On Mar 10, 2010, at 7:25 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
> Yes, I know it's one of those low long is a piece of string questions, but
> I'm now considering a dual-core Intel Atom system, which is "Compatible with
> Linux" according the the very minimal blurb I have right now. If the system
> is to be
On Mar 10, 2010, at 1:05 PM, John Hasler wrote:
>> I gather that crony is intended for machines with infrequent network
>> connections.
>
> That was one of the goals when it was first developed ten years ago. It
> has gone far beyond that now.
OK.
>> I can't imagine trying to run it for a perma
On Mar 10, 2010, at 4:59 PM, unruh wrote:
>> I've seen monitoring data from the NTP pool project for people using other
>> NTP implementations, and they don't seem to be nearly as reliable
>> timesources as the original ntpd implementation. It's not just my opinion:
>
> Uh, just because alterna
On Mar 19, 2010, at 1:19 PM, Joe Wulf wrote:
> Group,
>
> With due humbleness and respect to both 'cnoyes2' (the original author) and
> Steve Kosteke---I would think he (cnoyes2) isn't concerned with whether the
> clocks are monotonic (whatever that is).
It means whether the clock values always
Hi--
On Mar 19, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Ramesh wrote:
> I am trying to synchronize the time of my VM server with ntpd.
You didn't mention which time of VM you are using, but normally it is better to
run ntpd only in the "host ESX" for VMware, Dom0 for Xen, etc. See:
http://xen.epiuse.com/xen-faq.
On Apr 12, 2010, at 9:25 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
>> I want to know about non ECC memory based PC's running NTP and how many
>> NTP errors are caused by single and multi-bit memory errors.
>>
>
> I am not aware of any. I rather imagine that memory errors in such a system
> would likely cause t
On Apr 12, 2010, at 11:51 AM, G8KBV wrote:
> In article , david-
> tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid says...
>>
>> It surprises me that, with FreeBSD being suggested as a good system
>> for servers, there isn't more ready-made SNMP about.
>>
>
> That's 'cos it's a bit of a nightmare to setup and c
On Apr 13, 2010, at 1:40 PM, G8KBV wrote:
> When I 'make buildkernel KENRCONF=PPSGENERIC'
>
> Nowt happens, except a short error message to the effect that it doesnt
> know how to build the kernel.
>
> Err, what!
That should be KERNCONF, not KENRCONF. Of course, you should provide the exac
Hi--
On Apr 13, 2010, at 1:45 PM, Marc Fromm wrote:
> If I restart the ntpd service the time is updated to the correct time:
> /sbin/service ntpd restart
>
> If I run the command below the time is updated to the correct time:
> ntpdate -u time-nw.nist.gov
>
> If I don't do any of the above my ti
On Apr 13, 2010, at 3:59 PM, G8KBV wrote:
> Typo on my part. In the posting AFIK.
OK...although it's hard to say for sure. :-)
[ ... ]
> I can't copy/paste from the FreeBSD machine to this one, and I have no
> idea how to copy paste from the command line/terminal screen, to a
> floppy (or any
On Apr 13, 2010, at 4:13 PM, Marc Fromm wrote:
[ ... ]
> The server loses 1 second per minute.
> I've been checking it since I manually updated the time and after 2 hours it
> is 2 minutes and 1 second behind.
adjtime() used by ntpd and others typically won't correct more than about 2
seconds p
Hi--
On Apr 14, 2010, at 9:08 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
> I think you are correct in your final statement, but my understanding (albeit
> limited) is that kernel PPS provides better performance, and is used for a
> very limited set of operations (possibly just timestamping the PPS signal).
> A
On Apr 14, 2010, at 2:15 PM, unruh wrote:
> On 2010-04-14, Chuck Swiger wrote:
>>
>> The main point seems to be that a PPS signal should have much more reliable
>> latency and less jitter, so when you examine the current clock and any
>> adjustment, you can use the P
On Apr 14, 2010, at 9:51 PM, unruh wrote:
>> Kernel PPS_SYNC discipline is capable of providing around +/- 120 nanosecond
>> accuracy.
>>
>> While an ethernet packet containing NTP timestamps might well fire off an
>> interrupt from the NIC, not only is the network ISR a lot more complicated
>>
Hi--
On Apr 21, 2010, at 11:26 AM, geep wrote:
> I'm in the UK and synch my home PC with timeservers at the National
> Physical Laboratory.
> Until today - seems that their timeservers have gone down.
> Anybody else noticed this, or is it just me?
> These seem dead: ntp1.npl.co.uk ntp2.npl.co.uk
Hi, David--
On May 11, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Russell, David wrote:
> The device is a piece of networking equipment and so I doubt that the crystal
> is temperature controlled but since it is in a data center the temperature
> and power demand is steady.
It's pretty common for system loads to be dif
Hi--
On May 12, 2010, at 9:48 AM, Adrian Marsh wrote:
> However today, the main server needed a reboot, and since then I can't get
> any of the linux clients to agree to sync to the main server (no * against
> the peers listing).
[ ... ]
> The config is:
>
> server 127.127.1.0
> fudge 127.127
Hi--
On May 25, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Ray wrote:
> Is there a utility that can show me all the timestamps (including the
> destination timestamp), of an ntp transaction?
> I would like to monitor time asymmetries in network delays across a network.
You've already got one answer, but tcpdump -v also
Hi--
On May 25, 2010, at 2:20 PM, Ray wrote:
> Thanks again. tcpdump shows the content of the NTP packet.
Yes.
> The destination (or return) timestamp is not in there. It is stamped by the
> NTP daemon itself.
Right-- if you are running tcpdump on the machine running NTPd, then the
timestamp
Hi--
On Jun 24, 2010, at 6:45 AM, pc wrote:
> The RFC unequivocally states that "A primary server is synchronized to a
> reference clock directly traceable to UTC."
>
> IMO, that is not a necessary condition. If I have a hierarchy of NTP servers
> and clients with no external connection to the
Hi--
On Jul 15, 2010, at 8:59 AM, hymie! wrote:
> Through what I presume is a fluke of the DNS randomization, three of
> my four hosts were:
> 153.16.4.139.INIT. 16 u 390 51200.0000.000 4000.00
> 153.16.4.133.INIT. 16 u 378 51200.0000.000 4000.
Hi--
On Aug 17, 2010, at 7:58 AM, folkert wrote:
> Is it possible to run the NTP daemon only as a server and not as a
> local-clock maintainer?
> Reason: I have a virtual machine which gets its time via the vmware
> tooling from the hardware server it is running on. Now this virtual
> machine need
Hi, RFC-1035--
On Aug 17, 2010, at 4:32 AM, ntpquesti...@rfc1035.com wrote:
> I've stumbled on a weird problem with NTP 4.2.6 on MacOSX. I compiled
> and installed the code myself. The box is not running whatever NTP code
> is shipped with the OS. All is well (sort of). The server is chiming
> awa
Hi--
On Aug 18, 2010, at 2:01 PM, folkert wrote:
>> Virtual machines make terrible timesources-- 10's to 100's of
>> milliseconds of jitter are not unusual.
>
> I don't think that is in all situations the case. Depends on the
> scheduling by the hypervisor.
It depends on the hypervisor, the hard
On Sep 16, 2010, at 2:59 PM, Daniel Havey wrote:
> I want ntpdate, and don't really care about ntpd. I need an ntp server
> running on one node, and the other nodes connect to the first node with
> ntpdate like this:
>
> #!/bin/bash
> SERVER=ntpserver1
> RATE=5
> while [ 1 ];
> do
> ntpdate -b
On Sep 17, 2010, at 10:58 AM, Daniel Havey wrote:
> Hmmm, I'm not sure that I believe you guys ;^)
So you've said before, and I've certainly gotten the impression that you would
prefer to make your own mistakes rather than heed advice about best practices.
> This is a wireless emulator on a wi
On Sep 17, 2010, at 2:21 PM, Daniel Havey wrote:
> So, you think that a PC clock will drift 20-50ms in 5 seconds?
Goodness, no, a typical PC quartz crystal has a frequency stability typically
measured in tens of PPM (ie, ~ 10E-5 to 10E-6); even a bad one ought to not
drift by as much as a millis
On Sep 22, 2010, at 1:18 PM, Daniel Havey wrote:
> The bloody thing made it worse! Look at the graph. It was doing just fine
> at 0.002147 second offset, then I started ntpd and look what it does. This
> is definitely not very good for a testbed.
What graph? You'll need to mail out a link, s
On Sep 24, 2010, at 11:23 AM, R C wrote:
> I want to test the performance of the ntpd server. Are there any free/open
> source ntp clients that measure the server scalability? Thanks in advance for
> your help.
The ntpd sources come with ntpdate; use "ntpdate -q" in a shell script loop to
issue
Hi--
On Sep 28, 2010, at 10:07 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
>> Even if you have a test program that blasts lots of packets, that
>> won't mimmic real traffic. It's bypassing all the setup of ARP and
>> router slots.
>
> I'm not quite sure if I'm parsing that accurately - yes, such a
> single-connection
Hi, all--
On Oct 22, 2010, at 9:37 AM, pateretou Pateretou wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm so embarrassing with this stupid question but I'm not very comfortable
> with the "peer select algorithm"
>
> Let me try to explain:
> I've got one GPS stratum 1 server located in New York (172.17.200.100) and
> on
On Oct 29, 2010, at 9:07 AM, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
On 10/29/2010 2:46 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
>>> I had much better luck with the ntp documentation that comes with
>>> FreeBSD:
>>>
>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ntp.conf&sektion=5
>> []
>>> --
>>> Florin Andrei
>>> http://flori
On Oct 29, 2010, at 11:30 PM, David J Taylor wrote:
> - why add maxpoll 9 to all the servers? That seems wrong. I see the note:
> "The option `maxpoll 9' is used to prevent PLL/FLL flipping on FreeBSD.". So
> is that a FreeBSD specific issue, and if so, why not fix it in the OS?
Because it's
On Nov 4, 2010, at 10:45 AM, Ryan Malayter wrote:
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:34 AM, David J Taylor
wrote:
As to Linux, I would guess most users of ntpd are using Linux.
Any figures to back that up? Within my community of several
hundred users,
almost all are Windows, but behind firewalls and
On Nov 10, 2010, at 2:31 PM, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> The IP concept is based on addresses being constant.
>
> Really???
Yes, if you enter an IP address of a timeserver into the config, you are
indicating that such timeserver is not going to move until you change the
config again. If you e
Hi, Harry--
On Nov 12, 2010, at 8:18 AM, Harry wrote:
> What I haven't been able to figure out is...
> 1. How/Where to locate a public/remote NTP server that supports MD5
> authentication?
http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Servers/WebSearch?search=MD5&scope=all&web=Servers
...suggests:
http:/
On Nov 15, 2010, at 12:29 PM, SteveW wrote:
> With the default step threshold of 128 ms, if a machine's time is
> within 128 ms of the ntp server's time, when it syncs with the server,
> will it exit from ntpd -g -q without stepping the clock?
That should be the case. If the offset is less than 1
On Dec 6, 2010, at 1:47 PM, Atul Gupta wrote:
> I am trying to cross compile ntp package : ntp-4.2.4.tar.gz for mips
> platform. I need only ntpd binary to port on my platform, is there any way
> that i can do selective compilation of ntpd and not compile things like
> ntpdate,ntpdc,ntpq , as i don
On Dec 18, 2010, at 4:00 PM, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Please note that SMALL and GRAY type is extremely difficult for some of us to
> read. I'm not sure how you managed it but PLEASE DON'T!!
Your MUA presumably is configured to change the text of a mail signature
(indicated by a sigdash aka
Hi--
On Jan 4, 2011, at 3:30 PM, Edward T. Mischanko wrote:
> On my FreeBSD system have built and installed ntp-dev-4.2.7p108. But, when I
> type:
>
> ntpd --version
>
> It returns:
>
> ntpd - NTP daemon program - ver 4.2.4p5
>
> What is the prper way to determine the current version of ntpd
On Jan 12, 2011, at 9:31 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
> Is there one big CDMA timespace that encompases the planet, or are
> there really several discrete CDMA timespaces that are more "loosely" coupled?
CDMA cell towers contain GPS receivers, so they are effectively sync'ed to each
other.
Regards,
--
On Jan 12, 2011, at 11:25 AM, unruh wrote:
>> CDMA cell towers contain GPS receivers, so they are effectively sync'ed to
>> each other.
>
> Has anyone done tests on the cdma time signals to see how well they are
> actually correlated with GPS time? Are they reallywithin a few usec or a
> few msec
On Jan 12, 2011, at 11:37 PM, unruh wrote:
>>> In presumption lies error. The CDMA spec requires their cell towers to be
>>> sync'ed to better than 10 microseconds, which is why the Praesis units
>>> mentioned originally in the thread specify that level of precision:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia
On Jan 13, 2011, at 3:08 PM, David Woolley wrote:
> Chuck Swiger wrote:
>> Understanding that they are using quadrature modulation with a given
>> rate (approx 1.2e6) gives a close approximation of the necessary timing
>> precision:
>
> Not obviously.
Okay. I
On Jan 14, 2011, at 3:34 PM, Mike S wrote:
> In any case, pedanticism aside, the whole point was to avoid using the HPET
> (which - trying to satisfy the pedants again - is not a thing, but a
> function), because it gets set up inconsistently.
That's a valid criticism of HPET, although some of t
[ ...resource usage of ntpd... ]
A machine running ntpd as a client or lightly loaded server is unlikely to
consume more than a minute of CPU per day. The slowest machine I still have
handy is a P3 @ 933MHz and ntpd uses about 15 CPU seconds per day with a dozen
or so peers. When it was activ
On Feb 8, 2011, at 7:05 AM, Dave Täht wrote:
> I've been racking my brain trying to come up with a good way of
> semi-passively detecting bufferbloat at the datacenter.
OK. I'd choose to actively monitor something, assuming it mattered, or choose
a platform which did a good job of adjusting buf
On Feb 8, 2011, at 12:05 PM, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>> What would wild swings in latency on the order of seconds from a ntp client
>>> register on a ntp server as?
>>
>> High latency ("delay" column in "ntpq -p" output), high jitter.
>>
>> Regards,
>
> Why would the server even notice what
On Mar 8, 2011, at 9:13 AM, Ralph wrote:
> Well along those lines, what about creating a driver or deamon (for
> lack of something better to call it) that provides time to ntpd that
> gets that time from the host machine?
I still haven't been able to figure out which virtualization system you are
On Mar 8, 2011, at 11:28 AM, Chris Albertson wrote:
>> And exactly what is that difference? While ntp is perhaps too slow to
>> respond to local frequency changes, how do you see the difference
>> between keeping a computer's idea of local time accurate from keeping a
>> telecom's idea of local tim
On Mar 8, 2011, at 1:18 PM, Steve Kostecke wrote:
On 2011-03-08, Chuck Swiger wrote:
>> Seriously, each physical machine only has one RTC and crystal
>> oscillator. It's useful to run one instance of ntpd in the Dom0 (or
>> host ESX) context where it can actually
On Mar 8, 2011, at 5:56 PM, Steve Kostecke wrote:
> On 2011-03-08, Chuck Swiger wrote:
[ ... ]
>>> NTP disciplines the system (i.e. kernel) clock, not the hardware
>>> clock on the mother board.
>>
>> That's right, although in reasonably common for platfor
On Mar 9, 2011, at 3:36 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 03:26:34PM -0800, Chuck Swiger wrote:
>>>> You are better off running ntpdate (or sntp) periodically via cron in
>>>> the DomUs.
>>>
>>> Perhaps in certain cases, but not ac
On Mar 14, 2011, at 4:45 AM, Terje Mathisen wrote:
> It is in fact so wrong that a recent VMware report quoted here stated that
> with current VMware products you would get _better_ time sync on a client OS
> by running ntpd on the client, than by running ntpd on the host and using
> VMware's op
On Apr 18, 2011, at 2:54 PM, C BlacK wrote:
> Thanks for all the great answers. Now for a harder question, how does the
> accuracy of the local clock source affect the accuracy of ntpd.
Normally, except for stratum-1 NTP servers which are specifically configured to
use a high-quality local time
On Apr 18, 2011, at 5:09 PM, Mike S wrote:
> At 07:25 PM 4/18/2011, Chuck Swiger wrote...
>> On Apr 18, 2011, at 2:54 PM, C BlacK wrote:
>>> Thanks for all the great answers. Now for a harder question, how does the
>>> accuracy of the local clock source
On Apr 18, 2011, at 5:42 PM, Mike S wrote:
> At 08:30 PM 4/18/2011, Chuck Swiger wrote...
>> Why would the local clock source "moving around" have any impact on a
>> higher-stratum NTP time source running on some other machine?
>
> It doesn't, and that's
On Apr 22, 2011, at 8:22 AM, unruh wrote:
>> The pool DNS lookup now returns 3 servers, used to be 5.
>> When everyone uses 10 servers the load on the pool as a whole is
>> twice what it would need to be, and 3 times what would be the minimum
>> reasonable value.
>
> I agree. It is absurd. It seem
Hi, Jim--
On May 10, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Jim Kusznir wrote:
> I'm setting up an NTP server with a GPS-PPS hardware clock, and I am
> wondering what settings are "recommended".
>
> My time server is currently accessible at:
>
> time.eecs.wsu.edu
>
> Its a P4-2.4Ghz using the shm driver pulling a
On May 11, 2011, at 8:29 AM, Nickolay Orekhov wrote:
> And what if it has no "other source" ?
If your priority is to keep all your machines sync'ed with each other, you're
still fine. On the other hand, if your priority is to keep machines synch'ed
to real time, well, you ought to provide great
On May 19, 2011, at 10:01 AM, M. Giertzsch wrote:
> To run into the problem that the client is not syncing to the server I
> --> stopped the NTP service on both client and server
> --> changed the time on the client back to january of 1975
> --> started the NTP service on the client
> --> started t
On May 19, 2011, at 2:53 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
>> By default, ntpd will not try to correct a clock which is insanely far off.
>> The -g flag can be used to change this; otherwise run ntpdate -b at boot
>> to get the clock close and then run ntpd afterwards to keep the clock in
>> sync.
>
> Runnin
On May 23, 2011, at 2:52 PM, Florin Andrei wrote:
> May 23 09:19:04 hostname ntpd[7602]: synchronized to X.Y.Z.K, stratum 3
> May 23 12:10:08 hostname ntpd[7602]: synchronized to X.Y.Z.W, stratum 3
>
> What is the normal frequency for these messages to show in the logs? In the
> quote above, are
On May 26, 2011, at 9:28 AM, Florin Andrei wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 03:57 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
>>
>> That being said, it's not expected that the preferred time source would
>> change that frequently. You'd probably do better to run with at least 4
>> serve
On May 26, 2011, at 10:48 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
>> Evidently yes for your case. With only two servers, it may not be
>> possible to find a best intersection via ntpd's variant of
>> Marzullo's algorithm:
>
> I think the frequent source switching can happen with any number of
> sources if th
On May 26, 2011, at 12:56 PM, Florin Andrei wrote:
> I wish there was a way to "bind" several clients together. You know, tell
> them to make "group decisions" when following / unfollowing any servers -
> "y'all either follow the same server(s), or peer with each other when all
> servers are off
On Jun 14, 2011, at 12:52 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
[ ... ]
> The problem with both of those is that the Linux machines are all
> going to want the PPS to be conected to the DTR pin of a serial port
> and for that you need rs-232 levels with wides plus and minus volts.
> TTL level or wose is not g
On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:42 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
> Danny Mayer wrote:
>> You need to know that it's a numeric address before you call
>> getaddrinfo().
>
> Really? Is that for IPv6 specifically, or IP generally?
>
> Netperf has been passing IPs to getaddrinfo() without setting any special
> fla
On Jun 20, 2011, at 6:59 AM, Steve Tryon wrote:
> Synchronization to a tenth of a second is fine for my purposes. All servers
> will be running RH 5.5.
You won't need to do anything special to get better than 10ms sync accuracy,
much less 100ms.
> My concern is centered around a bad local cloc
On Jun 20, 2011, at 2:22 PM, Steve Tryon wrote:
> The reason I ask about large corrections is a scenario that I saw with a
> configuration that we originally tried. In essence, each server in the
> cluster was configured the same:
> - clients of 0.us.pool.ntp.org and 1.us.pool.ntp.org
> - peers
On Jun 21, 2011, at 12:33 AM, Condor wrote:
> Here is error that i got from kernel:
>
> net_ratelimit: 686 callbacks suppressed
> nf_conntrack: table full, dropping packet.
> nf_conntrack: table full, dropping packet.
> nf_conntrack: table full, dropping packet.
You're using a stateful firewall f
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:17 PM, m m wrote:
> Is there a clean way to run ntpd as a server in a guest VM in a vmware 2.x
> environment?
The simple answer is no. If other machines are using that ntpd as a time
source, then it should be running on a native OS and not in a VM.
Regards,
--
-Chuck
_
On Jul 8, 2011, at 7:38 AM, Florian Heigl wrote:
> # local fallback clock
> server 127.127.1.0
> fudge 127.127.1.0 stratum 10
Don't do this, unless you absolutely need ntpd to freewheel in the absence of a
reference time from the GPS receiver or other NTP servers for an extended
period of time.
On Jul 8, 2011, at 10:27 AM, Florian Heigl wrote:
>> Don't do this, unless you absolutely need ntpd to freewheel in the absence
>> of a reference time from the GPS receiver or other NTP servers for an
>> extended period of time.
>
> That's the case - if we lose all 4 reference clocks the NTP ser
On Jul 11, 2011, at 11:39 AM, wasimm wrote:
> Is there any way I could get netbsd binaries for any of
> these later ntp releases? I did some web search but no luck.
NetBSD ought to come with a newer version-- even 5 years ago, NetBSD was
shipping ntp-4.2.2; and it looks they updated to ntp-4.2.4
On Jul 12, 2011, at 1:43 PM, Lars Ericsson wrote:
> I have been running the ntp client on a Linux platform for some time and
> have not seen any problems.
Is this a VM?
> I recently run into a strange behavior where our communication software
> failed on some critical timeouts. After some invest
On Jul 13, 2011, at 6:53 AM, Edward T. Mischanko wrote:
> I am using GPS with PPS as my primary time source. I don't want
> to set my back-up network servers to minpoll 10 in the
> configuration because if the GPS ever fails the servers would be
> fixed at minpoll 10.
If your machine has been
On Jul 13, 2011, at 12:16 PM, Lars Ericsson wrote:
> Thanks for a prompt and precise answer.
You're most welcome
>>> I have been running the ntp client on a Linux platform for some time and
>>> have not seen any problems.
>>
>> Is this a VM?
>
> No, it's real HW, believe it or not ;)
OK.
On Jul 13, 2011, at 2:44 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
>> OK. I asked since a timewarp of 200ms is a bit surprising for real HW,
>> but is something to be expected if you were running in a VM.
>
> It's easy to get a time-warp of 200 ms on a DSL link. Just download
> a huge file, say a CD. The queuing d
Hi--
On Aug 26, 2011, at 8:34 PM, NPG wrote:
> What we have.
> An internal host running NTPd and syncing with 2 stratum 2 servers on
> the internet. All internal hosts syncing with the internal NTP server.
>
> What we plan to do.
> Add 1 more stratum 2 server and 2 stratum 1 servers to the inter
On Sep 15, 2011, at 1:32 PM, David Woolley wrote:
>> server 1.fi.pool.ntp.org minpoll 10 iburst
>
> The mistake most people make is setting minpoll too low. This is too high.
What's wrong with a minpoll of 10?
I recall OS vendors shipping an ntp.conf using "minpoll 12 maxpoll 17"...
Regards,
-
On Sep 15, 2011, at 4:30 PM, unruh wrote:
>> I recall OS vendors shipping an ntp.conf using "minpoll 12 maxpoll 17"...
>
> Well, if you do not care that you are never synchronized, I suppose it
> does not matter.
Are you claiming that such a config will never become synchronized?
If so, you're s
On Sep 15, 2011, at 5:09 PM, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Until you have read and understood Dave Mills' book on the subject, just
> consider the defaults to be mandatory!
Defaults should be a "best recommendation for the widest range of reasonable
circumstances"; they aren't mandatory, and they
On Sep 15, 2011, at 8:13 PM, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> Defaults should be a "best recommendation for the widest range of reasonable
>> circumstances"; they aren't mandatory, and they aren't something which
>> cannot be adjusted for beneficial results, at least if you have some idea as
>> what
On Sep 27, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> * Backported several fixes for Coverity warnings from ntp-dev
>
> WTF is "Coverity"? My dictionary does not list it!
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Coverity
It's a code analysis tool which looks for software bugs.
Regards,
--
-Chuck
On Oct 24, 2011, at 7:52 AM, A C wrote:
> The header from top when things work normally (ntpd no longer running at high
> priority in this capture):
>
>> load averages: 0.10, 0.09, 0.02; up 14+20:55:09 14:44:43
>> 22 processes: 21 sleeping, 1 on CPU
>> CPU states: 10.5% user,
On Oct 24, 2011, at 1:58 PM, A C wrote:
> It has 16 MB of RAM right now (one stick). It had 64 at one point while I
> was trying to diagnose this issue. I thought I might have a bad stick of RAM
> so I was testing them one by one (one stick in the machine at a time). I
> didn't reinsert the o
On Oct 24, 2011, at 2:26 PM, A C wrote:
>> If ntpd crashes, you should get a coredump which you can debug (assuming
>> you've setup the coredumpsize limit to permit this) and perhaps a syslog
>> message about a SIGSEGV, SIGBUS, or whatever.
>
> Not if it locks the system up entirely (as in I cou
Hi--
On Nov 8, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Fran wrote:
> My ‘high performance’ configuration is running ntpd bound to processor 0 on
> an SMP, and at highest priority. My poll rate is 16 sec. And I’m running ntpq
> locally so ntpq is communicating with ntpd over the loopback interface. Most
> of these c
On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:47 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
>> We have other real time processing occuring on the system and are sensitive
>> to offset errors, so we want ntpd to run at the highest real time priority.
>
> That will do little good and maybe some harm. ntpd reads time stamped
> input. Eve
On Dec 26, 2011, at 11:34 PM, ben slimup wrote:
> so in that case does it means that ntp protocol cannot be load balanced at
> all??
A load-balancer that provides session affinity based only upon source IP would
function to some extent, but keeping track of all that state is vastly more
work th
On Jan 8, 2012, at 11:45 PM, David J Taylor wrote:
> Chris, it also occurs to me to enquire exactly how the RS-232 data is being
> carried over the cat-5 cable. What is the wiring?
Searching for "RS232 over RJ45" suggests the standard pinout is known as
EIA/TIA 561.
Basically, it closely resemb
On Jan 9, 2012, at 11:25 PM, David J Taylor wrote:
>> Searching for "RS232 over RJ45" suggests the standard pinout is known as
>> EIA/TIA 561.
>> Basically, it closely resembles the EIA/TIA 574 (DB9) wiring, but DSR and RI
>> have been combined.
>
> I was expecting that, for timing purposes, the
On Jan 10, 2012, at 9:12 AM, Marco Marongiu wrote:
> I understand from "the NTP timescale and leap seconds" by Prof.Mills
> that modern ntpd doesn't step back the clock but either "freezes" time
> during the leap second, or it slightly increments it at each read until
> the "real time" catches up.
On Jan 10, 2012, at 11:47 AM, unruh wrote:
>> Ask your operating system vendor, or look at the source code:
>>
>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/src/sys/kern/kern_tc.c
>>
>>> - how can I simulate a leap second, and see how the system reacts?
>>
>> Change the system time to a f
Hi, Ron--
On Feb 7, 2012, at 10:38 AM, Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
> The subject may sound silly, but every time I click reply to one of the
> postings on this list, it puts the original message poster's address in the
> TO field rather than the public list address. If I want my reply to go to
>
On Feb 7, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
> Thanks to Dave and Chuck for the quick replies. Just FYI, most of the other
> lists I'm on use the public list address if you hit reply. Doesn't matter, I
> can work with it either way.
While it is a matter of some debate, changing the re
Hi--
On Feb 9, 2012, at 1:36 PM, bombjack wrote:
> What happens if I change the time on the server, lets say 5 years
> forward? Will the client sync to the server? and If so, how? big leap?
> small steps? Will the flag "-g" affect how the client reacts to this
> changes?
Exactly. If the server r
On Feb 9, 2012, at 4:05 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
>> Exactly. If the server reports a time that is further than the panic
>> threshold from the client's clock (which defaults to 1000 seconds) then it
>> will reject the server and exit. A human is then expected to manually
>> inspect the situa
On Feb 9, 2012, at 6:32 PM, Dave Hart wrote:
> Let me RTFM that for you,
If doing so makes you feel happier, by all means.
However, since there tends to be some divergence between what software actually
does and what the documentation claims it does, experience gained from
real-world testing wo
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
