[ntp:questions] Mixed maxpoll values for mixed LAN/Internet servers - sensible?

Dave Hart davehart at gmail.com
Fri Feb 27 17:38:52 UTC 2009

On Feb 27, 4:55 pm, "David J Taylor" <david-tay... at blueyonder.neither-
this-bit.nor-this.co.uk> wrote:
> > if you set minpoll 4 on a reference clock (and
> > no maxpoll) the similarly unselected internet servers are allowed to
> > progress to higher poll intervals.  It may not be possible to achieve
> > the same without a reference clock.
> Thats doesn't seem to happen with my FreeBSD system, if I am understanding
> you correctly.  Admittedly I have ntpd 4.2.0-a, but all servers have a 64s
> polls even though there is no minpoll or maxpoll specified.

I'm not sure how long ago the change happened, but it appears you have
the old code in this respect.  I do see the new behavior on 4.2.4p6,
which can be described as minpoll on a refclock is used as maxpoll for
it only, letting maxpoll for other peers go up.

When Dr. Mills first announced the change allowing the other peers'
intervals to go up with a refclock configuration, I believe he
observed a benefit from the mixed poll intervals, but he was thinking
at least two levels above my pay grade and the reasoning didn't
stick.  I can't find the message to refer to right now, but I'll try
again later.

Dave Hart

More information about the questions mailing list