On 2012-11-15, David Taylor wrote:
> On 14/11/2012 21:40, gbusenb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> []
>> Below ntpq -p from my 10.1.126.202 server which gets time from 10.1.126.204.
>> I see there is a lot of Jitter. Is the offset of 259ms.
>>
>> remote refid st t when poll reach de
On 14/11/2012 21:40, gbusenb...@yahoo.com wrote:
[]
Below ntpq -p from my 10.1.126.202 server which gets time from 10.1.126.204. I
see there is a lot of Jitter. Is the offset of 259ms.
remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
On 2012-11-15, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> On 11/14/2012 12:02 AM, E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the
> BlackLists wrote:
>> gbusenb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> I am now left with two lines in ntp.conf
>>> driftfile "C:\Program Files\NTP\etc\ntp.drift"
>>> server 10.1.126.204 iburst min
On 15/11/2012 00:32, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
30 minutes is more than a little optimistic! NTPD needs something like
ten hours to stabilize with the best time you are going to get. Thirty
minutes after startup is about when NTPD gets days, hours, and minutes
right. The next nine and a half
On 2012-11-14, gbusenb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> They HP DL 380 G7 Servers. Sorry for the typo. No virtual machines are
> being used. Each Windows 2008 Server has dedicated hardware and is almost
> idle in terms of load. Yesterday after making the changes of getting rid of
> the tinker and serve
I will have to check with my customer what exactly that is. I thought that was
one of their IPs in Maryland. I definitely see responses coming back from that
IP (20.200.0.1). My machines don't have internet access so it must be some
sort of internal access. This machine only responds to NTP
gbusenb...@yahoo.com wrote:> syncs time with 20.200.0.1
> remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
> ===
> *20.200.0.1 132.163.4.101 2 u 407 512 377 0.051 119.693 37.748
>
> 20.200.0.1 only supports NTP
On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 7:32:52 PM UTC-5, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> On 11/14/2012 12:02 AM, E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the
> BlackLists wrote: > gbusenb...@yahoo.com wrote: >> I am now left with two
> lines in ntp.conf >> driftfile "C:\Program Files\NTP\etc\ntp.drift"
On 11/14/2012 12:02 AM, E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the
BlackLists wrote:
gbusenb...@yahoo.com wrote:
I am now left with two lines in ntp.conf
driftfile "C:\Program Files\NTP\etc\ntp.drift"
server 10.1.126.204 iburst minpoll 5
There have been plenty of improvemnets since 4.2.6
On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 6:25:02 PM UTC-5, Dave Hart wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 9:24 PM, wrote: > I am not
> sure if this is possible. I have a requirement from a customer that the time
> must be within 10ms of the parent server which is on the same LAN. I have
> tried several differ
They HP DL 380 G7 Servers. Sorry for the typo. No virtual machines are being
used. Each Windows 2008 Server has dedicated hardware and is almost idle in
terms of load. Yesterday after making the changes of getting rid of the tinker
and server 127.127.1.0 & fudge 127.127.1.0 everything seemed
On 14/11/2012 11:25, David Woolley wrote:
[]
Especially if the stratum one server isn't local, setting a low maxpoll
will cause the time to track propagation asymmetries in your network
connection. You will get low offset, but relatively large time errors,
which could easily exceed the offsets.
On 2012-11-14, David Woolley wrote:
> David Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> The secret has been to make a tight connection between the Windows PCs
>> and the "best available" stratum-1 server by fixing the polling at 32
>> seconds. In your case, this may correspond to a line like:
>>
>> server 10.1.12
Sub-millisecond accuracy is easy using broadcast mode. Here are the
ntp.conf commands from my server:
broadcast 192.168.1.255 minpoll 4 maxpoll 4
server ac-ntp2.net.cmu.edu iburst minpoll 4 maxpoll 5
...
8 more lines similar to above connecting my server to 9 physically close
stratum 2
David Taylor wrote:
The secret has been to make a tight connection between the Windows PCs
and the "best available" stratum-1 server by fixing the polling at 32
seconds. In your case, this may correspond to a line like:
server 10.1.126.204 iburst minpoll 5 maxpoll 5
Especially if the s
On 13/11/2012 21:24, gbusenb...@yahoo.com wrote:
I am not sure if this is possible. I have a requirement from a customer that
the time must be within 10ms of the parent server which is on the same LAN. I
have tried several different things without an luck. NTP Time seems to get up
to 400ms
16 matches
Mail list logo
