[ntp:questions] "ntpd -q" is slow compared to ntpdate
stenn at ntp.org
Sun Oct 19 22:01:56 UTC 2008
>>> In article <GmLKk.2567$%%2.1526 at edtnps82>, Unruh <unruh-spam at physics.ubc.ca> writes:
Unruh> ntpdate serves a useful purpose, something which ntpd -g -q does not
Unruh> do (because for the purpose of setting the clock in a one-shot
Unruh> manner, ntpd is seriously flawed, especially if the clock is already
Unruh> within 128ms of the correct time). Now, sntp should be equally
Unruh> seriously flawed, since the suggestion in the rfc is that it use the
Unruh> same algorithm for clock setting as ntp uses I certainly would not
Unruh> overload the name sntp with yet another operating mode.
It's comments like this that cause me to wonder if you are just being a
troll, and to wonder if I should invest effort in responding.
I certainly wonder what your goal is by writing things like this.
Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.org>
http://ntpforum.isc.org - be a member!
More information about the questions