Charles Swiger writes: > On Apr 7, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Harlan Stenn <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why would you not want to iburst all of the servers? > > iburst helps to populate the reachability field quickly. > That reduces the interval it takes for an NTP server to move from: > > associd=0 status=c012 leap_alarm, sync_unspec, 1 event, freq_set => > associd=0 status=0615 leap_none, sync_ntp, 1 event, clock_sync > > ...which is the transition needed before clients of the server will > trust it for time.
Yes. > However, the transition doesn't happen any faster if you only use one > server with iburst, or with all of the server lines. The data I've > seen doesn't show any significant differences to the local clock > variables like frequency, sys_jitter, clk_jitter. That's true. And if the one machine you choose for iburst happens to be down, it takes a long time to sync up. This is why we recommend using iburst on all server lines - it quickly brings each server "into the fold". H _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
