unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:JDU9r.22132$_c5.11...@newsfe09.iad...
[]
Of course the question still is why in the world did the system go nuts
when it was on Local. That itself should not have happened.
If some software had told the system clock to run fast, it simply stays
Any chance of getting bug 2164 moving? Greater precision needed for ntpq
offset report.
http://bugs.ntp.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2164
While I'm asking, nothing seems to have happened with bug 1577 in over 18
months. Request that SNMP support be added for the Windows port
comp . protocols time
//123maza.com/46/flower875/
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 02:59:12AM +, Dave Hart wrote:
Although it's the first time I've seen such, it appears the offset and
frequency calculations both ended up overflowing. I would have
guessed bad input should have appeared in peerstats before loopstats
but I didn't find anything
On Mar 20, 3:45 am, David J Taylor david-
tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
Any chance of getting bug 2164 moving? Greater precision needed for ntpq
offset report.
http://bugs.ntp.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2164
While I'm asking, nothing seems to have happened with bug 1577 in over 18
On Mar 20, 3:45=A0am, David J Taylor david-
tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
Any chance of getting bug 2164 moving? =A0Greater precision needed for n=
tpq
offset report.
=A0http://bugs.ntp.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D2164
Patches welcome, otherwise we'll get to it as soon as somebody
On 3/20/2012 2:25 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:JDU9r.22132$_c5.11...@newsfe09.iad...
[]
Of course the question still is why in the world did the system go nuts
when it was on Local. That itself should not have happened.
If some software had told the
Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org wrote in message
news:e1s9ysb-000kqp...@stenn.ntp.org...
On Mar 20, 3:45=A0am, David J Taylor david-
tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
Any chance of getting bug 2164 moving? =A0Greater precision needed
for n=
tpq
offset report.
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:28, Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 02:59:12AM +, Dave Hart wrote:
Although it's the first time I've seen such, it appears the offset and
frequency calculations both ended up overflowing. I would have
guessed bad input should
Ron Frazier (NTP) timekeepingntpl...@c3energy.com wrote in message
[]
Hypothetically speaking, what if I don't want it to distribute time if
it's working in internet mode?
Run a Perl script one a minute, looking for the GPS line in ntpq -p
output, and if the tally code isn't * (or whatever,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 14:58, David J Taylor wrote:
Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org wrote in message
news:e1s9ysb-000kqp...@stenn.ntp.org...
I will say (knowing full well that I am not a windows guy) that we use
net-snmp for this for Unix, and it sure looks to me like that code
should build under
It seems that the types of different variables are stored in a
table, and offset has type FL. Latter on, there is a block of
code like this:
case FL:
output(fp, name,
David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid writes:
2164 needs discussion, unless altering the number of significant digits in
the ntpq output wouldn't break anything. Do we need to have this
discussion? I have looked through ntpq.c, but I can't see where the
number of decimal
David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid writes:
Thanks, David. Those don't seem to be in ntpq.c (at least 4.2.7p134), so
no wonder I couldn't find them.
Ah - I'm looking at a slightly older verion (4.2.4p8), but I'd guess
there is similar code lurking.
But if the control messages
[]
David Taylor is right that it is normal for Windows to keep running
the clock at whatever rate was last set after the program setting the
rate goes away. It's also true that Windows does not have any rate
limits itself -- you can easily tell Windows to advance the clock 1
usec per tick
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 15:55, David J Taylor wrote:
How does NTPD_TICKADJ_PPM affect this? If that was set to -800, for
example, wouldn't the adjustment range be -300/-1300 rather than +/-500?
Yes, it would.
Cheers,
Dave Hart
___
questions mailing
Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
On 3/20/2012 2:25 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:JDU9r.22132$_c5.11...@newsfe09.iad...
[]
Of course the question still is why in the world did the system go nuts
when it was on Local. That itself should not have happened.
If
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 15:59, David Malone wrote:
David J Taylor writes:
Thanks, David. Those don't seem to be in ntpq.c (at least 4.2.7p134), so
no wonder I couldn't find them.
Ah - I'm looking at a slightly older verion (4.2.4p8), but I'd guess
there is similar code lurking.
No, there's
On 2012-03-20, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:JDU9r.22132$_c5.11...@newsfe09.iad...
[]
Of course the question still is why in the world did the system go nuts
when it was on Local. That itself should not have happened.
On 2012-03-20, Dave Hart h...@ntp.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:28, Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 02:59:12AM +, Dave Hart wrote:
Although it's the first time I've seen such, it appears the offset and
frequency calculations both ended up
On 2012-03-20, Ron Frazier (NTP) timekeepingntpl...@c3energy.com wrote:
On 3/20/2012 2:25 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:JDU9r.22132$_c5.11...@newsfe09.iad...
[]
Of course the question still is why in the world did the system go nuts
when it was on
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:d13ar.7952$gv1.7...@newsfe12.iad...
[]
It is really really hard to imagine any gps device doing that.
Yes, I agree, and yet what just popped up in my mail box but a reference
to:
an inexplicable 1 second slip of 3 GPS based NTP time sources.
I
On 3/20/2012 1:25 PM, unruh wrote:
On 2012-03-20, Ron Frazier (NTP)timekeepingntpl...@c3energy.com wrote:
On 3/20/2012 2:25 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
unruhun...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:JDU9r.22132$_c5.11...@newsfe09.iad...
[]
Of course the question still is why in
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 17:28, unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
On 2012-03-20, Dave Hart h...@ntp.org wrote:
David Taylor is right that it is normal for Windows to keep running
the clock at whatever rate was last set after the program setting the
rate goes away. It's also true that Windows does
Hi David L,
See below.
On 3/20/2012 1:00 PM, David Lord wrote:
Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
On 3/20/2012 2:25 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:JDU9r.22132$_c5.11...@newsfe09.iad...
[]
Of course the question still is why in the world did the system go
nuts
On 2012-03-20, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:d13ar.7952$gv1.7...@newsfe12.iad...
[]
It is really really hard to imagine any gps device doing that.
Yes, I agree, and yet what just popped up in my mail box but a
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:Ur4ar.15722$iq1.15...@newsfe18.iad...
On 2012-03-20, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid
wrote:
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:d13ar.7952$gv1.7...@newsfe12.iad...
[]
It is really really hard to imagine any gps device
Ron,
I think the below is correct enough but accuracy is only one dimension of
NTP server performance.As you have found one other dimension is
reliability.
It does little good to have a system that is running at pico-second level
But jumps ahead two years at rare unpredictable times. (It
On 2012-03-20, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
news:Ur4ar.15722$iq1.15...@newsfe18.iad...
On 2012-03-20, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid
wrote:
unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote in message
On 2012-03-20, Dave Hart h...@ntp.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 17:28, unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
On 2012-03-20, Dave Hart h...@ntp.org wrote:
David Taylor is right that it is normal for Windows to keep running
the clock at whatever rate was last set after the program setting the
rate
Hi,
I've been working on my own clock management software under windows
using a Sure board, without the serialpps driver.
Here's some console output
Lines with offset are the PPS
The other lines are from the $GPGGSA.
You can see the PPS maintains the offset of the windows clock under 30µs.
Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
Hi David L,
See below.
On 3/20/2012 1:00 PM, David Lord wrote:
Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
Hi David T,
Eventually, I do plan to have the server preferences as follows:
Time server machine:
GPS
Internet as backup
Hypothetically speaking, what if I
David wrote:
2164 needs discussion, unless altering the number of significant digits in
the ntpq output wouldn't break anything. Do we need to have this
discussion? I have looked through ntpq.c, but I can't see where the
number of decimal digits in the output for offset is set.
I'd be
unruh wrote:
Dave Hart h...@ntp.org wrote:
frequency adjustments aren't compounded like that.
Lets hope not, but on his system, something DID trigger a runaway.
What about power saving frequency management of the core
NTP is using?
--
E-Mail Sent to this address
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:06 PM, unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
On 2012-03-19, Chris Albertson albertson.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Alby VA alb...@empire.org wrote:
On Mar 19, 12:12 pm, unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
The actual PPS signal at the PPS pin has
On 2012-03-20, David Lord sn...@lordynet.org wrote:
Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
Hi David L,
See below.
On 3/20/2012 1:00 PM, David Lord wrote:
Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
Hi David T,
Eventually, I do plan to have the server preferences as follows:
Time server machine:
GPS
I'm curious. Are you outputting ONLY GPGGA, or other sentences as
well. Other sentences will increase jitter. I'm getting about 5 ms of
jitter on my USB based BU-353 outputting GPGGA only at 9600 baud. I'll
be testing the Sure board once I get it.
Sincerely,
Ron
On 3/20/2012 4:32 PM,
On 3/20/2012 5:19 PM, David Lord wrote:
Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
Hi David L,
See below.
On 3/20/2012 1:00 PM, David Lord wrote:
Ron Frazier (NTP) wrote:
Hi David T,
Eventually, I do plan to have the server preferences as follows:
Time server machine:
GPS
Internet as backup
On 3/20/2012 5:48 PM, E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the
BlackLists wrote:
unruh wrote:
Dave Harth...@ntp.org wrote:
frequency adjustments aren't compounded like that.
Lets hope not, but on his system, something DID trigger a runaway.
What about power
On 3/20/2012 11:21 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
Ron Frazier (NTP) timekeepingntpl...@c3energy.com wrote in message
[]
Hypothetically speaking, what if I don't want it to distribute time
if it's working in internet mode?
Run a Perl script one a minute, looking for the GPS line in ntpq -p
output,
Ron Frazier (NTP) timekeepingntpl...@c3energy.com wrote:
On 3/20/2012 5:48 PM, E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the
BlackLists wrote:
unruh wrote:
Dave Harth...@ntp.org wrote:
frequency adjustments aren't compounded like that.
Lets hope not, but on
Out of curiosity, what does ntpd do when multiple servers are marked
'prefer'. Does it use its clock algorithm and attempt to select the
best server from the collection of 'prefers' or does it just hang onto
one and use it always?
___
questions
Rick Jones wrote:
Ron Frazier wrote:
BlackList wrote:
unruh wrote:
Dave Hart wrote:
frequency adjustments aren't compounded like that.
Lets hope not, but on his system, something DID trigger a runaway.
What about power saving frequency management of the core NTP is using?
I doubt that's
43 matches
Mail list logo
