[ntp:questions] Re: is there a way to "lock" the drift frequency
hmurray at suespammers.org
Tue Nov 18 05:30:47 UTC 2003
>Over the years, I've expected someone to fork a version of NTP that
>has been tweaked to satisfy the "small LAN" community, with no joy to
>date. This hypothetical version of NTP (say Local NTP), would be
>tailored for small switched networks characterized by fast/symmetric
>delays, plenty of bandwidth, a directly connected high stratum server,
>and strict requirements for fast initial convergence (assuming known
>drift) and narrow offset margins (forward steps always acceptable).
>Here, the server is always trusted (within reason), the network is
>very reliable, and any errors or discontinuities are assumed to be
>caused by the host (again within reason).
>Still waiting for that someone (smarter than me),
I'd put my effort in either of two other directions.
First would be fixing the lost interrupts on your system(s).
The other approach would be to use the cycle counter rather
than counting interrupts. Previous discussions indicate
that this gets hard in multi-processor systems. It might make
an interesting compile-time option for the kernel - safe to
use it if the SMP option is off.
The suespammers.org mail server is located in California. So are all my
other mailboxes. Please do not send unsolicited bulk e-mail or unsolicited
commercial e-mail to my suespammers.org address or any of my other addresses.
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
More information about the questions