On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:44:54 +0000 (UTC), William Unruh <[email protected]> wrote:
>Why should it not continue to poll it? It should be pruned as a bad >ticker by the ntpd algorihm, and thus not affect the clock discipline. >But that offset might be just a temporary abberation and that source >come back on sync in a few hours or days. Why throw it away. And as has >been mentioned, apparently the pool servers are monitored and if a >source is persistantly bad, it will be removed from the pool. >Ie, what is the harm in continuing to poll it? To prune or not to prune, that is the question. If the design of the pool command is that ntpd should drop a server which is obviously wrong then it should drop it and the question is why didn't that happen in my case. It's possible that my understanding of the pool command is faulty and that ntpd behaved as designed. If that is so I should like to be told that I am mistaken. The design of the pool command is something you'll have to discuss with others. -- Roger _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
