Unruh wrote:
[]
> I use cat 5e cable since it is cheap, available and is supposed to be
> good for better than about 100MMHz
> (10nsec) signals. I would not use usb cable or any old wire, because
> of
> the problems of spread of the pulse from the gps. Also I would
> terminate
> it properly as well
Unruh wrote:
[]
> The nmea is virtually useless for accurate timing. The main thing that
> the unit gives you is the PPS. You have to makes sure you do not
> degrade it.
The GPS 18x LVC only claims an accuracy of one microsecond for PPS in the
first place. The RS-232 receivers may well have some
Unruh wrote:
[]
> Now you could get far better response by using the temperature of the
> computer to also correct for rate responses.
I do agree that if temperature could be included NTP could work even
better.
David
___
questions mailing list
quest
Rick Jones wrote:
> David J Taylor
> wrote:
>> One suggestion might be wireless
>
> Isn't that just asking for jitter?
>
> rick jones
Have you tried it? How much extra jitter do you see? It would be
interesting to see some real data.
If the choice were between
David Lord wrote:
[]
> I only have a pair of servers as peer and that is maxpoll 8 and
> both sat at 256 sec. Offsets are 203us and 593us.
I see more like 1-3ms for the Internet servers (compared to the GPS), with
delays in the order of 30ms. This is with Windows, though, not a UNIX
system.
>
David Lord wrote:
[]
> I'll scope pps down utp but doubt the pps will keep its rising
> edge. I'm having a box with indicator led and 5V regulator at end
> of the stock Garmin cable and coax + utp from that box downstairs.
> One pair will have +9V/0V to the regulator. It's a long while
> since I ra
David Woolley wrote:
[]
> When used with proper balanced drivers and receivers, twisted pair is
> often better than coax.
>
> For any type of cable, group delay characteristics may be more
> important than characteristic impedance match.
Whilst I agree with both points, for carrying what are TTL-l
David Lord wrote:
> I'm intending buffering the pps to give 75r output to coax with
> another converter back to ttl at the server. The NMEA should manage
> the distance over twisted pair at 4800 baud.
[]
> I'd rather have the option for two way in case the Garmin needs to be
> set to a different mo
David Lord wrote:
[]
> Late last night I got round to connecting the Garmin GPS18x-LVC and
> just after midnight it stepped from around 60s to 0.5ms and 8 hours
> later is between -74us and +62us. The module is in south facing
> upstairs window in same location I failed to get anything useful
> fro
David J Taylor wrote:
[]
> I might be inclined to go for a screened
> cable if you need a 30m run, but thin 3-core mains cable /might/
> suffice.
I'm not sure whether the NMEA driver attempts to send anything /to/ the
GPS device. If not, three lines might to (ground, TX
I have ntpd 4.2.4p6 running on a Windows 7 RC machine.
>From the command prompt, when I enter: ping , ping works
correctly, but seems to be using an IPv6 address. I guess this must be an
auto-assigned address, as I have no IPv6 network as such. If I enter:
ntpq -c rv , I get the error messag
Dave Hart wrote:
[]
> NTP 4.2.5p181 binaries for Windows are at:
>
> http://davehart.net/ntp/win/x86/
> http://davehart.net/ntp/win/x86/ntp-4.2.5p181-win-x86-bin.zip
> http://davehart.net/ntp/win/x86/ntp-4.2.5p181-win-x86-debug-bin.zip
>
> Cheers,
> Dave Hart
The "release" version is installed and
newsreade...@web.de wrote:
[]
> Hi Dave, hi community,
>
> I have a setup where the serial data is - for technical reasons -
> routed over a LAN via 16 port MOXA port servers. While in general I
> found that ntp gets along well with the virtual ports, 4.2.5p180 seems
> to fail to connect once the c
ScottyG wrote:
[]
> What do you think you can achieve with let say 5,000-10,000 USD
> budget for each data center? Could we get 1 micro, 10 micro, 100
> micro, 1 milli?
>
> One catch is the not all the data centers have access to roof space
> for us. One company claims that they can use CDMA as a s
Maarten Wiltink wrote:
[]
> As it happens, I recently had cause to install a clean Windows
> somewhere and downloaded what turns out to be vegas-v2. As of five
> minutes ago,
> a new NTP is gathering loopstats.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Groetjes,
> Maarten Wiltink
That's good news, Maarten.
So, one questio
hven...@astound.net wrote:
> Just a quick follow up. Dave has supplied me with some updated code
> and this seems to be working OK on my machine now. It appears that
> most of the issue I was seeing was corrected when I turned serial port
> buffering off. At this point I am using the Atom (PPS)
Maarten Wiltink wrote:
[]
> A Windows 2000 without IPv6 says 'Ordinal not found : The ordinal 3852
> could not be located in the dynamic link library LIBEAY32.dll.'
>
> Copying the DLL into the directory didn't help, either.
>
> Groetjes,
> Maarten Wiltink
What libeay32.dll do you have? Mine is d
Maarten Wiltink wrote:
[]> It came with NTP-4.2.0 Windows binaries dated 2003-10-17. The DLL is
> dated 2003-06-04, 827 392 bytes, no version information.
>
> Groetjes,
> Maarten Wiltink
The newer file is here if you need it:
http://www.satsignal.eu/libeay32.zip
Cheers,
David
___
Maarten Wiltink wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
> wrote
> in message news:qzaul.35766$oo7.25...@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> Maarten Wiltink wrote:
>
>>> A Windows 2000 without IPv6 says 'Ordinal not found : The ordinal
>>> 3852 could not
Dave Hart wrote:
> You can find binaries at:
>
> http://davehart.net/ntp/win/x86/ntp-4.2.5p180-win-x86-bin.zip
> http://davehart.net/ntp/win/x86/ntp-4.2.5p180-win-x86-debug-bin.zip
>
> Testing on the earliest supported versions of Windows has been light.
> My binaries unfortunately are unable to lo
David J Taylor wrote:
> For your information:
>
> ___
> The MoD has informed Ofcom of the following GPS jamming exercise:
>
> Dates: 7-11 September and 14-18 September 2009.
>
> Times: limited periods between 09:00 an
For your information:
___
The MoD has informed Ofcom of the following GPS jamming exercise:
Dates: 7-11 September and 14-18 September 2009.
Times: limited periods between 09:00 and 17:00 hrs
Location: Within 5km of N52° 00.881' and W003° 3
David Lord wrote:
[]
> I eventually ordered from gpsw.co.uk, UKP 71.02 inclusive. I'd
> searched their site prior to trying the US ones and not been able to
> locate the GPS 18x-LVC and only went back after it being confirmed
> here they stocked the product.
I also ordered from GPS warehouse and
piste...@start.no wrote:
[]
> When calculating NOK to USD, I end up with $152,24. That's actually
> more than double the $63 price you have seen in US!! If I found a US
> place selling it for $63 I suppose it should get quite a lot cheaper
> even when adding shipping and tax.
>
> Geir
.. except th
Unruh wrote:
> piste...@start.no writes:
[]
>> Actually the Garmin 18x LVC is quite expensive here in Norway? Seems
>> like it's quite a lot cheaper abroad, but with tax and postage I
>> don't think it's any cheaper to order one unit from US or
>> somewhere...
>
> How much is "quite expensive" It s
Unruh wrote:
[]
> Probably better than 10 microseconds from the PPS if you had a decent
> operating system (eg BSD or Linux) On windows, maybe 1 msec
> accuracy.\.
More like better than 200 microseconds on a good Windows 2000 or XP
system, even in a non-temperature-controlled environment, when ru
piste...@start.no wrote:
> After first trying the Haicom HI-204III claiming to have PPS in the
> manual without really having it, I bought a Garmin 18x LVC and
> connected it to the onboard COM-port (COM1) on my Asus M3N78 PRO
> mainboard. The Haicom is residing on a USB serial adapter (COM6) to
>
Folks,
I've updated my NTP Loopstats plotting program for Windows in a number of
ways, including the overlay of offset and relative frequency error for
each 24-hour period. Please see:
http://www.satsignal.eu/software/net.htm#NTPplotter
It allows a clearer view of daily temperature or other
vhfme...@t-online.de wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have an embedded application running under Linux 2.6.22 #1 PREEMPT
> with 1000 ticks per second (PC architecture, AMD Geode Processor).
> Since precise timing is needed, the devices are synchronized to a time
> server via ntpd 4.2.2p4.
>
> After running 48
Unruh wrote:
[]
> If you mean you have a refclock attached, they have round trip time of
> 0. Thus there is never a minimum and all get used. Ntp's algorithm in
> short is: Save the last 8 polls. Check if the current poll has a
> larger
> roundtrip time than any of those 8. If it does, do not use i
Unruh wrote:
[]
>> As I have maxpoll set to 6, I would have expected entries no more
>> than 64s apart. What am I failing to understand here? The poll
>> values reported in ntpq -p are 64, 64 and 1024 - as expected.
>
> You are forgetting that ntp throws away 7/8 of the stuff it collects.
> (This
Folks,
I have the following entries in ntpd.conf:
server 192.168.0.2 iburst maxpoll 6
server 192.168.0.7 maxpoll 6
server 0.uk.pool.ntp.org minpoll 10
.. and the following as the most recent loopstats:
54974 37901.029 -0.000209922 13.840 0.000108471 0.007233 6
54974 38229.033 0.000346890 13.8
Dave Hart wrote:
> David J Taylor:
>> Does this new release include the improved interpolation developed
>> by Dave Hart, and the Windows Vista/7 optimisations?
>
> No, those are only in 4.2.5p162 and later. See
> http://bugs.ntp.org/216 Very soon a release candidate
Heiko Gerstung wrote:
> Hi Clock Addictives,
>
> following the security update of NTP we built a new version of our NTP
> Installer for Windows which now installs NTP 4.2.4p7 (ntpd and tools)
> as well as the full NTP Documentation. The installer now also
> includes the current version of the OpenS
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> I'm not sure that ANYTHING, other than a local atomic clock, is going
> to get you microsecond accuracy. 10 milliseconds is probably
> attainable for other than Windows clients. The Windows clock ticks
> every 17 milliseconds and may be accurate to within a few hun
Andy Yates wrote:
> Does anybody have any figures that shows the effect on accuracy of an
> NTP v3 client using a stratum 1 server rather than a stratum 2 or 3
> server? It's all in a GE LAN based scenario, commercial stratum 1
> servers connected to GPS and stratum 2 and 3 servers are typically
>
Dave Hart wrote:
> On May 14, 7:27 am, "David J Taylor" wrote:
>> It would indeed be interesting to see how well it performed, either
>> with FreeBSD or with Windows. I don't know if a USB/GPS driver is
>> available with the present version of NTP.
>
>
John Hasler wrote:
> David wries:
>> .. but if something only needs millisecond timing, designing for
>> nanosecond accuracy is gross over-engineering, and likely rather
>> costly.
>
> There's no real cost: just a few bytes in a data structure. Better
> to have it and never need it then to leave
David Woolley wrote:
[]
> The problem with USB latency is that it is unpredictable. The
> uncertainty in the direct serial port latency is 1/16 th of the
> signalling unit length (about 6 microseconds at 9600) plus the
> uncertainty in the interrupt and process scheduling latencies. (If
> the UAR
Augustine wrote:
> On May 9, 2:17 am, "David J Taylor" part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Background: I have a GPS 18 and USB
>> serial converter, and I wanted to see how well that actually
>> performs.
>
> Very interesting experiment. May I
Unruh wrote:
[]
> Well, I call "good" to include the design. If a car is designed so
> that
> the wheels fall off every 100 miles, no matter how closely the car
> meets
> the design, it is a bad car.
.. but if something only needs millisecond timing, designing for
nanosecond accuracy is gross ove
Unruh wrote:
[]
> Since the same machine can run Linux or BSD whose resolution is usec
> or
> nsec, yes, the hardware can do better. The question is how good is the
> software in the kernel. If I do a timestamp on an event, how accurate
> is
> that timestamp?
> Is it msec? Is it 15msec?
The precis
David Woolley wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> - with operating system calls, the main clock can be read with a
>> precision of 1 millisecond (although the ticks may be only 15
>> milliseconds). There are higher resolution counters which can also
>&
Unruh wrote:
[]
> OK, I keep forgetting. What accuracy can the clock be read on windows?
> is there an interpolation routine in the kernel so the clock can be
> read
> to usec accuracy?
> I would thin k you could set up and interrupt routine to read and
> record
> the clock time when the interrupt
Unruh wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
[]
>> On my system, I can detect no difference between the GPS 18 and the
>> GSP 18x. I am looking at jitters in the order of 2.2 microseconds,
>> and offsets in the range +170/-100 microseconds.
>
> How are you reading the PPS
Hal Murray wrote:
[]
> If anybody has figured out how to get good timing out of the
> SiRF units, please clue me in.
On my system, I can detect no difference between the GPS 18 and the GSP
18x. I am looking at jitters in the order of 2.2 microseconds, and
offsets in the range +170/-100 microsec
David Malone wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
>
> writes:
>
>> I know it's off-topic, but how far apart in time does two singers, or
>> choir, have to be before you notice? (No, I'm not suggesting a
>> spoken ref clock ).
>
> If you have an small
Unruh wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
[]
>> I know it's off-topic, but how far apart in time does two singers, or
>> choir, have to be before you notice? (No, I'm not suggesting a
>> spoken ref clock ).
>
> 10-100ms
> (3-30 m)
> iThat is why speake
Uwe Klein wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> []
>>
>>> You can try it and see what happens! The results may be
>>> sufficiently good for your purposes. You will almost certainly not
>>> get microsecond ac
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> You can try it and see what happens! The results may be sufficiently
> good for your purposes. You will almost certainly not get microsecond
> accuracy. If you are willing to settle for +/- 10 milliseconds you
> can almost certainly get that.
Richard,
My first te
David J Taylor wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Thanks to your help, I got the serial-over-USB GPS NMEA ref-clock
> working with Windows. It will be interesting to see whether the
> performance is any different to a LAN connection to a ref-clock. See:
>
> http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/
Hal Murray wrote:
[]
> USB is polled by the host. That gives it a bad reputation.
>
> But that polling is done by hardware. The basic time scale is 1 ms.
> If you don't get your low-latency stuff sorted out on a serial port
> you can easily introduce delays longer than 1 ms.
>
> If you want micro
Folks,
Thanks to your help, I got the serial-over-USB GPS NMEA ref-clock working
with Windows. It will be interesting to see whether the performance is
any different to a LAN connection to a ref-clock. See:
http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/NTP-on-Windows-serial-port.html#usb
over the next 24 ho
Hal Murray wrote:
>> I'm in a third category (probably) - as long as my PCs "sound" to
>> have the same time, I'm happy. Actually, I want UTC as well, but as
>> I have a speaking clock working on two PCs it's "nice" when they
>> both speak at the same time. I wonder how close that needs to be -
>
Folks, I made some tests with various settings for the NMEA driver and the
results are here:
http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/NTP-on-Windows-serial-port.html#usb
Maarten's guess about how to specify the COM port was correct (thanks),
but setting a port above COM3 failed, so I have created bug repo
Dave Hart wrote:
>> Does NTP even allow COM4?
>
> I don't think so. The unit numbers are limited to 0-3, I believe, but
> I don't have any concept of why. Windows never has a COM0:, so
> arguably it was a poor choice to map unit number to com port number
> without adding 1, but it's far too late
Maarten Wiltink wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
> wrote
> in message news:96anl.26389$oo7.7...@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I've looked through the documents, and I can't see how to set the COM
>> port for the NMEA driver on
Folks,
I've looked through the documents, and I can't see how to set the COM port
for the NMEA driver on Windows. Background: I have a GPS 18 and USB
serial converter, and I wanted to see how well that actually performs. It
supplies data on COM4, so I need to tell NTP that's where to look for
David Woolley wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
[]
>> http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/an_pk/3566
>
> This seems to suggest crystals have quadratic temperature dependency.
> My understanding is that normal cuts have cubic dependency. Of
> course, 32kHz crystals are often cu
David Woolley wrote:
[]
> A reasonable expectation of a cheap crystal is 50ppm static plus
> <10ppm temperature dependent. When one gets >500ppm it suggests the
> problem is rather worse than poor crystal tolerancing.
I am inclined to agree. One reference I found was this:
http://www.maxim-ic
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> I'm not here to make people feel good!
No comment!
> I've checked the hardware available to me and none is worse than 50
> PPM. That's two PC's running Windows XP, three Sun Ultra 10
> Workstations running Solaris 8, 9, and 10, two DEC Alpha workstations
> running V
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> An error greater than 500 PPM suggests seriously broken hardware! There
> might be some way to "kludge" the software to compensate for
> this brokenness but I think it would be easier and cheaper to fix or
> replace the broken hardware.
I was trying to see what erro
I've recent been suggesting the Windows port of NTP as a program suitable
for an application where the timekeeping needed to be within a second or
two. Yes, NTP is overkill, but it has the advantages of multiple servers,
best server selection, adaptive poll rate, and memory of the clock drift
David Lord wrote:
[]
> On Windows 98 here (GMT) London seems to be BST with an hour
> adjustment for DST so turning off DST is always an hour off UTC.
> I have timezone set as (GMT) Casablanca, Monrovia. :-)
>
> David
That's interesting. On the Windows-32 systems, London = "GMT" = UTC, and
havin
David Woolley wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> settings. If you want UTC displayed, just choose a time-zone without
>> any summer-time adjustment, for example:
>>
>> (GMT) Monrovia, Reykjavik
>>
> But make sure that you continually recheck its status. Tun
randy wilson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This has to have been solved somewhere but apparently
> my searchfu is not working well.
>
> I have some windows xp computers which we are syncing
> to a time server via ntp. I can see the time server
> has the correct UTC time on it and the the PCs are
> syncing to th
Folks,
I have Windows-7 RC installed on one of my PCs at the moment. It's
currently running the VegasV2 version:
http://www.satsignal.eu/mrtg/hydra_ntp.html
http://www.satsignal.eu/mrtg/performance_hydra.php
and doing about the same as a Vista PC running similar software, i.e. not
very w
David Lord wrote:
[]
> I've ntp logs going back many years and for me chrony was better
> suited to handling temperature changes but was originally used
> because of intermittent dialup connection.
Yes, having a history of expected variations due to temperature chnages,
or perhaps even using the
David Lord wrote:
[]
> cheers
>
> Both those were listed on garmin site as uk suppliers but the RS price
> that came up was almost 170 quid and I couldn't locate the GPS-18x LVC
> on the gpsw site.
>
> I'll check both again anyway in case my eyesight was playing up.
GPS Warehouse have them in stoc
David Lord wrote:
[]
> I've had $60 but not accept my cc and require $35 bank transfer
> fee or $60+ +$75 delivery and others don't export so I gave up.
>
> DL
David,
I'm advised that RS Components stock this at GBP 69 + VAT + delivery. A
search of their Web site reveals the GPS 18x range:
Steve Kostecke wrote:
> On 2009-05-01, David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> That's the newer 18x version.
>
> The 18x is the replacement for the 18.
>
>> Garmin's web site seems a little confusing - if I try searching the
>> Garmin site for "GPS 18x"
Steve Kostecke wrote:
[]
> The drop-down peoduct selection box on
> https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=158&pID=27594 lists the
> following versions:
>
> GPS 18x USB - $84.99 USD
> GPS 18x PC - $84.99 USD
> GPS 18x LVC, 5m - $79.99
That's the newer 18x version.
Garmin's web site seems a litt
Steve Kostecke wrote:
[]
> I was replying to article e-idnzgzia-_i2funz2dnuvz_g9i4...@bresnan.com
> where Nathaniel Homier said:
>
> "... make matters worse the lvc version has been discontinued."
>
> The LVC _is_ still available.
It's the "PC" version which is discontinued.
Cheers,
David
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> You can try it and see what happens! The results may be sufficiently
> good for your purposes. You will almost certainly not get microsecond
> accuracy. If you are willing to settle for +/- 10 milliseconds you
> can almost certainly get that.
> There are (at least
E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists wrote:
> Steve Kostecke wrote:
>> The GPS-18 has been replaced by the GPS-18x. According to
>> https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=158&pID=27594 all
>> 3 varients are still available.
>
> 4 variants?
>
> GPS 18x
> Part Number: 010-0
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article ,
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
>> USB is nearly useless for NTP! USB has latencies sufficiently large
>> and variable to render it unsuitable for use with NTP.
[]
Garrett, Richard,
You've both commented that USB has drawbacks, but in reality what
performanc
E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Unruh wrote:
>>> ... RS232 plug and a USB poser plug.
>>
>> Where are you proposing he plug the RS232 lead in? Buy a PCI/serial
>> card?
>
> Perhaps he meant a U
Unruh wrote:
> Nathaniel Homier writes:
>
>> Hello.
>
>> I would like to know if one can use the line audio out of any old
>> portable shortwave radio tuned to a time signal and fed via a line
>> audio input. This would be motherboard audio. The primary reason
>> is that I get the impression tha
David Woolley wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> David Woolley wrote:
>>> Bruce Lilly wrote:
>> []
>>>># ntpq -p
>>>> remote refid st t when poll reach delay
>>>> offset jitter
>>>>
David Woolley wrote:
> Bruce Lilly wrote:
[]
>># ntpq -p
>> remote refid st t when poll reach delay
>> offset jitter
>> *megatron.blilly 18.26.4.105 2 u 27 64 377
>> 2.9270.296 0.122
>> # ntptrace
>> megatron.blilly.net:
David J Taylor wrote:
> Are there any algorithm of other differences which might cause
> noticeable performance differences between 4.2.4 and 4.2.5? For
> example:
>
> - 4.2.5 being more reluctant to increasing the polling interval from
> 64s (with a mixture of local stratum-1
sheikdawoodraj...@gmail.com wrote:
[]
> Steve,
> what do you exactly mean "ultra high quality time"?
>
> My ntp service is started running the command below:
> "C:\ntp\bin\ntpd.exe" -U 3 -M -g -c "C:\ntp\etc\ntp.conf"
>
> Are you talking about the -M (Windows only - set high quality
> multimedia ti
David Woolley wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> netstat -ano works correctly on my Windows XP Pro SP3.
>>
>
> I ran strings on the Win 98 version to find the help message, so it
> looks like it has changed on XP, although ntpd wouldn't run on 98,
> anyway.
Ch
My friend's ISP had an unknown feature - a firewall on the ISP side which
blocked traffic other than Web and e-mail. Changing that firewall setting
from "high" to "low" and restarting his router allowed NTP to work
correctly and discipline his PC's clock.
Thanks to all the help and suggestions
David Woolley wrote:
> Danny Mayer wrote:
>>
>> Instead of all that, just run netstat -an from the command line and
>> see if there is anything using 123/UDP port on the local addresses.
>> You can then used netstat -ano to get the PID of the application
>> using that port.
>
> He is running Window
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> []
>>> NTP passes through my router with no problems. I never had to do
>>> any configuration to allow it. It seems to fall under "replies to
>>> outgoing packets a
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> NTP passes through my router with no problems. I never had to do any
> configuration to allow it. It seems to fall under "replies to
> outgoing packets are allowed"! The router is is a LinkSys BEFR81.
> YMMV!
Yes, my router also "just works". We're trying to figu
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> Routers sold into the consumer market generally have configuration
> options to allow or block ports and some can be configured to block
> specific IP addresses or address families. By default they allow
> responses to outgoing packets and block all other incoming tr
David Woolley wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> What is the difference in the packets sent and received in the two
>> command formats (I appreciate that -q does not set the clock)?
>
> The source port number. Your friend has a firewall problem. It is
> blocking repl
My friend's system shows that ntpdate works with the "-q" ption, but not
without:
___
E:\NTP\bin>ntpdate -q 81.171.44.131
server 81.171.44.131, stratum 2, offset 12.016615, delay 0.05682
4 Apr 08:49:58 ntpdate[3936]: step time server 81.171.44.131 offset
12.016615 sec
Dave Hart wrote:
> On Apr 2, 8:54 am, "David J Taylor" this-bit.nor-this.co.uk> wrote:
>> Running from the command-line, we get:
>>
>> 2 Apr 09:39:08 ntpd.exe[3984]: frequency initialized 0.000 PPM from
>> e:\NTP\etc\ntp.drift
>> 2 Apr 09:39:22 ntpd.e
David Lord wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> David Woolley wrote:
>>> Steve Kostecke wrote:
>>>> On 2009-04-01, David J Taylor
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> E:\NTP\bin>ntpq -c as
>>>
Running from the command-line, we get:
2 Apr 09:39:08 ntpd.exe[3984]: logging to file log.txt
2 Apr 09:39:08 ntpd.exe[3984]: precision = 1.000 usec
2 Apr 09:39:08 ntpd.exe[3984]: Listening on interface #0 wildcard,
0.0.0.0#123 Disabled
2 Apr 09:39:08 ntpd.exe[3984]: Listening on interface #1
David Woolley wrote:
> Steve Kostecke wrote:
>> On 2009-04-01, David J Taylor wrote:
>>
>>> E:\NTP\bin>ntpq -c as
>>>
>>> ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
>>> =
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> Have you tried "ntpd -g"? That should take care of your offset and
> give ntpd a chance to maintain the correct time. Let it run for a
> day or two and try "ntpq -p". On a "cold" start, ntpd will need at
> least 24 hours to beat your clock into submission.
Thanks
Steve Kostecke wrote:
> On 2009-04-01, David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> E:\NTP\bin>ntpq -c as
>>
>> ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
>> ===
>> 1 22554 8000 yes yes none
David Woolley wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> dstport=123, leap=11, stratum=16, precision=-20, rootdelay=0.000,
>
>
> The server is unsynchronised. I don't know how ntpdate worked.
> It doesn't seem to be the one against w
David J Taylor wrote:
> Heiko Gerstung wrote:
> []
>> Can you try to run ntpdate -q on the machine
>> and check if that works? If not, try ntpdate -qu to use an
>> unprivileged port. You would need to stop the NTP service on that
>> machine first (net stop n
Heiko Gerstung wrote:
[]
> Can you try to run ntpdate -q on the machine and
> check if that works? If not, try ntpdate -qu to use an
> unprivileged port. You would need to stop the NTP service on that
> machine first (net stop ntp).
E:\NTP\bin>ntpdate -q 129.215.160.240
server 129.215.160.240, s
Heiko Gerstung wrote:
> David J Taylor schrieb:
[]
ce between nptq.exe sending and
>> receiving packets, and ntpd.exe working in its normal manner?
>
> No, not really. If ntpq works you can be sure that
> - network communication works, i.e. you have a valid and working
>
901 - 1000 of 1387 matches
Mail list logo
