[ntp:questions] Re: Are these Windows XP clients beyond hope?

Neil Trotter neil_trotter at hotmail.com
Mon Sep 19 11:50:01 UTC 2005


In article <p06200702bf542d41f87f@[10.0.1.210]>, Brad Knowles said:

> 	It doesn't matter what order you list them in.  They will be used 
> regardless.
> 
> 	However, you do generally want to use servers that are "closer" 
> to you (in a network topological sense, which doesn't always cleanly 
> map to geographical distance), because this reduces the latency 
> between you and the remote server, and that helps reduce jitter and 
> improve your ability to accurately estimate just how good the remote 
> servers are.

Understood.

> >  server 0.uk.pool.ntp.org iburst
> >  server 1.uk.pool.ntp.org iburst
> >  server 2.uk.pool.ntp.org iburst
> >  server 0.europe.pool.ntp.org iburst
> >  server 1.europe.pool.ntp.org iburst
> >  server 2.europe.pool.ntp.org iburst
> 
> 	Note that there is guaranteed to be some overlap somewhere 
> between the uk.pool.ntp.org and europe.pool.ntp.org zones, since the 
> UK has one of the largest groups of servers in the European region. 
> However, since there are so many servers listed in both of these 
> zones, the likelihood of your actually running into a collision is 
> lower, and the likelihood of all three of these colliding should be 
> virtually nil.

That's a good point about the uk & europe overlap.  I am considering
using a (topologically) nearby country to replace the europe pool.

Thanks, Brad.

-- 
Neil
Alternative Network Directory
http://www.and-world.com
http://forum.and-world.com




More information about the questions mailing list