[ntp:questions] ntp-dev: PPS is a falseticker?

Rob nomail at example.com
Mon Jun 16 07:26:28 UTC 2014


Paul <tik-tok at bodosom.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Rob <nomail at example.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Did you put prefer on the PPS and not on another source?
>>
>
> That was the complete output of ntpq. The local clock is marked prefer; it
> can reliably number the seconds.  This is just a demonstration and  I think
> it unwise to run this way in production.

Note that we do not have a local clock, only PPS.
Also note that the requirement to number the seconds can be satisfied
with a number of external NTP servers that ntpd can evaluate and can
obtain a majority vote from.

I want to use that majority vote, not one particular server.
Is that so hard?

>
>> So you suggest that instead of fixing the bug in NTP we should buy
>> new GPSDOs?
>>
>
> It's your opinion it's a bug.  It doesn't seem like one to me.  I think you
> want a feature enhancement not a bug fix.

I think it is not a feature enhancement but a feature removal.
Probably the "prefer" keyword was overused in this case.  There should
not have been any relation between "number the seconds" and "prefer".
That feature must be removed, and maybe some other feature added, like
a "number" keyword, that you can attach to one clock.  When it is not
used, the "number" would be done by the usual majority vote of servers.

> It could be argued that If you had a "correct" installation you wouldn't
> have this "problem".

The installation is correct, only the program is mistreating it.



More information about the questions mailing list