[ntp:questions] Thoughts on KOD
mayer at ntp.org
Mon Jul 7 14:04:15 UTC 2014
On 7/6/2014 7:22 AM, Jan Ceuleers wrote:
> On 07/06/2014 11:23 AM, Rob wrote:
>> Jan Ceuleers <jan.ceuleers at computer.org> wrote:
>>> I recommend providing motivation for the undesired clients to stop using
>>> the server, by the server sending a regular response indicating that it
>>> is not synchronised or replying in some other way that has no
>>> timekeeping value to the offending client.
>> Well, that is what KOD actually is.
> Sorry, I was not clear. By a 'regular' response I mean one that has a
> non-zero stratum value. I had actually forgotten that a stratum value of
> zero indicates that the server is not synchronised (as it is a collision
> with LI=3, which also means that).
> So I guess I'm dropping my first suggestion.
> The second-one stands: pick a non-zero stratum value and report an
> immutable time stamp. Note that the stratum field occupies 8 bits in the
> packet format, but currently only values between 0 and 15 are defined
> (where we have seen that a value of 0 is not uniformly understood by
> real-life clients). So the choice of stratum value should be in the
> range 1-15.
> I have no particular preference for the immutable time stamp value to
> pick. Could be zero, could be some other "meaningful" value (such as
> 0xeee4baadeee4baad - twice Eek! Bad!).
KOD already sets a timestamp that is the requesters timestamp. See my
previous response. It's better than your idea since it is gradual.
More information about the questions