In message <cabbxvhuz+yo+fch1qb3xsuppfpcnpbghoe1jbqsrdgql_c+...@mail.gmail.com> , Chris Albertson writes: >On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Bob Camp <li...@rtty.us> wrote:
>NTP's clock selection algorithm is pretty good. If you choose a >diverse set of servers then NTP will only use the subset of them that >are self consistent. That depends a lot on your definition of "good". If you give the clock selection algoritm more than 5 choices, it tends to be fickle and change reference server far too often. The same will happen with fewer really good (=close) servers. >So I think you can trust the consensus time from a set of five >randomly selected pool servers. It would be far easier to spoof WWV, >just set up a transmitter. NTPd does build a consensus, it picks a winner. If you want to do something like this, the one thing you want to do is hand-pick the NTP server you use, and clamp its minpoll/maxpoll to the same value. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
