I'm new to setting up ntpd.
When ntp works successfully, it logs that fact to syslog.
When it fails (because I've provided a deliberately bogus timeserver),
it sends nothing to syslog, even 10 minutes after boot.
What should its behaviour be, when it can't contact its timeserver(s)?
Thanks,
Ch
Chris Dew wrote:
> I'm new to setting up ntpd.
>
> When ntp works successfully, it logs that fact to syslog.
>
> When it fails (because I've provided a deliberately bogus timeserver),
> it sends nothing to syslog, even 10 minutes after boot.
>
> What should its behaviour be, when it can't contac
Thanks for your reply.
I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't
synchronise the time.
I had assumed it would - and therefore we would be able to see such a
problem through off-box syslog analysis.
If it doesn't log such a failure itself, I'll need to add a monitoring
scr
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its
> configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your
> network people should be working like beavers to fix it!
How should they know if ntp is mum about that failure?
uwe
___
"Richard B. Gilbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Chris Dew wrote:
>> I'm new to setting up ntpd.
>>
>> When ntp works successfully, it logs that fact to syslog.
>>
>> When it fails (because I've provided a deliberately bogus timeserver),
>> it sends nothing to syslog, even 10 minutes after boot
Uwe Klein wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
>> Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its
>> configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your
>> network people should be working like beavers to fix it!
>
> How should they know if ntp is mum about
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Uwe Klein wrote:
>
>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>
>>> Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach
>>> its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and
>>> your network people should be working like beavers to fix it!
>>
>>
>> H
Uwe Klein wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> Uwe Klein wrote:
>>
>>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>>
Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach
its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and
your network people should be working like beav
On 2008-12-10, Chris Dew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't
> synchronise the time.
>
> I had assumed it would - and therefore we would be able to see such a
> problem through off-box syslog analysis.
ntpd will add a "no servers reachabl
>I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't
>synchronise the time.
>
>I had assumed it would - and therefore we would be able to see such a
>problem through off-box syslog analysis.
>
>If it doesn't log such a failure itself, I'll need to add a monitoring
>script (which *will
"Richard B. Gilbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Uwe Klein wrote:
>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>
>>> Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach its
>>> configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and your
>>> network people should be working like beavers
Thanks for the info.
>
> ntpd will add a "no servers reachable" message to the syslog when no
> servers are reachable.
>
How long should I expect to wait for ntpd to log the failure to
syslog, as I've not seen such a syslog message after 10 minutes?
All the best,
Chris.
___
Chris Dew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Thanks for the info.
>>
>> ntpd will add a "no servers reachable" message to the syslog when no
>> servers are reachable.
>>
>How long should I expect to wait for ntpd to log the failure to
>syslog, as I've not seen such a syslog message after 10 minutes?
> If like many, you made the mistake of haveing one of the servers be the
> Local server, you will wait forever.
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# cat /etc/ntp.conf
>> server 192.168.1.133
>> restrict 192.168.1.133 mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify notrap noquery
I had included the config in a post above. Is
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> The source to ntpd is available! If you wish it to write something to
> syslog, please feel free to download the source, make the necessary
> modifications, and try it. It should not be too difficult. Making it
> work for EVERY platform is going to be a massive pr
Hal Murray wrote:
>> I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't
>> synchronise the time.
>>
>
> You probably want to know if one of the servers you are using
> has died so you can switch to another before too many more die.
>
That's why you normally configure four, five,
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Hal Murray wrote:
>
>>> I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't
>>> synchronise the time.
>>>
>
>
>>
>> You probably want to know if one of the servers you are using
>> has died so you can switch to another before too many more die.
>>
>
> T
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Hal Murray wrote:
>
>>> I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't
>>> synchronise the time.
>>>
>
>
>>
>> You probably want to know if one of the servers you are using
>> has died so you can switch to another before too many more die.
>>
>
> T
Chris Dew wrote:
>> If like many, you made the mistake of haveing one of the servers be the
>> Local server, you will wait forever.
>
>>> r...@server:~# cat /etc/ntp.conf
>>> server 192.168.1.133
>>> restrict 192.168.1.133 mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify notrap noquery
>
> I had included the config
Uwe Klein wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> Hal Murray wrote:
>>
I'm querying whether ntpd will log an error to syslog if it can't
synchronise the time.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> You probably want to know if one of the servers you are using
>>> has died so you can switch to another before t
Chris Dew writes:
>> If like many, you made the mistake of haveing one of the servers be the
>> Local server, you will wait forever.
>>> r...@server:~# cat /etc/ntp.conf
>>> server 192.168.1.133
>>> restrict 192.168.1.133 mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify notrap noquery
>I had included the config i
"Richard B. Gilbert" writes:
>Chris Dew wrote:
>>> If like many, you made the mistake of haveing one of the servers be the
>>> Local server, you will wait forever.
>>
r...@server:~# cat /etc/ntp.conf
server 192.168.1.133
restrict 192.168.1.133 mask 255.255.255.255 nomodify notrap
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> What is a "false save setup"?
>
>
>
He? sorry, that any better( I canceled that post and fixed the spelling in a
new post ..):
Doing a FAIL save setup is orthogonal to announcing failures (early).
Compare to RAID devices:
If the user is not informed about failure
>>> In article
>>> <73ab7a34-49a8-472a-9d9a-9f6288624...@i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Chris
>>> Dew writes:
> Steve Kostecke wrote:
>> ntpd will add a "no servers reachable" message to the syslog when no
>> servers are reachable.
Chris> How long should I expect to wait for ntpd to log the f
>That's why you normally configure four, five, or seven servers. These
>"magic numbers" protect you against the failure of one, two, or three
>servers respectively. "Failure" can mean anything from not responding
>to responding with the wrong year!
That's missing the point I was trying to ma
Hal Murray wrote:
>> That's why you normally configure four, five, or seven servers. These
>> "magic numbers" protect you against the failure of one, two, or three
>> servers respectively. "Failure" can mean anything from not responding
>> to responding with the wrong year!
>
> That's missing
Uwe Klein wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
>> What is a "false save setup"?
>>
>>
>>
> He? sorry, that any better( I canceled that post and fixed the spelling
> in a new post ..):
>
> Doing a FAIL save setup is orthogonal to announcing failures (early).
>
> Compare to RAID devices:
> If th
>I think you are assuming here, that the servers will fail one by one
>with no one noticing or correcting the problems. This scenario seems
>rather unlikely to me. Any publicly available server has hundreds or
>even thousands of clients keeping an eye on it. If it goes belly up the
>failure
"Hal Murray" wrote in message
news:fpadnsquvyltjt_unz2dnuvz_uadn...@megapath.net...
>> I think you are assuming here, that the servers will fail one by one
>> with no one noticing or correcting the problems. This scenario seems
>> rather unlikely to me. Any publicly available server has hundred
"Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message
news:7qqdnst3fqthwnzunz2dnuvz_sjin...@giganews.com...
> Uwe Klein wrote:
[...]
>> Doing a FAIL save setup is orthogonal to announcing failures (early).
[...]
> Sorry, it's the "orthogonal" part that's bothering me. My dictionary
> says "pertaining to or compo
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Sorry, it's the "orthogonal" part that's bothering me. My dictionary
> says "pertaining to or composed of right angles". It's frequently used
> as a buzz word but seems to be without content in the context of NTP.
It also means "independent" or "uncorrelated". For
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
> Sorry, it's the "orthogonal" part that's bothering me. My dictionary
> says "pertaining to or composed of right angles". It's frequently used
That's a very narrow definition. The mathematical definition is much wider.
> as a buzz word but seems to be without c
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> I think you are assuming here, that the servers will fail one by one
> with no one noticing or correcting the problems. This scenario seems
There may be no problem, or the problem may be uncorrectable, like a
lack of money. Servers get taken out of service deliber
Hal Murray wrote:
>> I think you are assuming here, that the servers will fail one by one
>> with no one noticing or correcting the problems. This scenario seems
>> rather unlikely to me. Any publicly available server has hundreds or
>> even thousands of clients keeping an eye on it. If it go
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Okay, but . . . . Somebody has to be checking syslog fairly
> frequently. You'd better believe that there are machines out there that
> could catch fire without anyone noticing. Some of them may be serving
> time and even keeping time well.
Syslog (and SNMP) are
Jan Ceuleers wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
>> Sorry, it's the "orthogonal" part that's bothering me. My dictionary
>> says "pertaining to or composed of right angles". It's frequently
>> used as a buzz word but seems to be without content in the context of
>> NTP.
>
> It also means "i
>>> In article <49428c05$0$2861$ba620...@news.skynet.be>, Jan Ceuleers
>>> writes:
Jan> Syslog (and SNMP) are among the most widely deployed monitoring
Jan> mechanisms out there. I submit that leveraging this is beneficial,
Jan> particularly because doing so has a lower threshold than having
Jan
37 matches
Mail list logo
