David Woolley wrote: > Heiko Gerstung wrote: > >> time has passed without the signal coming back. This results in the >> time server replying with stratum 12 (for example) after a while and >> ensures that everybody has the same time, although it might be wrong. >> If a user does not want that, they can simply set the local clock >> stratum to 15 and the server will not be accepted anymore. >> >> Can you please let me know why you consider this a "bad implementation"? > > > Because the protocol fails to signal the loss of the time source > properly when one has a local clock configured. As such, I believe that > enabling a local clock should always be an opt in choice. Basically, > when it falls back to the local clock, root dispersion goes to zero, > when the true situation is that root dispersion is growing without bound. > > Things can go seriously wrong if there is more than one local clock > source on a network, as it becomes possible for them to outvote the real > time.
Local clock IS an opt in choice. If you don't configure it, it doesn't serve time. Stratum is taken into account in selecting a time source. I can't swear to it but I'd be surprised if three stratum 10 servers could out vote one stratum 2 server. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
