On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 5:45 PM Edward McGuire wrote:
>
> I was trying to understand how "discard monitor N" works in ntpd 4.2.8p15. I
> don't have a high-volume server -- this was purely academic interest. In the
> process I think I ran across a bug in how it works. Please correct me where
> I
On Tue, Oct 25, 2022, 12:35 AM David Hart wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022, 6:39 PM Edward McGuire wrote:
>
>> Without checking the source, I presume this is because access control is
>> enforced only at association creation time.
>>
>
> That is correct.
>
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022, 6:39 PM Edward McGuire wrote:
> On Monday, October 24, 2022 at 4:15:06 PM UTC-5, Roger wrote:
> > I asked about this back in April this year. It's the way the servers
> have been set up; the servers I have observed always return a poll of 4
>
> Thank you! I went back to the
It seems likely the OP has moved on to other problems, but another solution
that should work occurs to me. To control the local IP address used for
communication with upstream servers, two NTPD instances could be used on
the same host.
One instance would be configured to operate on a non-standard
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022, 9:36 AM Blažej Krajňák
wrote:
> Well, my server has dummy interface and multiple /32 IP addresses.
> They are announced via OSPF to IGP.
>
> The idea is to anycast 2 IPs (HA solution) and when primary server
> goes down, secondary will response to primary's IP address also.
