Re: [ntp:questions] ntpq -p show refid as .INIT. even my NTP Servers are synchronized properly.

2009-10-05 Thread Andhu
On Oct 5, 12:19 am, Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org wrote:
 On 2009-10-04, Andhu aravind.arju...@gmail.com wrote:

 [snip: time island with primary and secondary time servers]

  Problem:

  When i execute ntpq -p the output shows refid as .INIT. ?

 Where are you running this command?

 It may be that you are not allowing enough time to elapse after ntpd is
 started.

 For ntp-stable using ntpd's defaults a server which is using the
 Undisciplined Local Clock (127.127.1.x) as its time source will not be
 able to serve time to others until it has been running for approximately
 200 seconds (3 1/3 minutes). This time may be reduced to approximately
 50 seconds using the minpoll command.

  How to resolve this?

 Fix your configuration and/or allow ntpd to run for a long enough time
 before using 'ntpq -p'.

  Why it is showing?

 We won't be able to tell you that until we see a sample configuration
 for one of your servers and one of your clients.

  Tell me how much time it will take to synchronize to the secondary
  server when primary goes down?

 The client ntpd will keep the primary server as its sys_peer (in
 other words, will continue to be synced to the primary server) until
 that primary server becomes unreachable.

 It takes a maximum of 8 polls for a time source to become unreachable.

 For unicast (or client/server) associations, depending on the poll
 interval being used by the client ntpd it will take somewhere between
 8.5 minutes  and 2.27 hours for a remote time server to become
 unreachable.

 --
 Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org
 NTP Public Services Project -http://support.ntp.org/

hi,

When i execute ntpq -p the output shows refid as .INIT. ?

Where are you running this command?

I am  executing this command in NTP Server and in my NTP Clients.


It may be that you are not allowing enough time to elapse after ntpd
is
started.

So you mean to say that we need to execute the command ntpq -p after
the NTP server get stable?

As i mentioned it was in production and these NTP Servers were running
for very long time. And all my NTP Servers
are getting synchronized from the Primary NTP Server.

I found in some documents that this .INIT. is the kiss code error and
it means that my associaition server is not synchronized for the first
time.

For ntp-stable using ntpd's defaults a server which is using the
Undisciplined Local Clock (127.127.1.x) as its time source will not
be
able to serve time to others until it has been running for
approximately
200 seconds (3 1/3 minutes). This time may be reduced to
approximately
50 seconds using the minpoll command.

From the above you mean to say if the source is the Undisciplined
Local Clock (127.127.1.x) it wont serve time until it  has been
running for 3 1/3 minutes.

But my NTP Server is running for very long time. But still am getting
the refid as .INIT. when i execute ntpq -p command.

And regarding the time interval of ntpd client from changing the
synchronization from Primary to Secondary when the primary becaome
unreachable . As per you it will take maximum of 8 polls but it is
taking more than 1 hours to change it secondary NTP server if the
primary goes down.

with regards
A.Aravind

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Strange NTP problem on AMD Geode LX cards.

2009-10-05 Thread Frans Grotepass
On Saturday 03 October 2009 02:58:03 David Hawkins wrote:
 Hi
 I'm using a number of XTX form factor AMD Geode LX (500Mhz) cards at work.
 (Cannot get to news at work, and have left memory stick with details at
  work ! so apologies for missing info !)
 They are running Sues Linux from a read only flash drive, all identical
 clones other than host names and IP addresses.
 
 Most of the time ntp runs with no problems and will lock to a local server
 with less than 5ms offset, and the drift file comes out at between about
  -20 and -40.
 
 But now and again a system will not get a stable lock, and on investigation
 the drift file is at the maximum of -500.
 When I first encountered this I assumed it was a hardware problem with the
 processor card, just a one off, but now have seen this on around 10 systems
 out of 30 or so I have tested.
 When a system shows this fault, powering the unit on and off will almost
 always solve it, the unit synchronising to the server after a couple of
 hours with a drift file setting of -20 to -40 like the others.
 I'm more of a hardware engineer than software, but have now run out things
 to look at to solve this problem.
 
 I have considered / done the following
 
 * The drift file is stored in the ram drive /dev/shm so always starts at
 00.000 when the system is started.
 * On a system not locking stopping ntp and restarting having set the drift
 file to -28, results in the drift going back to -400 over a couple of
 hours - so not some odd start-up state that confuses the control loop.
 * The processor card uses a PCI clock generator capable of spread spectrum
 output, this is always enabled and not controllable from the BIOS - the
  chip has two settings off and on with a -0.5% spread. Have verified with a
  spectrum analyser that the cards with good lock and bad lock, have the
  spread spectrum option enabled.
 * The cards seem to be more lightly to exhibit the problem when they have
 been turned off for a day or so.
 * Power saving modes of the processor are enabled, but understand that the
 timing is done using the counter timer in the Geode companion chip that
  runs at a constant 14.13MHz regardless of the power state:- also as all
  running exactly the same code why would some have problems and not others
  ?
 
  Sorry rather random thoughts but I have now run out of things to look at,
 have you ever seen a problem like this and even better found a solution ?
 
 Dave

Dave, did you play around with adjtimex? I once had a machine who's internal 
clock was so horribly skewed that it would never sync. Tweaking the parms with 
adjtimex made the clock more stable and NTP could suddenly sync.

Best regards,

Frans
 
 
 ___
 questions mailing list
 questions@lists.ntp.org
 https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
 
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] ntpq -p show refid as .INIT. even my NTP Servers are synchronized properly.

2009-10-05 Thread David Lord
Andhu wrote:
 On Oct 5, 12:19 am, Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org wrote:
 On 2009-10-04, Andhu aravind.arju...@gmail.com wrote:

 [snip: time island with primary and secondary time servers]

 Problem:
 When i execute ntpq -p the output shows refid as .INIT. ?
 Where are you running this command?

 It may be that you are not allowing enough time to elapse after ntpd is
 started.

 For ntp-stable using ntpd's defaults a server which is using the
 Undisciplined Local Clock (127.127.1.x) as its time source will not be
 able to serve time to others until it has been running for approximately
 200 seconds (3 1/3 minutes). This time may be reduced to approximately
 50 seconds using the minpoll command.

 How to resolve this?
 Fix your configuration and/or allow ntpd to run for a long enough time
 before using 'ntpq -p'.

 Why it is showing?
 We won't be able to tell you that until we see a sample configuration
 for one of your servers and one of your clients.

 Tell me how much time it will take to synchronize to the secondary
 server when primary goes down?
 The client ntpd will keep the primary server as its sys_peer (in
 other words, will continue to be synced to the primary server) until
 that primary server becomes unreachable.

 It takes a maximum of 8 polls for a time source to become unreachable.

 For unicast (or client/server) associations, depending on the poll
 interval being used by the client ntpd it will take somewhere between
 8.5 minutes  and 2.27 hours for a remote time server to become
 unreachable.

 --
 Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org
 NTP Public Services Project -http://support.ntp.org/
 
 hi,
 
 When i execute ntpq -p the output shows refid as .INIT. ?
 
 Where are you running this command?
 
 I am  executing this command in NTP Server and in my NTP Clients.
 
 
 It may be that you are not allowing enough time to elapse after ntpd
 is
 started.
 
 So you mean to say that we need to execute the command ntpq -p after
 the NTP server get stable?
 
 As i mentioned it was in production and these NTP Servers were running
 for very long time. And all my NTP Servers
 are getting synchronized from the Primary NTP Server.
 
 I found in some documents that this .INIT. is the kiss code error and
 it means that my associaition server is not synchronized for the first
 time.
 
 For ntp-stable using ntpd's defaults a server which is using the
 Undisciplined Local Clock (127.127.1.x) as its time source will not
 be
 able to serve time to others until it has been running for
 approximately
 200 seconds (3 1/3 minutes). This time may be reduced to
 approximately
 50 seconds using the minpoll command.
 
 From the above you mean to say if the source is the Undisciplined
 Local Clock (127.127.1.x) it wont serve time until it  has been
 running for 3 1/3 minutes.
 
 But my NTP Server is running for very long time. But still am getting
 the refid as .INIT. when i execute ntpq -p command.
 
 And regarding the time interval of ntpd client from changing the
 synchronization from Primary to Secondary when the primary becaome
 unreachable . As per you it will take maximum of 8 polls but it is
 taking more than 1 hours to change it secondary NTP server if the
 primary goes down.
 
 with regards
 A.Aravind
 

As he said, please give cofiguration details, ntp.conf examples
from primary server, secondary server and client.

 From logs last month where I struggled to find a 4 day period
when I'd not lost internet connection there was at least one
outage of 6 hrs but ntpd hardly noticed (polls on servers are
up at 68m and 137m for selected sources).

servers here have
server 127.127.1.0
fudge 127.127.1.0 stratum 12

David

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Strange NTP problem on AMD Geode LX cards.

2009-10-05 Thread Maarten Wiltink
Unruh unruh-s...@physics.ubc.ca wrote in message
news:lv9ym.47716$ph1.37...@edtnps82...
 E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
n...@blacklist.griffin-technologies.invalid writes:
 Unruh wrote:

 It is an unshielded  efficient radiator, the motherboard.
  Unshielded because the manufacturer does not want to spend
   the money to shield it.

 Do you buy / use equipment that you have decided are the source
   of objectionable levels of EMI?

 I do not have the equipment to measure the radiation given off.
 The manufacturers do. If you tell me how I can get the information
 as to how much it emits, I will certainly include that in my decision
 process.

The motherboard that costs an unexplained ten dollars more than the
competition _may_ have spent it on shielding. Guess how many people
will buy it? Remember, by your own admission, _you_ _cannot tell_.

(Lying on the box? Who'd do such a horrible thing?)

Groetjes,
Maarten Wiltink


___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Strange NTP problem on AMD Geode LX cards.

2009-10-05 Thread Unruh
Maarten Wiltink maar...@kittensandcats.net writes:

Unruh unruh-s...@physics.ubc.ca wrote in message
news:lv9ym.47716$ph1.37...@edtnps82...
 E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
n...@blacklist.griffin-technologies.invalid writes:
 Unruh wrote:

 It is an unshielded  efficient radiator, the motherboard.
  Unshielded because the manufacturer does not want to spend
   the money to shield it.

 Do you buy / use equipment that you have decided are the source
   of objectionable levels of EMI?

 I do not have the equipment to measure the radiation given off.
 The manufacturers do. If you tell me how I can get the information
 as to how much it emits, I will certainly include that in my decision
 process.

The motherboard that costs an unexplained ten dollars more than the
competition _may_ have spent it on shielding. Guess how many people
will buy it? Remember, by your own admission, _you_ _cannot tell_.

(Lying on the box? Who'd do such a horrible thing?)

That is why one has regulations. 


Groetjes,
Maarten Wiltink


___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Strange NTP problem on AMD Geode LX cards.

2009-10-05 Thread Maarten Wiltink
Unruh unruh-s...@physics.ubc.ca wrote in message
news:_mmym.46645$db2.5...@edtnps83...
 Maarten Wiltink maar...@kittensandcats.net writes:
 Unruh unruh-s...@physics.ubc.ca wrote in message
 news:lv9ym.47716$ph1.37...@edtnps82...
 E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
 n...@blacklist.griffin-technologies.invalid writes:
 Unruh wrote:

 It is an unshielded  efficient radiator, the motherboard.
  Unshielded because the manufacturer does not want to spend
   the money to shield it.

 Do you buy / use equipment that you have decided are the source
   of objectionable levels of EMI?

 I do not have the equipment to measure the radiation given off.
 The manufacturers do. If you tell me how I can get the information
 as to how much it emits, I will certainly include that in my
 decision process.

 The motherboard that costs an unexplained ten dollars more than the
 competition _may_ have spent it on shielding. Guess how many people
 will buy it? Remember, by your own admission, _you_ _cannot tell_.

 (Lying on the box? Who'd do such a horrible thing?)

 That is why one has regulations.

Indeed. Just imagine the radio interference that e.g. motherboards
might cause if there were no rules limiting it.

(As another, very practical, example of well-intentioned regulations,
there is the 'CE' mark featured on products that should be safe to
use. There is a test to determine if your product may carry it.

OR - you can simply slap it on and wait to be challenged. Then, if
the challenger proves you don't deserve the mark, you have to take
it off. A procedure officially sanctioned as 'self-declaration'.)

Tebrgwrf,
Maarten Wiltink


___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Strange NTP problem on AMD Geode LX cards.

2009-10-05 Thread John Hasler
Maarten Wiltink writes:
 As another, very practical, example of well-intentioned regulations,
 there is the 'CE' mark featured on products that should be safe to
 use. There is a test to determine if your product may carry it.

 OR - you can simply slap it on and wait to be challenged. Then, if
 the challenger proves you don't deserve the mark, you have to take
 it off. A procedure officially sanctioned as 'self-declaration'.

Do that with the UL mark in the USA and you will be the defendant is a
series of painful and expensive lawsuits.  Plus bad publicity.  Plus
possible criminal prosecution for fraud.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


[ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Dew Wrobel
I have to setup a couple of servers that will get their time from the
internet.

I have following the steps listed at http://www.pool.ntp.org/

The following is the contents of ntp.conf:

driftfile /drift/ntp.drift
server 0.us.pool.ntp.org
server 1.us.pool.ntp.org
server 2.us.pool.ntp.org
server 3.us.pool.ntp.org

When I start NTP, the start up hands with ntpdate trying to get the
time from the servers.  I have verified that the server names do
verify in DNS.

Do I need to pick a different set of servers?  Any idea/suggestions
would be greatly appreciatd.

Thanks

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Jan Ceuleers
Dew Wrobel wrote:
 I have to setup a couple of servers that will get their time from the
 internet.
[...]
 When I start NTP, the start up hands with ntpdate trying to get the
 time from the servers.  I have verified that the server names do
 verify in DNS.
 
 Do I need to pick a different set of servers?  Any idea/suggestions
 would be greatly appreciatd.

Dew,

A few questions to help figure out what is going on.

What error messages, if any, are emitted? How do you determine that it isn't 
working?

Can you manually execute ntpdate pool.ntp.org ?

If ntpdate succeeds where ntpd itself fails, the culprit is most likely your 
firewall configuration. You need to permit both inbound and outbound traffic on 
UDP port 123.

If you conclude that things aren't working from ntpq -p, have you waited long 
enough for ntpd to achieve synchronisation? Without iburst on your server lines 
it can take quite a while for sync to be acquired.

Cheers, Jan

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Steve Kostecke
On 2009-10-05, Dew Wrobel drew.wro...@gmail.com wrote:

 When I start NTP, the start up hands with ntpdate trying to get the
 time from the servers.  I have verified that the server names do
 verify in DNS.

Please run 'ntpdate -q pool.ntp.org' _and_ 'ntpdate -u pool.ntp.org' on
the command-line and post the results here.

You may need to open your firewall to allow return packets from the
remote time servers on port 123/UDP.

-- 
Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org
NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Unruh
Dew Wrobel drew.wro...@gmail.com writes:

I have to setup a couple of servers that will get their time from the
internet.

I have following the steps listed at http://www.pool.ntp.org/

The following is the contents of ntp.conf:

driftfile /drift/ntp.drift
server 0.us.pool.ntp.org
server 1.us.pool.ntp.org
server 2.us.pool.ntp.org
server 3.us.pool.ntp.org

When I start NTP, the start up hands with ntpdate trying to get the

start up hands-- this means what?

And you should not start with ntpdate. ntpd -g does essentially the same
thing. 


time from the servers.  I have verified that the server names do
verify in DNS.

No. Each time they are called via dns you get a different IP address. It
is a huge round robin.



Do I need to pick a different set of servers?  Any idea/suggestions
would be greatly appreciatd.

What is the problem?



Thanks

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Richard B. Gilbert
Dew Wrobel wrote:
 I have to setup a couple of servers that will get their time from the
 internet.
 
 I have following the steps listed at http://www.pool.ntp.org/
 
 The following is the contents of ntp.conf:
 
 driftfile /drift/ntp.drift
 server 0.us.pool.ntp.org
 server 1.us.pool.ntp.org
 server 2.us.pool.ntp.org
 server 3.us.pool.ntp.org
 
 When I start NTP, the start up hands with ntpdate trying to get the
 time from the servers.  I have verified that the server names do
 verify in DNS.
 
 Do I need to pick a different set of servers?  Any idea/suggestions
 would be greatly appreciatd.
 
 Thanks

Ntpdate is deprecated.  Perhaps you should eliminate ntpdate and start 
ntpd with the -g option.  This option tells ntpd to find out what time 
it is by querying the servers and then setting that time.

The results should be similar either way but ntpd -g is the documented 
and supported way to set the time at startup.

If you add iburst to each server line in your ntp.conf you should get 
a faster startup.  Iburst will cause ntpd to send an initial burst of 
eight requests at two second intervals.  The replies fill the filter 
pipeline and should get you synchronized a little faster.

Ntpd will need about ten hours to achieve the accuracy it's capable of. 
  Initially you should have a reasonable approximation of the correct 
time; e.g. within, say, 100 milliseconds.   The longer it runs the 
better the time will get.

If you can possibly avoid rebooting and/or restarting NTPD you will get 
much better time.

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Dew Wrobel
On Oct 5, 2:17 pm, Richard B. Gilbert rgilber...@comcast.net
wrote:
 Dew Wrobel wrote:
  I have to setup a couple of servers that will get their time from the
  internet.

  I have following the steps listed athttp://www.pool.ntp.org/

  The following is the contents of ntp.conf:

  driftfile /drift/ntp.drift
  server 0.us.pool.ntp.org
  server 1.us.pool.ntp.org
  server 2.us.pool.ntp.org
  server 3.us.pool.ntp.org

  When I start NTP, the start up hands with ntpdate trying to get the
  time from the servers.  I have verified that the server names do
  verify in DNS.

  Do I need to pick a different set of servers?  Any idea/suggestions
  would be greatly appreciatd.

  Thanks

 Ntpdate is deprecated.  Perhaps you should eliminate ntpdate and start
 ntpd with the -g option.  This option tells ntpd to find out what time
 it is by querying the servers and then setting that time.

 The results should be similar either way but ntpd -g is the documented
 and supported way to set the time at startup.

 If you add iburst to each server line in your ntp.conf you should get
 a faster startup.  Iburst will cause ntpd to send an initial burst of
 eight requests at two second intervals.  The replies fill the filter
 pipeline and should get you synchronized a little faster.

 Ntpd will need about ten hours to achieve the accuracy it's capable of.
   Initially you should have a reasonable approximation of the correct
 time; e.g. within, say, 100 milliseconds.   The longer it runs the
 better the time will get.

 If you can possibly avoid rebooting and/or restarting NTPD you will get
 much better time.

The call to ntpdate is part of the RC script that comes with the OS.
I checked an option under /etc/sysconfig/ntp to not call ntpdate on
start.

I found a web page about debugging NTP and came across running ntpq
with various parameters.  here is the output from that.
I can't help and wondering, based on the as option, it sounds that the
time servers being used are reject.

Aside from what servers I'm using, I don't have to do anything else,
do I?

ntpq pe
 remote   refid  st t when poll reach   delay
offset  jitter
==
 ntp1.truetime.c .INIT.  16 u-   6400.000
0.000   0.001
 zinc.ops.tns.it .INIT.  16 u-   6400.000
0.000   0.001
 ntp2.usno.navy. .INIT.  16 u-   6400.000
0.000   0.001
ntpq as

ind assID status  conf reach auth condition  last_event cnt
===
  1 53536  8000   yes   yes  nonereject
  2 53537  8000   yes   yes  nonereject
  3 53538  8000   yes   yes  nonereject
ntpq rv 53536
assID=53536 status=8000 unreach, conf, no events,
srcadr=ntp1.truetime.com, srcport=123, dstadr=172.21.100.26,
dstport=123, leap=11, stratum=16, precision=-20, rootdelay=0.000,
rootdispersion=0.000, refid=INIT, reach=000, unreach=0, hmode=3,
pmode=0, hpoll=6, ppoll=10, flash=00 ok, keyid=0, ttl=0, offset=0.000,
delay=0.000, dispersion=16000.000, jitter=0.001,
reftime=.  Thu, Feb  7 2036  1:28:16.000,
org=.  Thu, Feb  7 2036  1:28:16.000,
rec=.  Thu, Feb  7 2036  1:28:16.000,
xmt=.  Thu, Feb  7 2036  1:28:16.000,
filtdelay= 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.00
0.00,
filtoffset=0.000.000.000.000.000.000.00
0.00,
filtdisp=   16000.0 16000.0 16000.0 16000.0 16000.0 16000.0 16000.0
16000.0
ntpq

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread David J Taylor
Unruh  wrote in message news:jkqym.46679$db2.37...@edtnps83...
 Dew Wrobel  writes:
[]
When I start NTP, the start up hands with ntpdate trying to get the
 
 start up hands-- this means what?

My guess was start up hangs.

David 

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Dew Wrobel
On Oct 5, 3:40 pm, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.not-this-
part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid wrote:
 Dew Wrobel  wrote in message

 news:2b93fbec-9896-4eaf-a2b8-d8379be27...@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
 []

  ntpq pe
      remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay
  offset  jitter
  ==
  ntp1.truetime.c .INIT.          16 u    -   64    0    0.000
  0.000   0.001
  zinc.ops.tns.it .INIT.          16 u    -   64    0    0.000
  0.000   0.001
  ntp2.usno.navy. .INIT.          16 u    -   64    0    0.000
  0.000   0.001

 A reach of 0 means you aren't contacting the servers.

 Check your firewall.

 Cheers,
 David

I do not have the firewall enabled on the server.  Nor is there one
between me and the internet.

Alright, I'm a bit confused ( doesnt' take much ).

I ran the following tcpdump command, to verify that NTP is making
attempts out of the server

tcpdump port 123

I logged into the server again via another session and restarted NTP.

No output was generated from the tcpdump command.

Either I didn't run the tcpdump command with the correct options OR
NTP requests are not leaving the server at all.  I do not have the
firewall running, it's currently disabled.

Should I try to reboot the server and try again?

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread David J Taylor
Dew Wrobel  wrote in message 
news:2b93fbec-9896-4eaf-a2b8-d8379be27...@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
[]
 ntpq pe
 remote   refid  st t when poll reach   delay
 offset  jitter
 ==
 ntp1.truetime.c .INIT.  16 u-   6400.000
 0.000   0.001
 zinc.ops.tns.it .INIT.  16 u-   6400.000
 0.000   0.001
 ntp2.usno.navy. .INIT.  16 u-   6400.000
 0.000   0.001

A reach of 0 means you aren't contacting the servers.

Check your firewall.

Cheers,
David 

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Steve Kostecke
On 2009-10-05, Dew Wrobel drew.wro...@gmail.com wrote:

 ntpq pe
  remote   refid  st t when poll reach  delay offset  jitter

  ntp1.truetime.c .INIT.  16 u-   640   0.000 0.000   0.001
  zinc.ops.tns.it .INIT.  16 u-   640   0.000 0.000   0.001
  ntp2.usno.navy. .INIT.  16 u-   640   0.000 0.000   0.001

Are you using any restrict lines in your ntp.conf? If so, what are they?

-- 
Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org
NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Strange NTP problem on AMD Geode LX cards.

2009-10-05 Thread Brian Utterback
Rob wrote:

 I am talking about problems at startup time.  Even when you keep NTPD
 running 24x7 you have to start it at some time.  That is not a smooth
 operation.  But that problem is denied or ignored.

I believe that Dr. Mills position is that the startup period is 
relatively short and it wasn't worth it (to him at least) to spend a 
lot of time tracking down what he viewed as transients.

This has been reported many times in the newsgroup, and I know of some 
cases where it was reported via bugzilla. One case of low hanging 
fruit is that fact that NTP sets the drift frequency at startup and 
then if iburst is not in use, will correct the offset 5 minutes later. 
This offset correction is interpreted by the kernel reference code as 
a drift that has occurred since the frequency was set (i.e. 5 minutes) 
and then adjusts the frequency incrementally, sometimes putting the 
frequency at a drastically incorrect value, depending on the initial 
offset. What it should do is set the initial frequency and then set it 
again immediately after the first offset correction. Real frequency 
corrections should not occur until after the first offset correction. 
This is bug 1044

Brian Utterback

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Dew Wrobel
On Oct 5, 3:49 pm, Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org wrote:
 On 2009-10-05, Dew Wrobel drew.wro...@gmail.com wrote:

  ntpq pe
       remote       refid  st t when poll reach  delay offset  jitter
 
   ntp1.truetime.c .INIT.  16 u    -   64    0   0.000 0.000   0.001
   zinc.ops.tns.it .INIT.  16 u    -   64    0   0.000 0.000   0.001
   ntp2.usno.navy. .INIT.  16 u    -   64    0   0.000 0.000   0.001

 Are you using any restrict lines in your ntp.conf? If so, what are they?

 --
 Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org
 NTP Public Services Project -http://support.ntp.org/

Not using any.

Here is the /etc/ntp.conf being used:

driftfile /drift/ntp.drift

server 216.210.169.40 iburst
server 128.118.46.3 iburst
server 192.5.41.209 iburst

I have the IP-addresses cause I wanted to rule out DNS resolution
being a problem.

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread David Lord
Dew Wrobel wrote:
 On Oct 5, 3:49 pm, Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org wrote:
 On 2009-10-05, Dew Wrobel drew.wro...@gmail.com wrote:

 ntpq pe
  remote   refid  st t when poll reach  delay offset  jitter
 
  ntp1.truetime.c .INIT.  16 u-   640   0.000 0.000   0.001
  zinc.ops.tns.it .INIT.  16 u-   640   0.000 0.000   0.001
  ntp2.usno.navy. .INIT.  16 u-   640   0.000 0.000   0.001
 Are you using any restrict lines in your ntp.conf? If so, what are they?

 --
 Steve Kostecke koste...@ntp.org
 NTP Public Services Project -http://support.ntp.org/
 
 Not using any.
 
 Here is the /etc/ntp.conf being used:
 
 driftfile /drift/ntp.drift
 
 server 216.210.169.40 iburst
 server 128.118.46.3 iburst
 server 192.5.41.209 iburst
 
 I have the IP-addresses cause I wanted to rule out DNS resolution
 being a problem.

What O/S?

At least on BSD and Linux I've used, there is output to
/var/log/messages if ntpd is having a problem. It's not a
fatal problem otherwise ntpd would fail to start.

I'm assuming you can make other external connections ok
www, ftp etc?

There are some tools with ntpd you can use, ntptrace etc.
Does that work, can you traceroute to a remote server?

David

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


Re: [ntp:questions] Unable to get time from the internet using NTP

2009-10-05 Thread Richard B. Gilbert
Dew Wrobel wrote:
 On Oct 5, 2:17 pm, Richard B. Gilbert rgilber...@comcast.net
 wrote:
 Dew Wrobel wrote:
 I have to setup a couple of servers that will get their time from the
 internet.
 I have following the steps listed athttp://www.pool.ntp.org/
 The following is the contents of ntp.conf:
 driftfile /drift/ntp.drift
 server 0.us.pool.ntp.org
 server 1.us.pool.ntp.org
 server 2.us.pool.ntp.org
 server 3.us.pool.ntp.org
 When I start NTP, the start up hands with ntpdate trying to get the
 time from the servers.  I have verified that the server names do
 verify in DNS.
 Do I need to pick a different set of servers?  Any idea/suggestions
 would be greatly appreciatd.
 Thanks
 Ntpdate is deprecated.  Perhaps you should eliminate ntpdate and start
 ntpd with the -g option.  This option tells ntpd to find out what time
 it is by querying the servers and then setting that time.

 The results should be similar either way but ntpd -g is the documented
 and supported way to set the time at startup.

 If you add iburst to each server line in your ntp.conf you should get
 a faster startup.  Iburst will cause ntpd to send an initial burst of
 eight requests at two second intervals.  The replies fill the filter
 pipeline and should get you synchronized a little faster.

 Ntpd will need about ten hours to achieve the accuracy it's capable of.
   Initially you should have a reasonable approximation of the correct
 time; e.g. within, say, 100 milliseconds.   The longer it runs the
 better the time will get.

 If you can possibly avoid rebooting and/or restarting NTPD you will get
 much better time.
 
 The call to ntpdate is part of the RC script that comes with the OS.
 I checked an option under /etc/sysconfig/ntp to not call ntpdate on
 start.

Check the version of the NTPD you have.  A lot of companies ship NTP 
Version 3.x while NTP is now at V4.2 (I think!).
 
 I found a web page about debugging NTP and came across running ntpq
 with various parameters.  here is the output from that.
 I can't help and wondering, based on the as option, it sounds that the
 time servers being used are reject.
 
 Aside from what servers I'm using, I don't have to do anything else,
 do I?
 
 ntpq pe
  remote   refid  st t when poll reach   delay
 offset  jitter
 ==
  ntp1.truetime.c .INIT.  16 u-   6400.000
 0.000   0.001
  zinc.ops.tns.it .INIT.  16 u-   6400.000
 0.000   0.001
  ntp2.usno.navy. .INIT.  16 u-   6400.000
 0.000   0.001
 ntpq as

The reach field says you are not getting replies from any of your 
chosen servers!  The likeliest reasons for that is that are that:
1. Your requests are not reaching the servers
2. The replies to your requests are not reaching you.
3. You didn't wait long enough after starting NTPD before running NTPQ.

Check with your network people.  NTP uses port 123 which is a privileged 
port.  Your firewall may be blocking it.  You need to allow both 
incoming and outgoing traffic on port 123.

In your NTP.CONF file you can add the keyword IBURST to each of your 
server statements.  This will cause the first eight requests to be sent 
at intervals of two seconds.  Subsequent packets will be sent a rates 
ranging from 64 seconds to 1024 seconds; the rates are determined by 
NTPD and will be adjusted as necessary from time to time!

___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions