I think this is an extra-governmental document. The valid jurisdiction will be any country that accepts Visa or Mastercard, and

Re: [ntp:questions] NTP on small 100% Linux LAN : reasonable access control policy ?

Rob a écrit : It should be: restrict 127.0.0.1 mask 255.0.0.0 Yeah, I also noticed that. Thanks for pointing it out. Niki ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions

Re: [ntp:questions] NTP on small 100% Linux LAN : reasonable access control policy ?

Danny Mayer wrote: >> Server : grossebertha, 192.168.1.252 >> >> # /etc/ntp.conf >> >> driftfile /var/lib/ntp/drift >> logfile /var/log/ntp.log >> >> server 0.fr.pool.ntp.org >> server 1.fr.pool.ntp.org >> server 2.fr.pool.ntp.org >> server 3.fr.pool.ntp.org >> >> restrict default nomodify nop