ntp problems
in [Linux Networking]
|
Prev: wireless WOL
Next: ntp problems
From: David Schwartz on 20 Apr 2010 13:51 On Apr 19, 7:13 pm, Sidney Lambe <sidneyla...(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > Now you are going to tell me that it doesn't work when it works > perfectly well. You can bash in every screw you ever put in with a hammer if you want. But if you suggest other people do that, when screwdrivers are easily available, you are the kook. > You are a dumb sheep who does things the way others do it > because you don't like to think for yourself. Quite the contrary, I do things the way others do it because it makes sense. Screws and screwdrivers are designed to work together perfectly. There's no genius of independent thinking in bashing screws in with hammers. If you want to do things an objectively inferior way just to be different, that's your business. DS
From: Bonno Bloksma on 20 Apr 2010 02:11 Hi, >>> On a HP switch there is the option TimeP or SNTP. Eventhough TimeP >>> is still the default it seems I then need to use SNTP to talk to a >>> NTP server. >> >> Yes. You should use SNTP rather than TimeP > > Or ntpd, or chrony, both of which will discipline your local time to > better than a ms. > sntp is a cutdown implimentation of ntp for use for final leaves in a > tree ( ie it shoulc not be used as a server for anything else). Your > switch may well be something you use to then discipline other clocks on > your network. No, the Linux machines are at the heart of all the site networks and wil be the time reference for all machines** at that site. I have several network devices that need a somewhat accurate time in order to have a proper timestamp in the logs. If that means that by using the only available but old protocol it is even a second of I still would not care. ;-) I want the Linux machines to be a good time source for my network. Anything that pulls the time needs only be as good as it needs to be. So if the server itself is using ntp to reference several servers on the internet and a nearby stratum 2 server it can then use something else to service devices which use only the older time protocol, if need be. I would rather not run an entire xined environment just to provide the old time protocol but if that is what it takes.... If someone knows a better way I'd like to know about it. Bonno Bloksma ** Except the Windows machines that are part of the Active Directory which will use the AD internal timesync.
From: unruh on 20 Apr 2010 02:49 On 2010-04-20, Bonno Bloksma <bbloksma(a)xs4all.nl> wrote: > Hi, > >>>> On a HP switch there is the option TimeP or SNTP. Eventhough TimeP >>>> is still the default it seems I then need to use SNTP to talk to a >>>> NTP server. >>> >>> Yes. You should use SNTP rather than TimeP >> >> Or ntpd, or chrony, both of which will discipline your local time to >> better than a ms. >> sntp is a cutdown implimentation of ntp for use for final leaves in a >> tree ( ie it shoulc not be used as a server for anything else). Your >> switch may well be something you use to then discipline other clocks on >> your network. > > No, the Linux machines are at the heart of all the site networks and wil be the time reference for > all machines** at that site. I have several network devices that need a somewhat accurate time in > order to have a proper timestamp in the logs. If that means that by using the only available but old > protocol it is even a second of I still would not care. ;-) > > I want the Linux machines to be a good time source for my network. Anything that pulls the time > needs only be as good as it needs to be. So if the server itself is using ntp to reference several > servers on the internet and a nearby stratum 2 server it can then use something else to service > devices which use only the older time protocol, if need be. > > I would rather not run an entire xined environment just to provide the old time protocol but if that > is what it takes.... If someone knows a better way I'd like to know about it. > > I am confused. You have Linux machines on which you want to have accurate ( say better than 1msec) time, and some network devices which you want time to say 1 sec. So on the Linux machines you can run ntpd or chrony with some network sources (eg pool.ntp.org sources). If your "network devices" only understand the time, not the ntp protocol, you could always run the time servers. Not sure what you mean by "entire xinetd environment". You just run one daemon. Or you can run the time daemon directly. Either way. But since the Linux machine is already running ntp, use ntp on the "network devices" or use ntpdate from crontab. It is definitely a second best-- the time becomes a sawtooth, as the local clock is stepped. >
From: Mart Frauenlob on 20 Apr 2010 03:52 On 20.04.2010 03:42, Sidney Lambe wrote: [...] > > Another fatheaded idiot telling me that something I have been doing > successfully for years doesn't work. > > I have just given him the score that tells me that his technical > advice is to be approached with caution. > > Sid Why are you so auto-aggressive? Why do you need to start flaming all the time? Why can't you stay technical? Why confront all the world with your negative emotions? Why not stay friendly? What's so hard about it? What would the groups look like if everyone would be battlesome like you?
From: Peter Köhlmann on 20 Apr 2010 04:35
Mart Frauenlob wrote: > On 20.04.2010 03:42, Sidney Lambe wrote: > [...] >> >> Another fatheaded idiot telling me that something I have been doing >> successfully for years doesn't work. >> >> I have just given him the score that tells me that his technical >> advice is to be approached with caution. >> >> Sid > > Why are you so auto-aggressive? > Why do you need to start flaming all the time? Simple: He is Alan Connor Easily one of the dumbest kooks on usenet of all time -- The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum |