[ntp:questions] Re: win32 undisciplined local clock sync time

Steve Kostecke kostecke at ntp.isc.org
Fri Nov 18 14:20:17 UTC 2005


On 2005-11-18, Skunk Worx <skunkworx at verizon.net> wrote:

> My server is win2003 setup with meinberg's 
> ntp-4.2.0b at 20051016-1.1417-o-win32-setup.exe
>
> The clients are all Fedora Core 4 linux, Fedora ntp version is 
> ntp-4.2.0.a.20040617-8
>
> I've setup the ntp.conf on the server with :
>
> driftfile "C:\Program Files\NTP\etc\ntp.drift"
> server 127.127.1.0 prefer
> fudge 127.127.1.1 stratum 8 refid NIST
> disable auth

ntpd is intended to be used in conjunction with a source of time.

The undisciplined local clock (127.127.1.x) is not appropriate for this
purpose.

> 1) The service on the win2003 box takes 2-3 minutes to drop from stratum 
> 16 to stratum 9. The linux boxes won't sync to stratum 16, so I have to 
> wait several minutes between booting the server and the clients. Is 
> there a way to make the win32 box sync faster?

No.

> 2) If I reboot the linux clients after a couple of days I get a "too 
> long without sync" message, and the service on the win2003 box has to be 
> restarted,

You would be better off making one of your linux systems the
"undisciplined local master ntpd" and "syncing" your win2003 to it.

> with another wait of 2-3 minutes to drop from stratum 16 to stratum 9,
> then reboot the linux clients.

Restarting ntpd on the linux systems should be sufficient.

>Is there a way to configure the linux NTP daemons to sync to the server
>even though the server has aged?

Not AFAIK.

> 3) Are IRIG sync'd rackmount NTP servers commonly available?

Here's one: http://www.ese-web.com/299.htm

http://www.google.com/search?q=IRIG+rackmount+ntp+server for links to
more...

Have you thought about adding an IRIG PCI card to the system hosting
your "local master ntpd" ?

Here are some links:

http://www.meinberg.de/english/products/tcr510pci.htm
http://www.ese-web.com/273pci.htm
http://www.symmttm.com/products_bus_level_timing.asp

> 4) True NIST-traceable time is not important to me,

Then why are you telling your undisciplined local clock to use "NIST"
as its ref-id?

> relative time is.

Keep in mind that your "time island" will drift unless you provide a
stable time reference.

-- 
Steve Kostecke <kostecke at ntp.isc.org>
NTP Public Services Project - http://ntp.isc.org/




More information about the questions mailing list