[ntp:questions] The libntp resumee...

David Woolley david at ex.djwhome.demon.co.uk.invalid
Sun Sep 7 08:36:35 UTC 2008

Kay Hayen wrote:

> We could alternatively want to change ntpd in a way that the iburst lasts 
> until a sufficient synchronization was achieved. But it appears to be more 
> simply to delay the iburst by delaying the ntpd start until sufficient 
> conditions are met.

That's not going to be desirable.  Although you might only use it on 
your internal severs, it will soon get round on the grapevine that it is 
a good thing to do, which will result in servers that are down or denied 
to the client, or the networks of ex-servers getting bombarded with 
large numbers of requests, whereas I believe the standard behaviour is 
to back off under those circumstances.

More information about the questions mailing list