[ntp:questions] Re: ntpdc vs iburst

Richard B. Gilbert rgilbert88 at comcast.net
Fri Nov 19 17:20:34 UTC 2004


Harlan Stenn wrote:

>>A) The ntpd is started from ip-up (when the computer has finished the ppp
>>negotiation and already connected). Plus several servers
>>with iburst in ntp.conf. And ip-down stops ntpd. It works, I tested it.
>>    
>>
>
>However ntpd does not discipline your clock when it is not working.
>
>  
>
>>B) The ntpd starts up with the computer with only one server: 127.127.0.1.
>>The ip-up adds several server with ntpdc's addserver command.
>>And the ip-down removes all of them except for the local clock.
>>The only one drawback of this option is that this way ntpd
>>sets the clock a bit slowly.
>>    
>>
>
>I don't think you need the local refclock if this is the only computer
>you want to sync.
>
>And it is too bad that addserver does not support "iburst".
>
>It might be better to have ip-up stop the running ntpd and then restart
>ntpd, using several servers and iburst.  Have ip-down unpeer the servers.
>
>This way, ntpd stays up (mostly) and should be able to keep your clock
>working even when you have no connection.
>
>I assume you are using DHCP and get a fresh address with every connection.
>
>If not, you can leave the servers configured and adjust maxpoll (I think).
>
>H
>  
>
How does ntpd with no servers or reference clock available do anything 
useful?  Shouldn't the clock keep running at the last frequency that was 
set whether ntpd is running or not?



More information about the questions mailing list