[ntp:questions] "ntpd -q" is slow compared to ntpdate
stenn at ntp.org
Sat Oct 18 06:16:50 UTC 2008
>>> In article <976d969e0810151552y27b51d97p7c44fef03714becf at mail.gmail.com>, extproxy at gmail.com (Mohit Aron) writes:
>> > Thanks. It seems 'sntp -r <server>' is the appropriate replacement >
>> for ntpdate.
>> I'm sure I'm about to soil my shoe in what may be an old and well-trodden
>> pile, but if sntp can set the time as well and as quickly as ntpdate, why
>> a new program rather than fixes/enhancements to the old one?
I thought we answered this already.
ntpdate is broken, and has been for a very long time.
Folks have used ntpdate to initially set the time for ntpd.
This is generally no longer needed.
for a discussion of the issues.
Mohit> Good question. I'd much rather just keep using ntpdate. The ntpd man
Mohit> page is obviously wrong when it suggests that 'ntpd -q' mimics the
Mohit> behavior of ntpdate - it doesn't - 'ntpd -q' is dog slow. Along comes
Mohit> 'sntp -r' to the rescue.
Eventually the ntpd man page will be updated. But for a certain class of
situation, yes ntpd -q does mimic ntpdate.
Please remembere that I mentioned that ntpdate is broken and has been for a
Mohit> ... I did find the deb package 'msntp' on Ubuntu, which has
Mohit> the binary 'msntp' which seems to perform exactly like the 'sntp'
Mohit> binary on Gentoo. The man pages also look suspiciously similar. Go
The currently distributed sntp is the msntp package. That package is being
replaced by an sntp implementation that is up-to-date with the current RFC.
Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.org>
http://ntpforum.isc.org - be a member!
More information about the questions