[ntp:questions] Stratum 1 servers in pools?!?

Unruh unruh-spam at physics.ubc.ca
Tue Jun 16 10:27:39 UTC 2009


Rich <richwales at gmail.com> writes:

>I'm using ntpd 4.2.4p4 on several Ubuntu 9.04 ("Jaunty") servers.

>Recently, I've been reconfiguring some of my servers to use the "pool"
>DNS names (e.g., "server 0.us.pool.ntp.org").  I've noticed that I
>sometimes end up associating with a stratum-1 server from a pool.  As
>an experiment, I specified 0.de.pool.ntp.org (the German pool), and
>one of my servers is currently syncing to zit-net2.uni-paderborn.de (a
>stratum-1 server currently syncing to a DCF77 clock).  I've seen this
>a couple of times with the US pool as well -- though I'm afraid it
>didn't occur to me at the time to write down the stratum-1 servers
>involved.

>Since (as I understand) end-user clients should avoid dealing directly
>with stratum-1 servers, I assume this probably isn't as it should be.
>Is it, in fact, proper for a stratum-1 server to be registered as part

No. You ae fine. The reason for the statement is that stratum 1 do not
want to be overloaded (eg the stratum 1 central time sources for a
country). But if someone sticks his stratum 1 GPS or other machine into
the pool, they are willing to ac cept connnection from anyone.


>of a pool?  Where -- if anywhere -- should I report a stratum-1 server

You should not. Just use and enjoy.

>found in a pool?  Should I consider doing something in my ntp.conf so
>as to avoid bothering a server from a pool if it happens to be in
>stratum 1?

No. Why?
It is like the statement "You should not bother movie stars while they
are eating in a restaraunt". If the movie star gets up in the restaraunt and announces
that they want to talk to anyone who wants to talk to them, then that
social restriction can be abandoned. 


>Rich Wales
>richw at richw.org, richwales at gmail.com




More information about the questions mailing list