> > I expect you would lose some servers from the pool then... > > From a quick check ...
I'm sorry, but you are making assumptions about our operation as it is now
and as it may evolve in future.
We have put a couple of our timeservers in the pool, as a gesture of
goodwill to the community, because the cost of doing so is essentially down
in the noise. They reply to NTP/UDP packets with reasonably good time
(which would be better if the builders hadn't mangled our GPS clock's
connection!). They are set up to do so for the benefit of our staff and
students, and just happen to reply to everyone else as well.
However, if you are now to require that the machines provide other services,
then the cost goes from negligible to significant: quite apart from the
immediate effort setting up a redirect (and there are assumptions there too,
which would be pretty far off-topic to discuss on this list), there would be
be planning and upgrade costs and constraints on our other use of the
machines which happen to respond to the listed addresses.
We're happy to serve time, and I expect we'll continue to do so whether
we're in the pool or not. However if the project decides to require other
services from the pool "machines" and then removes us from the pool because
we don't provide them, I have to say we won't be particularly bothered.
> [Apache configuration snipped as irrelevant in context]
--
Dr George D M Ross, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
Kings Buildings, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH9 3JZ
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: +44 131 650 5147 Fax: +44 131 667 7209
PGP: 1024D/AD758CC5 B91E D430 1E0D 5883 EF6A 426C B676 5C2B AD75 8CC5
pgp9jXXFCc1cH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ timekeepers mailing list [email protected] https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
