Re: [ntp:questions] ntpd on busybox ARM system not keeping time with server

2021-05-19 Thread Harlan Stenn
On 5/18/2021 5:57 PM, Jakob Bohm wrote: > On 2021-05-18 13:56, David Woolley wrote: >> On 18/05/2021 12:26, Andreas Schick wrote: >>> server 127.127.1.0  # local clock (LCL) >>> fudge  127.127.1.0 stratum 10   # LCL is unsynchronized >> >> Delete these lines.  As described, this system

Re: [ntp:questions] ntpd on busybox ARM system not keeping time with server

2021-05-19 Thread Terje Mathisen
Jakob Bohm wrote: On 2021-05-18 13:56, David Woolley wrote: On 18/05/2021 12:26, Andreas Schick wrote: server 127.127.1.0  # local clock (LCL) fudge  127.127.1.0 stratum 10   # LCL is unsynchronized Delete these lines.  As described, this system is not suitable as a time server,

Re: [ntp:questions] ntpd on busybox ARM system not keeping time with server

2021-05-19 Thread Miroslav Lichvar
On 2021-05-18, Andreas Schick wrote: > One further idea I had was just modifying some startup scripts (which > run before ntpd process is started and after the network is up) to > include some from of a ntpd-run-sync-and-quit or ntpdate call that > steps the clock at system startup on the ARM devi

Re: [ntp:questions] ntpd on busybox ARM system not keeping time with server

2021-05-19 Thread Jakob Bohm
On 2021-05-19 09:55, Terje Mathisen wrote: Jakob Bohm wrote: On 2021-05-18 13:56, David Woolley wrote: On 18/05/2021 12:26, Andreas Schick wrote: server 127.127.1.0  # local clock (LCL) fudge  127.127.1.0 stratum 10   # LCL is unsynchronized Delete these lines.  As described, thi

Re: [ntp:questions] ntpd on busybox ARM system not keeping time with server

2021-05-19 Thread David Woolley
On 19/05/2021 01:57, Jakob Bohm wrote: Perhaps the "tos orphan" option is a better way to make ntpd continue after loss of all time sources. This is a pure client configuration. There is no need for ntpd to continue to serve time after the loss of all sources. The kernel software clock will

Re: [ntp:questions] ntpd on busybox ARM system not keeping time with server

2021-05-19 Thread Terje Mathisen
Jakob Bohm wrote: On 2021-05-19 09:55, Terje Mathisen wrote: Jakob Bohm wrote: On 2021-05-18 13:56, David Woolley wrote: On 18/05/2021 12:26, Andreas Schick wrote: server 127.127.1.0  # local clock (LCL) fudge  127.127.1.0 stratum 10   # LCL is unsynchronized Delete these lines.

[ntp:questions] Are mode 6 responses rate controlled?

2021-05-19 Thread Brian Utterback
We are getting customer inquiries about Mode 6 packets and DDOS packet amplification issues. It seems that security audit vendors have started checking to see if NTP is allowing mode 6 packets. I am getting some pressure to disable them by default. I notice that some vendors have indeed done th

Re: [ntp:questions] Are mode 6 responses rate controlled?

2021-05-19 Thread Harlan Stenn
I see ways to improve this, and I'll make improvements in p16. There will be significant new functionality in this area in the upcoming 4.4 release. In the meantime, one can use 'restrict noquery' (a feature that has been available for a very long time) to block mode6 (and mode7, already disabled

[ntp:questions] Feature request: logfile timestamp format

2021-05-19 Thread Opty
Hello, as it seems that I won't live to see my Bugzilla account, I'm trying this way: Please add e.g. logfiletimestamp option to ntp.conf (and possibly command line option -lt string/--logfiletimestamp=string?) to specify the timestamp format when using alternate log file so one can use e.g. ISO