[ntp:questions] Re: More peering theory - refclocks in the mix
jcoombs at gwi.net
Thu Mar 16 21:31:39 UTC 2006
"Harlan Stenn" <stenn at ntp.isc.org> wrote in message
news:ywn9d5gm5e3i.fsf at ntp1.isc.org...
> He's talking about using burst on a refclock. The problem is that
> this is a
> logical extension of the purpose of burst to a realm where it has
> not been
> implemented. There is no "downside" as one will cause no extra
> traffic; the
> intente would be to "listen to more frequent answers".
> For some refclocks this make sense (as they may provide timestamps
> once per
> second), and I believe Dave has done some work on handling this case
> some refclocks.
I tried it, and I can't observe any change on the ACTS refclock. I
still only get one time stamp line logged in clockstats per call.
More information about the questions