If by auditing you mean the recording of events in the event log I'm
pretty sure it is still controlled by the value of EventLogFlags which
is best configured by Group Policy. Default should be moderate logging
like it is in 2K3.

 

If you want to turn on debug logging, in 2K8 it is a switch on w32tm.
W32tm /debug /enable blah blah blah J

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/w32time/archive/2008/02/28/configuring-the-time-se
rvice-enabling-the-debug-log.aspx

 

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 1:51 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Which is the better way

 

I too thank you.  I did use the correct time setting for what I was
looking to do, as this is the forest/domain pDCe.  Do you happen to know
the KB where Microsoft has documented the way to turn on the time
auditing for Windows 2008?  Since I will be bringing up a 2008 pDCe
sometime in the future I would like to have the auditing turned on for
that machine as I do now for the current pDCe.  All I can find at this
time is the KB for turning it on for a 2003 machine will that work?

 

Jon

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hmm, fully complaint but not actually the full spec.  LOL, that sure
does sound like MS.  ;-)  But SNTP or NTP - it syncs the time just
fine to my routers, and thats all that matters to me.

Many thanks for digging this info up. Very much appreciated.



On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Free, Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Is this true?  Last I had heard, Windows was still using the SNTP
> subset
>
> It is (sort of) for backwards compatibility but it is based on NTP so
it
> depends on what you mean by "true" :-)
>
> I have a message from the MS Windows Time PM back in 2005 where he
> publically stated:
>
> "I own the time service for Windows, so I can field the OS question.
The
> NTP server in Windows 2003 is NTP V3 RFC compliant"
>
> In another conversation where some of us were questioning conflicting
MS
> documentation on w32time's protocol change from SNTP to NTP in W2K3 he
> said-
>
> "Regarding the Doc, it's obviously wrong (I'll get it fixed). The
> W32time server service in 2000 was SNTP, and 2003 its NTP."
>
> Is W32time a 100% full-blown NTP implementation like you would see on
> *NIX, no.
>
>
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc772694.aspx
>
> The Windows Time service uses the Network Time Protocol (NTP) to help
> synchronize time across a network. NTP is an Internet time protocol
that
> includes the discipline algorithms necessary for synchronizing clocks.
> NTP is a more accurate time protocol than the Simple Network Time
> Protocol (SNTP) that is used in some versions of Windows; however
> W32Time continues to support SNTP to enable backward compatibility
with
> computers running SNTP-based time services, such as Windows 2000.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 9:17 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Which is the better way
>
> Is this true?  Last I had heard, Windows was still using the SNTP
> subset functionality of NTP - and not fully adhering to the NTP
> standard.
>
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Troy Meyer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ok how about some actual answers :)
>>
>> NTP versus SNTP
>>
>> If you are running *nix time servers, NTP is a standard and works
more
> consistently.
>>
>> http://blogs.technet.com/industry_insiders/pages/w32-tm-service.aspx
>>
>>
>> -troy
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Free, Bob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 8:32 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: RE: Which is the better way
>>
>> Still begs the same question, why use net time on anything newer than
> a wintendo? W2K's w32time works just fine. It was the first time we
> actually had a decent native time service with registry based
> configuration and a management interface. That said, regardless of its
> quirks, even in the NT era the old timeserv was a quantum leap above
net
> time when you didn't have AD's hierarchical structure  and kerberos
time
> requirements.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 5:28 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Which is the better way
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry to say this but I got use to it when doing Win 2000 machines.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 8:19 AM, Ken Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> ?!?
>>
>>
>>
>> Why would you use net time is a better question...
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, 27 August 2008 10:10 PM
>>
>>
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>
>> Subject: Re: Which is the better way
>>
>>
>>
>> Never mind just a differnet way to skin the cat.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 7:56 AM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> You don't use Net Time to do your synchronization?  Why not?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Ziots, Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>>        W32tm /config /syncfromflags:DOMHIER
>>
>>        W32tm /config /update
>>
>>        W32tm /resync /rediscover.
>>
>>
>>
>>        Z
>>
>>
>>
>>        Edward E. Ziots
>>
>>        Network Engineer
>>
>>        Lifespan Organization
>>
>>        MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
>>
>>        Phone: 401-639-3505
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>>        From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>        Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 7:52 AM
>>        To: NT System Admin Issues
>>        Subject: Which is the better way
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ME2
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>



--
ME2

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to