On 2008-07-01, kiran shirol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>"Frank Kardel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>
>> [---=| TOFU protection by t-prot: 82 lines snipped |=---]
>
> That would be good so that the user need not have to worry about any
> changes in the IP addresses in future. I read some other mail thread
> on the forum and the solution suggested was to restart NTP. But that
> approach needs user/admin intervention and thus not a good thing to
> do.

Restarting ntpd in response to system events such as DHCP acquiring a
new address is not that difficult on a useful OS. So that's a rather
weak argument.

Although you might be tempted to make the case restarts are undesireable
because that ntpd loses state information when restarted, it should be
pointed out that systems which are subject to interface changes are
usally leaf-nodes and a definitely not high quality time servers. Plus
the warm restart of a properly configured ntpd (i.e. correct ntp.conf,
valid drift.file) takes a mere ~15-20 seconds.

-- 
Steve Kostecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/

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

Reply via email to