[ntp:questions] Re: ntpd on Windows XP

Kemal Oral CANSIZLAR ocansizlar at comcast.net
Wed Mar 23 13:41:34 UTC 2005


Hi,

"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88 at comcast.net> wrote in message 
news:v8-dnTjl04jZYt3fRVn-iQ at comcast.com...
> Kemal Oral CANSIZLAR wrote:
>
>>"Darren Dunham" <ddunham at redwood.taos.com> wrote in message 
>>news:lKZ%d.386$FN4.287 at newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>Kemal Oral CANSIZLAR <ocansizlar at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I have a question regarding ntpd on Windows XP.
>>>>
>>>>I have successfully compiled and run Instsrv.exe to register ntpd as an 
>>>>NT
>>>>service.
>>>>
>>>>When service is run, even though the clock is several seconds off, it 
>>>>does
>>>>not initially STEP into correct time. I tried with "-g" parameter also 
>>>>at no
>>>>avail.
>>>>
>>>How long did you wait?  Once it determines which clocks are suitable for
>>>synchronization, it should step.  With the default settings (no iburst)
>>>this can take 3 to 4 minutes.
>>>
>>
>>Thanks alot, I forgot to append "burst" "iburst" commands, now it 
>>functions as I expected.
>>
>>
>
> Please don't use burst!!!   iburst and only iburst is what you need.
>
> burst causes ntpd to send eight requests at two second intervals at each 
> poll interval.  This places eight times the normal load on the server and 
> is a very unfriendly thing to do!!!!
>

Oh OK, I thought "iburst" was applicable when the server was unreachable 
(although I couldnot understand the statement),
but setting only "iburst" also seems to work fine (converge quickly as 
possible). Thank you for the note, I wouldnot choose to abuse time services 
unnecessarily :) So, does iburst read as "initial burst"?





More information about the questions mailing list