[ntp:questions] Double "prefer" configuration

Richard B. gilbert rgilbert88 at comcast.net
Fri Mar 2 05:58:22 UTC 2007


Eugen COCA wrote:
> After severeal hours things looks like this:
> 
> ntpq> pe
>      remote     refid  st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
> ==============================================================================
>  GPS_NMEA(1)     .GPS.  0 l  85h   64    0    0.000    0.000   0.004
>  ptbtime1.ptb.de .PTB.  1 u   57  256  377   56.491   -0.062   0.132
>  ntps1-1.cs.tu-b .PPS.  1 u  116  256  377   57.161    0.827   0.225
>  ntp-p1.obspm.fr .1PPS. 1 u   65  256  373   57.027    0.541   5.938
>  gps-2.mit.edu   .GPS.  1 u  125  256  377  133.034    2.194   0.270
> oPPS(1)          .PPS.  0 l   10   16  377    0.000    0.000   0.004
>  ntp2.usv.ro     .PPS.  1 u   61   64  377    0.198    0.003   0.007
>  ntp3.usv.ro     .PPS.  1 u   14   64  377    0.240    0.003   0.005
>  ptbtime2.ptb.de .PTB.  1 u   33  256  377   55.610    1.183   0.334
>  gps-1.mit.edu   .GPS.  1 u   84  256  377  132.648    2.118   0.369
> 
> 
> Is there anybody able to emmit an oppinion if this configuration (with
> two prefer weywords) is good enough for a stable server ?
> 

I would drop gps-1.mit.edu and gps-2.mit.edu.  Their delays are high 
enough that they are unlikely to be selected as a synchronization 
source.  Any benefit you might gain is probably too small to justify 
using them.

Is something wrong with your GPS?  It appears to have been inoperative 
for 85 hours!

I don't know about two "prefer" keywords.  I had the impression that 
only one was supported but I could be wrong.

Other than that, it looks fine to me!




More information about the questions mailing list