Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-06-03 Thread E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
Mischanko, Edward T wrote:> I would modify the current algorithm with an exception > that if offsets exceed 1 millisecond for more than one > polling cycle, then, polling will be reduced by one > interval, else, continue normal operation. Look at ntp_loopfilter.c {around line 650?} * Here we

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-26 Thread unruh
Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2013 9:27 AM >> To: questions@lists.ntp.org >> Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? >> >> On 2013-05-25, Mischanko, Edward T >> wrote: >> > >> >> -Original Message- >> >> From: Charles Swi

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-26 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > > > > > I tried reducing the Allan Intercept to 7 and the result was wild swings > in > > frequency ppm. I don't know why? Is the FLL broken? Has anyone else > &g

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-26 Thread David Lord
Mischanko, Edward T wrote: I don't believe the room temperature changes much at this computer's location. Now if your computer heats up and cools down by 20C over an hour that could change the clock by a few ms. And ntpd is slow to respond to changes in clock rate. [Mischanko, Edward T

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-26 Thread David Woolley
Mischanko, Edward T wrote: I tried reducing the Allan Intercept to 7 and the result was wild swings in frequency ppm. I don't know why? Is the FLL broken? Has anyone else observed this behavior? If you are not suffering from wild swings in frequency, you should not be trying to reduce t

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > unruh wrote: > > > > > Note that on maxpoll 10, the clock will freerun for about 7000 sec > > between disciplines. 5ms in 7000 sec is about 1PPM. Now if your computer > > The time constant for the pro

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
sts.ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > On 5/25/2013 5:55 AM, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > > [Mischanko, Edward T] > > > > I would modify the current algorithm with an exception that if offsets > > exceed 1 millisecond for more than one p

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > On 2013-05-25, Mischanko, Edward T > wrote: > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Charles Swiger [mailto:cswi...@mac.com] > >> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 1:01 AM > >> To: Mischanko,

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > > > > > I would modify the current algorithm with an exception that if offsets > > exceed 1 millisecond for more than one polling cycle, then, polling > will be > &g

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread David Woolley
unruh wrote: Note that on maxpoll 10, the clock will freerun for about 7000 sec between disciplines. 5ms in 7000 sec is about 1PPM. Now if your computer The time constant for the proportional correction is 16384 seconds, so only about 35% of the correction would be made over 7000 seconds. I

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread Brian Utterback
On 5/25/2013 5:55 AM, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: [Mischanko, Edward T] I would modify the current algorithm with an exception that if offsets exceed 1 millisecond for more than one polling cycle, then, polling will be reduced by one interval, else, continue normal operation. What if 1 mill

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread unruh
On 2013-05-25, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > >> -Original Message- >> From: Charles Swiger [mailto:cswi...@mac.com] >> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 1:01 AM >> To: Mischanko, Edward T >> Cc: questions@lists.ntp.org >> Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread David Woolley
Mischanko, Edward T wrote: I would modify the current algorithm with an exception that if offsets exceed 1 millisecond for more than one polling cycle, then, polling will be reduced by one interval, else, continue normal operation. Whilst I still think the OP is trying to make the statisti

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
chanko=arcelormittal@lists.ntp.org > [mailto:questions- > bounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormittal@lists.ntp.org] On Behalf Of > unruh > Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 9:55 AM > To: questions@lists.ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > On 2013-05-24

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
> >>> On 2013-05-21, Mischanko, Edward T > > >> wrote: > My concern is that too much data is being thrown away when polling > above 256 seconds and that allows excessive wandering of my clock. > >> If too much data is being thrown away, it would be because the poll > >> adjust algorithm

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-25 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
> -Original Message- > From: Charles Swiger [mailto:cswi...@mac.com] > Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 1:01 AM > To: Mischanko, Edward T > Cc: questions@lists.ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > On May 23, 2013, at 10:02 PM, "Mischank

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-24 Thread unruh
On 2013-05-24, David Woolley wrote: > >> is entitled to. Why do you not use chrony? I know you have tried it. >> > I'm fairly sure he said Windows up thread. If he did, I missed it, and I apologize for my irrelevant suggestion. So, decrease the poll interval. _

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-24 Thread David Woolley
is entitled to. Why do you not use chrony? I know you have tried it. I'm fairly sure he said Windows up thread. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-24 Thread unruh
On 2013-05-24, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > > >> >> >> > On 2013-05-21, Mischanko, Edward T >> wrote: >> > >> >> My concern is that too much data is being thrown away when polling >> >> above 256 seconds and that allows excessive wandering of my clock. >> > >> >> If too much data is being thro

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-24 Thread John Hasler
David Woolley writes: > Offset is not offset from true time. And that, I think, is the major point of confusion here. If offset was the offset from true time ntpd would just subtract it out, set the clock to true time, and we'd all be happy. It isn't. It's one of the pieces of information ntpd

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-24 Thread David Woolley
Mischanko, Edward T wrote: On 2013-05-21, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: My concern is that too much data is being thrown away when polling above 256 seconds and that allows excessive wandering of my clock. If too much data is being thrown away, it would be because the poll adjust algorithm h

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-23 Thread Charles Swiger
On May 23, 2013, at 10:02 PM, "Mischanko, Edward T" wrote: > It takes too long to figure out it needs a more aggressive correction. > If I leave maxpoll at the default of 1024 seconds, my clock drifts outside > of 5 milliseconds consistently. Measured by what? If you have a better source of tim

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-23 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
> > > > On 2013-05-21, Mischanko, Edward T > wrote: > > > >> My concern is that too much data is being thrown away when polling > >> above 256 seconds and that allows excessive wandering of my clock. > > > > If too much data is being thrown away, it would be because the poll > adjust algorith

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-21 Thread David Woolley
On 2013-05-21, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: My concern is that too much data is being thrown away when polling above 256 seconds and that allows excessive wandering of my clock. If too much data is being thrown away, it would be because the poll adjust algorithm has chosen too high a poll

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-21 Thread Steve Kostecke
On 2013-05-21, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > My concern is that too much data is being thrown away when polling > above 256 seconds and that allows excessive wandering of my clock. The clock filter algorithm processes the offset and delay samples produced by the on-wire protocol for each peer pro

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-21 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
] On Behalf Of > unruh > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 3:14 PM > To: questions@lists.ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > On 2013-05-20, Mischanko, Edward T > wrote: > > Hello friends, > > > > Does anyone know what setting can be chan

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-21 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
ounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormittal@lists.ntp.org > [mailto:questions- > bounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormittal@lists.ntp.org] On Behalf Of > David Woolley > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 8:13 AM > To: questions@lists.ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread unruh
On 2013-05-20, unruh wrote: > On 2013-05-20, David Woolley wrote: >> Mischanko, Edward T wrote: >> >>> Does anyone know what setting can be changed that will cause >>> tighter regulation of the offset. My goal is to get clk_wander to >> >> Why do you want to track network propagation delay chang

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread unruh
On 2013-05-20, David Woolley wrote: > Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > >> Does anyone know what setting can be changed that will cause >> tighter regulation of the offset. My goal is to get clk_wander to > > Why do you want to track network propagation delay changes, at the > expense of accurate tim

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread unruh
On 2013-05-20, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > Hello friends, > > Does anyone know what setting can be changed that will cause > tighter regulation of the offset. My goal is to get clk_wander to > equal as close to zero as possible more often. I would also like > to see the frequency adjusted with

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread David Woolley
Mischanko, Edward T wrote:> The particular client I am monitoring is on an extremely stable corporate LAN. The servers are on the same LAN. Changes in network propagation are minimal. On the other hand, it is on Windows, which doesn't have very stable time measurement. The 8 stage minimu

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread David Woolley
David Woolley wrote: Mischanko, Edward T wrote:> 2) an analysis of the breakdown of errors between the crystal frequency, Windows load related errors, and network load related error. In particular, unless your main error source is changes in crystal frequency, in which case the best approac

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > On 20/05/2013 08:58, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > > Hello friends, > > > > Does anyone know what setting can be changed that will cause > > tighter regulation of the offset. My goal is to get clk_wander to >

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
estions@lists.ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation? > > Mischanko, Edward T wrote: > > > Does anyone know what setting can be changed that will cause > > tighter regulation of the offset. My goal is to get clk_wander to > > Why do you want

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread David Woolley
Mischanko, Edward T wrote: Does anyone know what setting can be changed that will cause tighter regulation of the offset. My goal is to get clk_wander to Why do you want to track network propagation delay changes, at the expense of accurate time keeping? equal as close to zero as possible

Re: [ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread David Taylor
On 20/05/2013 08:58, Mischanko, Edward T wrote: Hello friends, Does anyone know what setting can be changed that will cause tighter regulation of the offset. My goal is to get clk_wander to equal as close to zero as possible more often. I would also like to see the frequency adjusted with ever

[ntp:questions] Tighter regulation?

2013-05-20 Thread Mischanko, Edward T
Hello friends, Does anyone know what setting can be changed that will cause tighter regulation of the offset. My goal is to get clk_wander to equal as close to zero as possible more often. I would also like to see the frequency adjusted with every change in offset data; it currently does not app