On 01/04/11 13:44, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering about the section 5.3.3 on the ntp support web
http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Support/SelectingOffsiteNTPServers#Section_5.3.3.
It says and explains that minimum number of servers to detect one
falseticker is four, is that
On 01/04/11 17:07, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 04:12:06PM -0500, Brian Utterback wrote:
On 01/04/11 13:44, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
It says and explains that minimum number of servers to detect one
falseticker is four, is that really correct? I understand that four is
David L. Mills wrote:
Miroslav,
Nowhere in the documentation produced by me is the statement that the
minimum number of servers to reliably find the truechimers is four.
There might have been some confusion in the past, in particular with
reference to Lamport's paper, which describes an
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 09:23:59AM +0100, Terje Mathisen wrote:
Two servers which don't overlap, and a third which overlaps (partly)
both of them:
server A and B
--- server C
In this particular situation C must be a survivor, but since it
overlaps both A and B
Terje,
That's why Autokey uses digital signatures and zero-knowledge identity
proofs.
Dave
Terje Mathisen wrote:
David L. Mills wrote:
Miroslav,
Nowhere in the documentation produced by me is the statement that the
minimum number of servers to reliably find the truechimers is four.
MIroslav,
The select algorithm was changed in a very minor way to conform
precisely to the formal assassin quoted in my previous message. It
probably has very little practical significance. After all, the old
algorithm has been going strong for nineteen years.
Dave
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 10:31:15AM -0500, Brian Utterback wrote:
Let's equalize a bit to make it a bit more fair:
c b-
a--
So, now, if you were NTP, which would you choose? You are correct in
your assessment that NTP would accept them all as
Terfe,
Read the formal assertion carefully and examine the algorithm on the
Select Algorithm page. The algorithm would return interval C as the
smallest intersection with the largess number of contributors.
Dave
Terje Mathisen wrote:
David L. Mills wrote:
Miroslav,
Nowhere in the
Miroslav,
According to your diagram, the algorithm would determine the
intersection interval as interval a. The midpoints of all three
intervals would be considered truechimers, since each of the intervals
a, b and c, contain points in the intersection interval.
Dave
Miroslav Lichvar
Hi,
I'm wondering about the section 5.3.3 on the ntp support web
http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Support/SelectingOffsiteNTPServers#Section_5.3.3.
It says and explains that minimum number of servers to detect one
falseticker is four, is that really correct? I understand that four is
better for
On 1/4/2011 1:44 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering about the section 5.3.3 on the ntp support web
http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Support/SelectingOffsiteNTPServers#Section_5.3.3.
It says and explains that minimum number of servers to detect one
falseticker is four, is that really
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 02:35:13PM -0500, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
The problem with using only two servers is that NTPD has no means of
determining which is more nearly correct when the two differ, as
they inevitably will!
ntpd will pick the one with smaller distance if their intervals
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 02:35:13PM -0500, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
The problem with using only two servers is that NTPD has no means of
determining which is more nearly correct when the two differ, as
they inevitably will!
ntpd will pick the one with smaller distance
Miroslav,
Nowhere in the documentation produced by me is the statement that the
minimum number of servers to reliably find the truechimers is four.
There might have been some confusion in the past, in particular with
reference to Lamport's paper, which describes an algorithm much more
David,
As you might see from the online documentation, much of the tutorial
material has been largely rewritten. Awhile back, some kind soul pointed
out a logical discrepancy in the select algorithm. That was repaired,
the code updated and the documentation refreshed. The pages linked from
The average user doesn't read such documentation.
The average user, if they believe anything at all, seems to believe that
there is no combining algorithm and the server with the * on the ntpq
peers display is the only one used to discipline the clock. This is why
they get so concerned about
16 matches
Mail list logo
