[ntp:questions] server and peer lines correct?
Harlan Stenn
stenn at ntp.org
Mon Apr 7 23:39:36 UTC 2014
Charles Swiger writes:
> On Apr 7, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.org> wrote:
> > Why would you not want to iburst all of the servers?
>
> iburst helps to populate the reachability field quickly.
> That reduces the interval it takes for an NTP server to move from:
>
> associd=0 status=c012 leap_alarm, sync_unspec, 1 event, freq_set =>
> associd=0 status=0615 leap_none, sync_ntp, 1 event, clock_sync
>
> ...which is the transition needed before clients of the server will
> trust it for time.
Yes.
> However, the transition doesn't happen any faster if you only use one
> server with iburst, or with all of the server lines. The data I've
> seen doesn't show any significant differences to the local clock
> variables like frequency, sys_jitter, clk_jitter.
That's true.
And if the one machine you choose for iburst happens to be down, it
takes a long time to sync up.
This is why we recommend using iburst on all server lines - it quickly
brings each server "into the fold".
H
More information about the questions
mailing list