[ntp:questions] poll interval - Clarification! - RFC compliance question

Unruh unruh-spam at physics.ubc.ca
Mon Jun 16 17:29:30 UTC 2008

anton.a.persson at ericsson.com (Anton Persson A) writes:


>I want to clarify one important issue since this discussion took a
>completely different turn that the technical one I was looking for.

>We are NOT implementing the NTP protocol, we are using the reference
>implementation straight out of <unnamed commercial embedded Linux
>distribution>. I thought that was clear from the syntax of 
>my configuration and the fact that we use ntpq/ntpdc... ;-)

The distros may change ntp. Ie, they are usually NOT the reference

>The question I had was, in other words, should I expect the poll
>interval reported by ntpq to increase when using ntpd 4.2.4? And,


>if it is to be expected, how fast should it increase? (This is
>in the case when ntpd is in synchronization with a server and
>the communication breaks down, the server is "down".) (The
>reason I named NTP v3 is that we have configured the daemon
>to use NTP v3 explicitly..)

Sorry, you told us that you are using some unknown version from some
unknown distribution, and then ask about NTPV3. Is the implimentation an
implimentation of the v3 or v4? Tell us the version number and the distro.
Why are you so coy about the details?

I think that on a lost lock, ntp first decreases the poll interval, on the
theory that the loss was temporary, and that the next time it will be
there. If that does not work, then the poll interval is increased. 
But I think the min and max poll are still honoured. Ie with a maxpoll of
10 it does not wait for 8 days (poll 16)  before trying again.

>I just want to say that I don't mind the license discussion, it's
>an important subject to discuss. However; I'm biased and I really
>prefer the GPL.. ;-)

The license is far less restrictive than GPL. 

>    Best regards, Anton

>-----Original Message-----
>From: questions-bounces+anton.a.persson=ericsson.com at lists.ntp.org
>[mailto:questions-bounces+anton.a.persson=ericsson.com at lists.ntp.org] On
>Behalf Of Harlan Stenn
>Sent: den 13 juni 2008 20:44
>To: questions at lists.ntp.org
>Subject: Re: poll interval - RFC compliance question


>You are familiar with the draft NTPv4 spec, which includes SNTP, right?

>More info at http://support.ntp.org/IETF/WebHome .

>Several of your questions would be useful on the IETF NTP workgroup
>mailing list, and would be useful and interesting topics for the Support
>or Dev areas of http://support.ntp.org .

>Finally, I encourage you and everybody else who is working for a company
>that has an interest in NTP to get your company to join the the NTP
>Forum, http://ntpforum.isc.org .  I am happy to do whatever I can to
>make membership in the NTP Forum a valuable experience.
>Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.org>
>http://ntpforum.isc.org  - be a member!

>questions mailing list
>questions at lists.ntp.org

More information about the questions mailing list