On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:23:14 +0200
Mel Flynn wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 April 2009 19:31:33 RW wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:43:32 +0200
> >
> > Mel Flynn wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 21 April 2009 16:20:52 RW wrote:
> > > > The bottom line though, is that ntpdate_enable=yes solves the
> > > > proble
On Tuesday 21 April 2009 21:07:34 Chuck Swiger wrote:
> Try contacting your ISP for nearby NTP
> sources,
Anchorage, AK, is special that way. I'll check with ACS if they have one, but
if they don't, even traffic to the local competitor (GCI) goes through
Seattle.
--
Mel
On Apr 21, 2009, at 11:57 AM, Mel Flynn wrote:
[ ... -x option... ]
Hmm, that might work. Thanks!
Sure.
It should be surprising that your clock would jump by 6 seconds. Do
you have adequate upstream timesources (ie, at least 4) configured,
is
your local HW clock busted somehow, or are you
On Tuesday 21 April 2009 19:43:30 Chuck Swiger wrote:
> Hi, Mel--
>
> On Apr 21, 2009, at 2:06 AM, Mel Flynn wrote:
> > Some coarse reading of ntpd(8) and ntp.conf(5) doesn't lead me to
> > believe it's
> > possible to make ntpd *not* adjust the time. With adjust I don't
> > mean the skew
> > opera
On Apr 21, 2009, at 11:33 AM, Mel Flynn wrote:
On Tuesday 21 April 2009 20:29:18 Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Apr 21, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Mel Flynn wrote:
Now I'm also wondering how ntpd handles securelevel 2.
"man init" suggests that stepping the clock by more than a second is
disallowed:
yes, so
On Tuesday 21 April 2009 20:29:18 Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Apr 21, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Mel Flynn wrote:
> > Now I'm also wondering how ntpd handles securelevel 2.
>
> "man init" suggests that stepping the clock by more than a second is
> disallowed:
yes, so does it bail or retry till skew wins over
On Apr 21, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Mel Flynn wrote:
Now I'm also wondering how ntpd handles securelevel 2.
"man init" suggests that stepping the clock by more than a second is
disallowed:
2 Highly secure mode - same as secure mode, plus disks may not
be
opened for writing (exce
On Tuesday 21 April 2009 19:31:33 RW wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:43:32 +0200
>
> Mel Flynn wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 April 2009 16:20:52 RW wrote:
> > > The bottom line though, is that ntpdate_enable=yes solves the
> > > problem entirely, since the real problem is not the step, but the
> > > fa
Hi, Mel--
On Apr 21, 2009, at 2:06 AM, Mel Flynn wrote:
Some coarse reading of ntpd(8) and ntp.conf(5) doesn't lead me to
believe it's
possible to make ntpd *not* adjust the time. With adjust I don't
mean the skew
operation, but really change the time.
Perhaps I've missed it elsewhere in t
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:43:32 +0200
Mel Flynn wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 April 2009 16:20:52 RW wrote:
>
> > The bottom line though, is that ntpdate_enable=yes solves the
> > problem entirely, since the real problem is not the step, but the
> > fact that it happens in the background, and after a dela
On Tuesday 21 April 2009 16:11:52 Tim Judd wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Matthew Seaman <
>
> m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk> wrote:
> > Mel Flynn wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Some coarse reading of ntpd(8) and ntp.conf(5) doesn't lead me to
> > > believe
> >
> > it's
> >
> > > possibl
On Tuesday 21 April 2009 16:20:52 RW wrote:
> The bottom line though, is that ntpdate_enable=yes solves the problem
> entirely, since the real problem is not the step, but the fact that it
> happens in the background, and after a delay.
Care to expand on that? Dovecot won't stop if root issues a
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:09:09 +0200
Mel Flynn wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 April 2009 11:39:32 Matthew Seaman wrote:
> > * Don't run 'ntpd -g' as the documentation tells you is the
> > modern and accepted method. Instead, run 'ntpdate' as a separate
> > process and run 'ntpd' without the '-g' flag.
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Matthew Seaman <
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk> wrote:
> Mel Flynn wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Some coarse reading of ntpd(8) and ntp.conf(5) doesn't lead me to believe
> it's
> > possible to make ntpd *not* adjust the time. With adjust I don't mean the
> skew
> > ope
On Tuesday 21 April 2009 11:39:32 Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Mel Flynn wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Some coarse reading of ntpd(8) and ntp.conf(5) doesn't lead me to believe
> > it's possible to make ntpd *not* adjust the time. With adjust I don't
> > mean the skew operation, but really change the time. Bac
Mel Flynn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some coarse reading of ntpd(8) and ntp.conf(5) doesn't lead me to believe
> it's
> possible to make ntpd *not* adjust the time. With adjust I don't mean the
> skew
> operation, but really change the time. Backwards is my primary concern but if
> it can be turned off
16 matches
Mail list logo
