Raphae wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:41:10 GMT, Tom Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Yes. "ntpdate -q [server]" is a better test.


Here is the result of my running that command:

$ ntpdate -q pool.ntp.org
server 130.236.254.106, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 194.146.227.112, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 66.17.252.26, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 66.187.233.4, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 64.172.230.138, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 85.130.119.198, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 131.211.80.155, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 195.197.87.213, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 207.145.113.114, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 213.240.180.155, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 217.71.122.144, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
server 217.125.14.244, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
13 Dec 14:19:30 ntpdate[5334]: no server suitable for synchronization
found

I am in Silicon Valley, California.  I would assume that there are
some suitable servers in my immediate vicinity.


Maybe something has changed in the last day, but each of those is
just fine from Massachusetts:

>ntpq -pn
     remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
=============================================================================
   .
   .
   .
+130.236.254.106 130.236.254.45   4 u   28   64    7  129.488  -28.314  25.32
+194.146.227.112 131.188.3.220    2 u   30   64    7  102.849  -26.222  28.22
+66.17.252.26    204.123.2.5      2 u   30   64    5   51.981  -26.551  29.56
+64.172.230.138  164.67.62.194    2 u   27   64    7   94.661  -21.929  30.27
+85.130.119.198  193.79.237.14    2 u   26   64    7  168.206  -34.966  34.76
+131.211.80.155  PPS(0)           2 u   24   64    7  119.127  -13.553  28.77
+195.197.87.213  195.197.174.38   3 u   26   64    7  137.482  -31.652  33.26
+207.145.113.114 .GPS.            1 u   21   64    7   93.903  -21.734  24.54
+213.240.180.155 192.53.103.104   2 u   20   64    7  134.128  -23.728  23.60
+217.71.122.144  212.251.14.84    3 u   23   64    7  114.970  -34.111  22.42
+217.125.14.244  131.188.3.221    3 u   18   64    7  178.605  -25.047  21.96

-Tom

_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions

Reply via email to