[time-nuts] time.windows.com statistics
On the subject of time.windows.com, it is usually up but it seems to be a pretty cruddy source of NTP time. The actual source is somewhere in the Akamai cloud (so even if it resolves to the same numeric address twice, tha Akamai cloud may in fact be farming it out to geographically different machines) and I often find responses from time.windows.com to be all over the map, with a scatter of 100 milliseconds or more and often timing out, making time.windows.com one of the cruddyist NTP servers out there. Wonder out loud if using NTP server in a load-distributing cloud will just intrinsically be randomly cruddy, or if this is somehow engineering a source which is often good enough for SNTP users but obviously inappropriate for NTP to prevent extra load from non-windows users. Tim N3QE On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 5:37 AM, Esa Heikkinen tn1...@nic.fi wrote: Hi! At first, Windows XP supports SNTP protocol (so it can be synchronized with NTP server, but not with millisecond grade accuracy) and it uses time.windows.com as default server. Maybe Microsoft is closed that server or something, if it doesn't work anymore. However it's easy to change the NTP server, like Ed Palmer alrady described. It's also possible to use local NTP server, I use Symmetricom/Datum TymServe 2100 to synchronize the system cloks for all Windows computers. Works fine and does not need connection outside local network. Any Windows computer can also act as NTP server, if millisecond grade time is not needed. Registry change is needed to enable the Windows NTP server, Google if you want to do this. In addition, the system running as NTP server must also have working NTP client configuration so that it syncrhonizes itself. But remember, integrated Windows NTP is not very accurate, the time may have even more than ten seconds offsets. You do not want to have your XP box connected to the internet at all. This is not something that can be dealt with by any anti-virus software you are running. I even have Windows 2000 computer having 24/7 internet connection. This is a server computer running 24/7, doing certain tasks. Windows 2000 support is stopped many years ago and also there's not even anti-virus software compatible with Windows 2000 anymore. Sounds dangerous? Not necessary - there has not been any trouble ever... The secret is that this (and all other computers) are behind NAT firewall so there's no direct access to this (or other) Windows computers. Second thing is (maybe most important), that this computer is NOT used for any web browsing or e-mails (which are most common way to infect any unprotected computer). By the way, XP support is not fully stopped yet, there's still monthly malware removal updates coming. Last one happened just few days ago. We still use XP for work (with anti-virus software of course) and there's never been any problems with it. Any suspicious traffic from local network to the Internet will be noticed by network monitoring, but there's haven't been any. XP is safe, if it's behing network firewall. One easy trick to keep any Windows computer safe is to use Jotti's Malware Scan service before running any new .exe files downloaded from Internet: http://virusscan.jotti.org/ This is an easy-to use online service, where you can send files for scanning. It uses more than 20 anti-virus tools to scan the file and reports the results from each tool. If the file is infected, there will be many alerts, even when the anti-virus software installed in own computer doesn't give any alert. Connecting any Windows computer directly to the Internet (without NAT or nework firewall) or DMZ is not recommended at all, even if it has most recent Windows version. There will be always new and undetected vulnerabilities. That's the reason why the Windows updates exists. -- 73s! Esa OH4KJU ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/ mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] time.windows.com statistics
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Tim Shoppa tsho...@gmail.com wrote: Wonder out loud if using NTP server in a load-distributing cloud will just intrinsically be randomly cruddy, or if this is somehow engineering a source which is often good enough for SNTP users but obviously inappropriate for NTP to prevent extra load from non-windows users. Pool servers seem to work well. But they are randomly assigned only once. Once a connection is made to a pool server it remains connected to the same server for the duration. Best practice is to use about five pool servers and let NTP sort out which are best. Even if using a GPS you should still configure about five pool servers. A load distributed load cloud where each data packet goes to a different server just plan would not work for NTP. If you look at the clock selection algorithm the servers would all be rejected and NTP would likely fall back to the PC's internal clock as the best source. NTP's design depends on network path between any two NTP servers remaining mostly constant or at least changing slowly. Load sharing would kill that assumption. -- Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] time.windows.com statistics
But a perfectly reasonable source of time for SNTP where you just slam the clock, rather than NTP where you're figuring out drift... -- Kenton A. Hoover kenton . nemersonhoover org +1 415 830 5843 On 14 July 2014 at 05.:23.14, Tim Shoppa (tsho...@gmail.com) wrote: On the subject of time.windows.com, it is usually up but it seems to be a pretty cruddy source of NTP time. The actual source is somewhere in the Akamai cloud (so even if it resolves to the same numeric address twice, tha Akamai cloud may in fact be farming it out to geographically different machines) and I often find responses from time.windows.com to be all over the map, with a scatter of 100 milliseconds or more and often timing out, making time.windows.com one of the cruddyist NTP servers out there. Wonder out loud if using NTP server in a load-distributing cloud will just intrinsically be randomly cruddy, or if this is somehow engineering a source which is often good enough for SNTP users but obviously inappropriate for NTP to prevent extra load from non-windows users. Tim N3QE On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 5:37 AM, Esa Heikkinen tn1...@nic.fi wrote: Hi! At first, Windows XP supports SNTP protocol (so it can be synchronized with NTP server, but not with millisecond grade accuracy) and it uses time.windows.com as default server. Maybe Microsoft is closed that server or something, if it doesn't work anymore. However it's easy to change the NTP server, like Ed Palmer alrady described. It's also possible to use local NTP server, I use Symmetricom/Datum TymServe 2100 to synchronize the system cloks for all Windows computers. Works fine and does not need connection outside local network. Any Windows computer can also act as NTP server, if millisecond grade time is not needed. Registry change is needed to enable the Windows NTP server, Google if you want to do this. In addition, the system running as NTP server must also have working NTP client configuration so that it syncrhonizes itself. But remember, integrated Windows NTP is not very accurate, the time may have even more than ten seconds offsets. You do not want to have your XP box connected to the internet at all. This is not something that can be dealt with by any anti-virus software you are running. I even have Windows 2000 computer having 24/7 internet connection. This is a server computer running 24/7, doing certain tasks. Windows 2000 support is stopped many years ago and also there's not even anti-virus software compatible with Windows 2000 anymore. Sounds dangerous? Not necessary - there has not been any trouble ever... The secret is that this (and all other computers) are behind NAT firewall so there's no direct access to this (or other) Windows computers. Second thing is (maybe most important), that this computer is NOT used for any web browsing or e-mails (which are most common way to infect any unprotected computer). By the way, XP support is not fully stopped yet, there's still monthly malware removal updates coming. Last one happened just few days ago. We still use XP for work (with anti-virus software of course) and there's never been any problems with it. Any suspicious traffic from local network to the Internet will be noticed by network monitoring, but there's haven't been any. XP is safe, if it's behing network firewall. One easy trick to keep any Windows computer safe is to use Jotti's Malware Scan service before running any new .exe files downloaded from Internet: http://virusscan.jotti.org/ This is an easy-to use online service, where you can send files for scanning. It uses more than 20 anti-virus tools to scan the file and reports the results from each tool. If the file is infected, there will be many alerts, even when the anti-virus software installed in own computer doesn't give any alert. Connecting any Windows computer directly to the Internet (without NAT or nework firewall) or DMZ is not recommended at all, even if it has most recent Windows version. There will be always new and undetected vulnerabilities. That's the reason why the Windows updates exists. -- 73s! Esa OH4KJU ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/ mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] time.windows.com statistics
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Kenton A. Hoover ken...@nemersonhoover.org wrote: But a perfectly reasonable source of time for SNTP where you just slam the clock, rather than NTP where you're figuring out drift... And if you use pool.ntp.org it doesn't matter and this entire discussion becomes moot. -- Brian Lloyd Lloyd Aviation 706 Flightline Drive Spring Branch, TX 78070 br...@lloyd.com +1.916.877.5067 ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] time.windows.com statistics
I have set the time server to us.pool.ntp.org. It's keeping my clock in step with the rest of the world so I am a happy camper. I had no idea my simple question would result in such a long thread. Regards. Max. K 4 O DS. Email: m...@maxsmusicplace.com Transistor site http://www.funwithtransistors.net Vacuum tube site: http://www.funwithtubes.net Woodworking site http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/funwithtubes/Woodworking/wwindex.html Music site: http://www.maxsmusicplace.com To subscribe to the fun with transistors group send an email to. funwithtransistors-subscr...@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the fun with tubes group send an email to, funwithtubes-subscr...@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the fun with wood group send a blank email to funwithwood-subscr...@yahoogroups.com - Original Message - From: Chris Albertson albertson.ch...@gmail.com To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement time-nuts@febo.com Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [time-nuts] time.windows.com statistics On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Tim Shoppa tsho...@gmail.com wrote: Wonder out loud if using NTP server in a load-distributing cloud will just intrinsically be randomly cruddy, or if this is somehow engineering a source which is often good enough for SNTP users but obviously inappropriate for NTP to prevent extra load from non-windows users. Pool servers seem to work well. But they are randomly assigned only once. Once a connection is made to a pool server it remains connected to the same server for the duration. Best practice is to use about five pool servers and let NTP sort out which are best. Even if using a GPS you should still configure about five pool servers. A load distributed load cloud where each data packet goes to a different server just plan would not work for NTP. If you look at the clock selection algorithm the servers would all be rejected and NTP would likely fall back to the PC's internal clock as the best source. NTP's design depends on network path between any two NTP servers remaining mostly constant or at least changing slowly. Load sharing would kill that assumption. -- Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
