=?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_[ntp:questions]_Advice_appreciated_on_ntp.conf_files, _etc?=
cave.dnb@tiscali.fr
cave.dnb at tiscali.fr
Thu Dec 8 21:03:54 UTC 2005
Apologies for having to resort to webmail again. Brad Knowles has been trying to unblacklist servers being blocked by SORBS,
so that I can send to the questions list, but SORBS are apparently being very slow in accomodating his request. Personally, I'm
getting a bit T'd off now. I'm not a spammer, and having to use webmail is an inconvenience, but I'm coming around to the
conclusion that it might be better for Brad to keep these servers blacklisted for the sake of keeping , or trying to keep the
questions list spam-free. I'll just put up with using webmail for my odd postings, and waiting for them to receive approval from
the moderator. Quite honestly I think the Internet is going down the tubes, because of spammers scammers, and all the other
scum that are trying to make a quick buck at everyone ele's expense. And I also apologise for the ads which I have no control
over.
On Sunday 04 December 2005 04:11, Danny Mayer wrote:
> cave.dnb at tiscali.fr wrote:
> > Hi. At last. Having read multiple times the docs, and viewed all the
> > postings to the list over the last 2 weeks, I am once again attempting to
> > post to the list, this time by webmail, as SORBS have DNS servers blocked
> > te the mailing list.I'd like some help in understanding the various
> > ntf.conf default entries for
> > different distros, and have attached the files for ntpq-output,
> > and /etc/ntp,conf files for the different distro's below.
>
> Get rid of all your restrict lines and see if that works. It's dangerous
> to start with restrict lines unless you know exactly how to configure
> them. Have you read http://ntp.isc.org/bin/view/Support/ConfiguringNTP
> and particularly section 6.4?
>
> Danny
Hi Danny. Sorry for the delay in replying. I've been waiting on Brad Knowles
to make it possible for me to post to list.
I commented out all restrict lines, read the doc you mentioned, also the
ntpq.html doc again, and the doc "NTP Debugging Techniques" which answered a
lot of the stuff I'd asked you.
All seems to be working ok now. The clocks on the server and client are nicely
in synch, but as the ntp daemon is running continually on the server, and
port 123/UDP is in use, I'm no longer getting updates to the time on the
Smoothwall Express2 firewall. This isn't a big problem as Smoothwall
Express3, now in version Alpha, has the capabilities to allow clients to
retrieve time from the Smoothwall.
Just 2 queries I have. The Server I have running at the moment is FC2. When I
first set this up with 3 Internet time servers, the refid on ntpq> pe showed
the IP addresses that were on the timeserver website. Now they have changed,
but the FC2 client is still showing a refid for the original IP address of
whichever Internet time server is running as a sys.peer. Again, the time is
in synch, so there is clearly no problem, but I'd be interested in knowing
why this is so. ntpq> pe & as outputs below.
FC2-serverntpq> pe
remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
==============================================================================
+lptfpc46.obspm. 195.220.94.163 2 u 613 1024 37 212.045 29.814 23.999
*ntp.kamino.fr 193.52.184.106 2 u 741 1024 37 311.487 31.968 7.659
+ntp2.belbone.be 195.13.23.250 2 u 696 1024 37 268.909 97.301 45.988
ntpq> as
ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
===========================================================
1 596 b474 yes yes none candidat reachable 7
2 597 b674 yes yes none sys.peer reachable 7
3 598 b474 yes yes none candidat reachable 7
FC2-client
ntpq> pe
remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
==============================================================================
*192.168.0.230 216.32.94.18 3 u 504 512 377 0.390 1.136 12.721
192.168.0.228 .INIT. 16 u - 1024 0 0.000 0.000 4000.00
ntpq> as
ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
===========================================================
1 15380 9614 yes yes none sys.peer reachable 1
2 15381 8000 yes yes none reject
The remote address 192.168.0.228 is for FC1, which I run as an alternative
timeserver on the same machine as the FC2 server is running.
I have now reconfigured the /etc/ntp,conf on the FC1 server, removing the
original default stratum 1 server (clock1.redhat.c) and replacing it with the
same 3 Internet timeservers that I use on the FC2 server.
My second. also unimportant query is. The FC2 servers refid shows IPaddresses,
but the FC1 servers refid shows alternative hostnames. Why might this be?
Again the FC2 client accessing this server is showing the original IP
addresses as refid.
FC2 server is using ntp-4.2.0-7
FC! server is using ntp-4.1.2-5
Lastly. When FC1 server was using clock1.redhat.c as a stratum 1 timeserver,
the refid showed a kiss code .CDMC. This one isn't on your kiss code list.
Do you know, just out of interest what this denotes?
Many thanks for NTP. This is the first time I've had all my distro's clocks in
sync. Nigel Henry.
-------------- ALICE HAUT DEBIT : TRIPLE PLAY A 29,95 EUR/MOIS --------------
Découvrez vite ALICEBOX : avec le modem WIFI, profitez de l'ADSL, de la TELEPHONIE et en exclusivité de la TELEVISION !
Bénéficiez aussi de la hotline gratuite 24h/24 ! Soumis à conditions. Pour en profiter cliquez ici http://abonnement.aliceadsl.fr
More information about the questions
mailing list