[ntp:questions] chrony as a server

Harlan Stenn stenn at ntp.org
Mon Feb 23 09:06:49 UTC 2015


Miroslav Lichvar writes:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 07:02:28PM +0000, David Taylor wrote:
> > On 21/02/2015 17:52, William Unruh wrote:
> > []
> > >It will do that too. The crucial item there is "the only method of time
> > >correction is manual entry" which is different from ntpd and orphan
> > >mode. I have no idea why this conversation is continuing. The two are
> > >different. The two methods are trying to solve the same problem
> > >(timekeeping of isolated systems) but doing so in a different manner. If
> > >you like one better than the other, that is fine. But they are not the
> > >same.
> > 
> > Bill, please enlighten me why I cannot, using NTP's orphan mode, set the
> > time on one PC manually and have another PC sync to it?
> 
> Well, you can, but it's not as easy. You need to find the orphan
> parent first (i.e. the system with the smallest refid), somehow
> figure out its phase and frequency error to the real time, and correct
> them behind ntpd's back (possibly with the date and ntptime -f
> commands).
> 
> With chrony you just run "chronyc -a settime xx:xx:xx" once in a while
> on the server and it will do the rest for you.

I'm not buying it.

It's trivially easy to set up a proper orphan mesh.

A proper network configuration will have multiple time servers on it,
because sometimes things break.  If you want to set up something where a
flock of machines follow a single server, that's your choice and there
are consequences to that choice when things break.

If you implement the recommended setup then the old local refclock
scheme will usually pretty much just work, and an an orphan scheme will
just work.
-- 
Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.org>
http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member!


More information about the questions mailing list