[ntp:questions] Should ntpd log failure to syslog?
Uwe Klein
uwe_klein_habertwedt at t-online.de
Wed Dec 10 18:31:51 UTC 2008
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Uwe Klein wrote:
>
>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>
>>> Normally, reaching a server is not a problem. If ntpd can't reach
>>> its configured servers, something is horribly wrong somewhere and
>>> your network people should be working like beavers to fix it!
>>
>>
>> How should they know if ntp is mum about that failure?
>>
>> uwe
>
>
> IF NTP IS THE ONLY THING FAILING, they won't know. It's probably not
> their problem. If you have four servers configured and you can't reach
> any of them, it's almost certainly a network problem and your networking
> people should know about it!
>
> If you MUST have NTP working at all times, you need to build a defense
> in depth. That means one or more hardware reference clocks and/or four,
> five, or seven upstream servers. I use a GPS timing receiver as the
> source for one of my servers, a WWV/WWVH radio clock for another, and
> several internet servers as backup/sanity check.
>
> And I'm just a hobbyist these days! But I'm a hobbyist who knows what
> time it is! :-)
So, you are a hobby rocket scientist? ;-)
back to the topic:
with firewalls, overintelligent switches, NAT and nutty admins
it is no longer a given that reaching a host via ping, traceroute
or http means it works globally and you can now savor your next cigar.
I prefer information push of failures ( like to syslog )
to information pull ( like in writing utilities that monitor
uncooperative apps and which I have to setup as a cronjob ..... )
syslog already is a very flexible tool for monitoring and problem escalation.
uwe
More information about the questions
mailing list