[ntp:questions] Compensating for asymmetric delay on a per-peer/server basis?

Rob nomail at example.com
Fri Sep 12 12:30:36 UTC 2014

Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen at tmsw.no> wrote:
> Rob wrote:
>> Martin Burnicki <martin.burnicki at meinberg.de> wrote:
>>> Rob wrote:
>>>> Martin Burnicki <martin.burnicki at meinberg.de> wrote:
>>>> When you serve thousands of clients, this tends to overflow the NAT
>>>> table or stress the lookup code so much that it overloads the CPU.
>>> Haven't had such case, yet since my home NTP server doesn't serv 1000s
>>> of clients, but sounds reasonable and should be kept in mind.
>> It is sometimes a problem when you become member of the NTP pool.
> I'm in that situation, but my ntp server is only announced on IPv6 where 
> I do have a static/personal network range, and the server is also my 
> gateway machine, i.e. it gets all port 123 packets forwarded without any 
> NAT type source port rewriting.

Same for me, I am in the IPv6 pool as well.  But that is on a small
system where I did not want the extra load of being in the IPv4 pool.

A number of years ago I had my system at home in the IPv4 pool, but
then I installed a new modem/router and even when it was configured
in "no NAT" mode it still has tracking always enabled and was swamped
by the number of "sessions".  So I left the pool.

More information about the questions mailing list