[ntp:questions] Restrict statements and the "pool" directive

Paul tik-tok at bodosom.net
Mon Dec 22 15:03:41 UTC 2014

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 4:14 AM, Rob <nomail at example.com> wrote:
> David Woolley <david at ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> wrote:
> > On 21/12/14 20:10, Rob wrote:
> >> What I got from the documentation is that without "nopeer" a server
> >> could setup a "peer" association.  I don't like that.
> >
> > No. Without nopeer, a *client* can't set up a peer session.
> >
> > The problem here is that the exact significance of being a peer isn't
> > well documented.
> Exactly.  The description in the documentation is unreadable.  There
> is no plain language paragraph after the initial definition that must
> be in terminology explained elswhere, but has no pointer to there.

This is true but irrelevant.  The udel documentation could use more linking
but given a typical configuration you don't need to understand everything
to use NTP or the POOL directive.

(or the equivalents in the html directory).

> Until it is, I appears to be better to not use the functionality.

Didn't we go through this last month too?

By the way, if you're only going to believe what you read in the html
directory then don't ask questions here -- read the docs.  If you are going
to ask questions here then do people the courtesy *silently* ignoring their

More information about the questions mailing list