In article <cambsiyafdpaprwslha07ccui0qbdxuldqjn76vtyy37sqsp...@mail.gmail.com>, [email protected] says... > > On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:30 AM, DaveB <[email protected]> wrote: > > pi@raspberrypi:~$ ntpq -p > > remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter > > ======================================================================== > > *192.168.42.24 .GPS. 1 u 362 1024 377 0.563 0.669 0.284 > > time.xilo.net 82.219.4.30 3 - 5h 1024 0 21.571 13.885 0.000 > > dns0.rmplc.co 195.66.241.3 2 - 5h 1024 0 2019.75 -1000.8 0.000 > > > > If those delay/offset and jitter figures are in milli seconds (?) could > > that be down to the USB hosted LAN port on the Pi? The same figures for > > the BSD box at 192.168.42.24 are 0.000 0.004 and 0.002 respectively, I > > just remoted into that and checked. > > Yes, having your network behind a USB adapter is going to degrade > performance compared to a PCI-connected NIC. A half-millisecond delay > is quite high for 100Mbit LAN. Offset and jitter in the same range > are to be expected. > > The output of: > > ntpq -c "rv 0 version precision" > > would shed a bit more light on which ntpd version and the time to read > the clock on that system. > > Cheers, > Dave Hart
As requested.. pi@raspberrypi:~$ ntpq -c "rv 0 version precision" version="ntpd [email protected] Sun Oct 17 13:24:55 UTC 2010 (1)" That's all the output it gave. And the latest stat's (The other listed servers are still ignored or are unreachable) after several days left to do it's thing. pi@raspberrypi:~$ ntpq -p remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter ======================================================================== *192.168.42.24 .GPS. 1 u 491 512 377 0.559 -0.148 0.102 So by my understanding so far, that would agree with the expected behaviour of a USB based LAN adapter for this sort of use. Regards. Dave B. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
