Kay Hayen wrote: > We could alternatively want to change ntpd in a way that the iburst lasts > until a sufficient synchronization was achieved. But it appears to be more > simply to delay the iburst by delaying the ntpd start until sufficient > conditions are met. >
That's not going to be desirable. Although you might only use it on your internal severs, it will soon get round on the grapevine that it is a good thing to do, which will result in servers that are down or denied to the client, or the networks of ex-servers getting bombarded with large numbers of requests, whereas I believe the standard behaviour is to back off under those circumstances. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
