In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Spoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >I would have thought that short polling intervals are always better, >ignoring traffic overhead issues: > >If the current "correct" interval should have been e.g. 64 seconds >instead of 16 seconds, just ignore 3 out of 4 replies. > >Where is the flaw in my logic?
I believe the other respondents didn't actually read what you wrote, or perhaps failed to register what was a pretty bizarre idea... The flaw isn't with your logic but with your common sense, e.g. the idea that you could "ignore traffic overhead issues" - an implementation that sent 3 out 4 requests only to throw away the replies should and would be considered totally unacceptable. --Per Hedeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
