[ntp:questions] Re: Problem with good synchronization.
David L. Mills
mills at udel.edu
Mon Oct 18 14:38:29 UTC 2004
Yes, you are missing something. The bulls as I describe it do what I
believe you want.
Harlan Stenn wrote:
> Your "interesting case" is the one I see the most. I have 1 path to the
> 'net and no local refclocks.
> If for no other reason than to keep NFS happy the machines on my net
> need to agree with each other.
> So I have my primary machine listen to its local clock at a stratum 1 lower
> than where it ordinarily runs.
> I have another machine listening to ist local clock at a stratum 2 lower
> than the primary. It also tries to listen to servers on the 'net.
> When all is well, the primary is believed by everybody.
> When the outside servers are unreachable, the primary machine drops one
> stratum, and everybody still listens to the primary.
> If for some reason the primary fails, everybody listens to the secondary
> machine. If the secondary machine cannot reach the servers on the net,
> it will eventually lower its stratum by no more than 3 notches (because
> it will listen to its locak refclock).
> Yes, there is a bit of a dance while different machines at different poll
> intervals settle on "who knows best", but there is amost always only a single
> leader with this approach.
> If the 2 bulls run at the same stratum, in my experience, when the network
> servers are unreachable there is no other machine available to "break the tie", so each bull heads off on its own. The cows follow one bull or the other
> and the cliques head off in different directions. Bad for me.
> Am I missing something?
More information about the questions