[Pool] Virtualization

Max Grobecker max.grobecker at ml.grobecker.info
Sat Jul 25 20:12:44 UTC 2015


Am 21.07.2015 um 23:54 schrieb Arnold Schekkerman:

> They have more control over NTP traffic (and possible abuse or other issues) if
> they support the pool with dedicated resources. Another reason might be that NTP
> traffic to an IP can stay for a long time after you stop being a customer. The next
> customer obtaining your former IP may not like the residue NTP traffic. In this,
> NTP is different from other traffic.

Oh yes...
I used to provide a Stratum 1 time server (DCF77) to the pool, configured with 1M bandwidth.
Since the hardware is not working anymore, I removed this server from the pool. In September. Last year.
Today I can see frequent requests coming from about 15-20 different source IPs...
Even the host name does not resolve anymore, so I assume I'm seeing traffic from very long running systems (or those
with static configured IPs instead of host names).
That's not a real problem and it does not consume any data volume. But what if I configured the server to have 100M bandwidth?

To virtualization:
My pool servers are virtualized with KVM on my very own KVM hosts. Monitoring says, the server is pretty accurate and provides stable time
for the last 2-3 years. But I wouldn't setup a pool server on a leased virtual server from another provider. I see, that some hosters are doing
weird things on limiting/blocking UDP traffic directed or originating from virtual servers...


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/pool/attachments/20150725/56d82da4/attachment.sig>

More information about the pool mailing list