[ntp:questions] Re: Are these Windows XP clients beyond hope?
Neil Trotter
neil_trotter at hotmail.com
Mon Sep 19 11:50:01 UTC 2005
In article <p06200702bf542d41f87f@[10.0.1.210]>, Brad Knowles said:
> It doesn't matter what order you list them in. They will be used
> regardless.
>
> However, you do generally want to use servers that are "closer"
> to you (in a network topological sense, which doesn't always cleanly
> map to geographical distance), because this reduces the latency
> between you and the remote server, and that helps reduce jitter and
> improve your ability to accurately estimate just how good the remote
> servers are.
Understood.
> > server 0.uk.pool.ntp.org iburst
> > server 1.uk.pool.ntp.org iburst
> > server 2.uk.pool.ntp.org iburst
> > server 0.europe.pool.ntp.org iburst
> > server 1.europe.pool.ntp.org iburst
> > server 2.europe.pool.ntp.org iburst
>
> Note that there is guaranteed to be some overlap somewhere
> between the uk.pool.ntp.org and europe.pool.ntp.org zones, since the
> UK has one of the largest groups of servers in the European region.
> However, since there are so many servers listed in both of these
> zones, the likelihood of your actually running into a collision is
> lower, and the likelihood of all three of these colliding should be
> virtually nil.
That's a good point about the uk & europe overlap. I am considering
using a (topologically) nearby country to replace the europe pool.
Thanks, Brad.
--
Neil
Alternative Network Directory
http://www.and-world.com
http://forum.and-world.com
More information about the questions
mailing list