[ntp:questions] Re: Prefer peers when using PPS driver

David L. Mills mills at udel.edu
Tue Apr 25 02:57:14 UTC 2006


Yes, that is the intended behavior. Frnakly, I'm very nervous about 
configurations like that. If the remote servers comes bum, it is easy 
for the client to slide into the wrong second. Yes, it would be possible 
to put up a tinker switch, but the program has become so infested with 
tinkers that I am reluctant to add more. While I haven't tested it, you 
might try setting more than one server as prefer. In this case the PPS 
should tune as long as one of them is a survivor.


John Ackermann N8UR wrote:
> Hi --
> A question about configuring the prefer peer when using the PPS driver 
> with a source that provides only the PPS signal and no other timecode.
> It seems that having to designate a single remote server as the prefer 
> peer causes a weakness -- if that remote server goes away, the PPS 
> driver is disabled.
> Is this a situation where specifying more than one prefer peer makes 
> sense (assuming that all are of roughly equal, high, quality)?  Will 
> anything bad happen from doing this?
> Thanks,
> John
> _______________________________________________
> questions mailing list
> questions at lists.ntp.isc.org
> https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions

More information about the questions mailing list