Dave Hart wrote:

> distrusted by downstream ntpds.  Assuming no orphan-mode
> configuration, it is not clear to me if the stratum is supposed to go
> the maximum and the synchronization (leap bits) to 11, or if they are
> expected to remain at the last values with only the root dispersion to
> indicate the problem.
> 

This has been discussed before. With ntpd, once an association gets
out of leap-11, it never goes back. That is not true of xntpd.

> I pick a nit about calling a ntpd unsynchronized as soon as its
> sources are severed.  A "freewheeling" ntpd simply maintaining the
> last known frequency compensation is initially still a good source of
> time, decreasingly so over time.  NTP 4 maintains an error budget
> along those lines, resulting in the root dispersion value that's part
> of every NTP response.

Which is exactly the reason an association never goes
"unsynchronized". I think the key milestones are:

1. Reach goes to 0.
2. Root dispersion goes to greater than 1 second.
3. Ref time goes to greater than one day.

As I recall, these milestones can trigger different behaviors, but I
don't remember just what they are.

_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
          • ... E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
          • ... michael . buetow
          • ... unruh
          • ... michael . buetow
          • ... Brian Utterback
          • ... Michael Butow
          • ... unruh
          • ... Michael Butow
          • ... E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
          • ... michael . buetow
      • Re: [... Brian Utterback
        • R... michael . buetow
  • Re: [ntp:quest... Richard B. Gilbert

Reply via email to