REMO,
Any discrepancy between the NTPv3 specification (rfc1305) and the
implementation (xntpd) must be accepted as-is and no repairs are
anticipated. The developer corps does not maintain the NTPv3
specification or implementation.
You question as it applies to the NTPv4 implementation is addressed at
the NTP project page www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp.html. See the
architecture briefing and note the error budget and sanity checks.
Dave
Remo wrote:
After going down the rabbit hole, I learnt that w32time is very poor.
And now my problem jots down to a single question: In versions of
xntp, the sanity checks of the clock-selection procedure shows that the
(peer->dispersion is compared with NTP_MAXDISTANCE). But the RFC
suggests of using peer->synchdistance. Why is this =><= ?? I found
that peer->dispersion is a subset in composing
peer->synchdistance...but using synchdistance according to RFC could
make the clock selection more strict right ?
Please correct me if I am wrong and let me know why there is a
difference in implementing. I could not find the BugID that made this
:o(
Thanks for your time
~REMO
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
