[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