Tom Smith wrote: > > In any case, the local clock should be declared as a "server" and not a > "peer". >
Thanks for all the replies so far all. I spoke to my senior engineer and asked why we had the current configuration. He said that he wanted the servers to stay in sync and acknowledged that the time would float (his main point was to keep them in sync). Our network/server/system configuration is built to provide redundancy as much as possible. According to the man pages peer has the following description: "This command specifies that the local server is to operate in "symmetric active" mode with the remote server host_address. In this mode,the local server can be synchronized to the remote server and, in addition, the remote server can be synchronized by the local server. This is useful in a network of servers where, depending on various failure scenarios, either the local or remote server host may be the better source of time" To my understanding, with our current setup, when terrance starts xntpd it checks its peers for their times. Then it changes its time to match it (please correct me if I am wrong). Does it check both peers?(in our current setup with both phillip and 127.127.1.1 as peers) In the setup below, when terrance starts xntpd, it checks the server (its local clock) and then changes its time to meet it (I assume). Does it then check phillip's time? What does it do if phillips time is different? Terrance: peer phillip server 127.127.1.1 and phillip: peer terrance peer 127.127.1.1 _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
