"Alexandre Carrausse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] > On serverA, I am thinking about having the following conf > > peer serverB > peer serverC > peer serverD > peer serverE > > and so on for BCDE. > > Does this make sense?
Probably not. Peering does not in any way average the time from several servers. It just creates an association that may work either way (but not both). It's useful when both servers have (disjoint) references, and may independently lose their connection with those. Then either server can fall back on the other. If both servers have the same sources, you gain nothing. If you have only one source, just build a simple tree. Doing better requires rather careful fault scenario analysis. Groetjes, Maarten Wiltink _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
