On 2009-03-19, Rob <[email protected]> wrote: > But [the Microsoft implementation of] NTP [for Windows] is perfectly > capable of doing [something]. > > I am not trying to convince people to use Windows or the w32time > service, but I disagree with the opinion that it does not work, uses > sntp only, or leads to times that are seconds off the mark. > > It seems like many here base their opinion on Windows NT and think > that Microsoft never improves anything. And they also think that > everyone asking a question about the NTP protocol
Most questions from "visitors" to this news-group tend to be about using NTP software rather than the actual NTP protocol. The regular participants, on the other hand, discuss the NTP protocol in the context of The NTP Reference Implementation from www.ntp.org / UDEL. > must first be converted to the software of their choice. That's our choice. Not yours. > That does not belong in a .protocols group, IMHO. This news-group has, historically, been focused on The NTP Reference Implementation from www.ntp.org / UDEL. So it is natural that vast majority of the participants in this news-group use and recommend The NTP Reference Implementation. You are free to participate and reccomend solutions which are acceptable in your world view. However you have no business telling us that we need to change our focus. -- Steve Kostecke <[email protected]> NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/ _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
