[ntp:questions] NTP over redundant peer links, undetected loops

Maarten Wiltink maarten at kittensandcats.net
Mon Feb 16 08:56:07 UTC 2009

"Dave Hart" <davehart at gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3a359156-5610-4c6c-8d4f-6f7fbab96b88 at x11g2000pro.googlegroups.com...

> RFC1918 addresses are of course not globally unique, so are
> particularly ill-suited to a reference ID used for loop detection.
> Why play roulette if you have a globally unique IPv4 address to use
> as a refid? ...

You do? Lucky you. RFC1918 addresses are all I have[0], except for
the one address on the outside of my modem, which of them all is the
_least_ suitable because it's the one place in my network where I
don't have, nor currently want, NTP service[1].

RFC1918 addresses may not be globally unique, but they are also not
routeable, so within any given network they _will_ be unique. While
multi-homed hosts may seem to be a counter-example, living as they
do on several networks at the same time, I think they still need
unambiguous network addresses around them.

Maarten Wiltink

[0] Well, except for, but I'm not suggesting we use that.
[1] I do think that the Pool is a great idea, though.

More information about the questions mailing list