[ntp:questions] Using two NTP Server: Bad?

Richard B. Gilbert rgilbert88 at comcast.net
Fri Apr 22 15:30:08 UTC 2011


On 4/22/2011 5:48 AM, Roger wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 09:32:21 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert"
> <rgilbert88 at comcast.net>  wrote:
>
>> One server: if it fails you have nothing!
>> Two servers: If the two differ, which one do you believe?
>> Three servers: degenerates too easily to the two server case.
>> Four servers: Allows the failure of one server.
>> Five servers: Allows the failure of two.
>> Seven servers: Allows the failure of three.
>
> I've seen these number quoted before and I don't understand
> the last one. Why doesn't 6 allow for the failure of 3? Why
> doesn't 7 allow for the failure of 4? Assuming that this
> wasn't a mistake in the dim and distant past which keeps
> on being repeated what am I missing?

You might try Professor Mills' book on NTP

"Computer Network Time Synchronization: The Network Time Protocol on 
Earth and in Space, Second Edition [Hardcover]"
David L. Mills
David L. Mills (Author)
› Visit Amazon's David L. Mills Page
Find all the books, read about the author, and more.
See search results for this author
Are you an author? Learn about Author Central
(Author)

I suspect that the math is a little heavy for most people.  The price
may also be a little heavy for most people but if you want to get it
"from the horse's mouth" it's the authoritative source.




More information about the questions mailing list