Regarding packet prioritization, http://bugs.ntp.org/show_bug.cgi?id=752
should be completely fixed as of 4.2.7p306. if that helps.
--
Harlan Stenn
http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member!
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
htt
Hal Murray wrote:
> Are you running network tests? Or running some high-priority
> job that ties up the CPU for a while?
You could say that - this is a network load balancer that gets hit
with a fairly large network load. You thinking I need to suggest to
the device manufacturer they find some
I've been informed by the folks with the ability to do a laying-on of
hands with this system have run an experiement where they disabled NTP
and indeed no longer see the 600 millisecond time shifts.
If there are indeed somewhat common 600 millisecond time steps,
doesn't that suggest that NTP is ha
What do these messages say, if anything, about the passage of time on
the system?
5 Feb 17:30:40 ntpd[27435]: kernel time sync enabled 2001
5 Feb 18:56:03 ntpd[27435]: kernel time sync enabled 6001
5 Feb 19:13:08 ntpd[27435]: kernel time sync enabled 2001
5 Feb 21:46:51 ntpd[27435]: kernel tim
