A C agcarver+...@acarver.net wrote:
On 2014-06-14 12:57, Rob wrote:
A C agcarver+...@acarver.net wrote:
I actually disliked having to use a prefer peer for PPS as well. So I
modified the source code to remove that requirement. As long as there's
a source that is acceptable to the selection
Brian Inglis brian.ing...@shaw.ca wrote:
On 2014-06-14 12:03, Rob wrote:
Brian Inglis brian.ing...@systematicsw.ab.ca wrote:
I see no problem, really no problem, in this configuration and I wonder
why the software makers do see a problem in it and want me to make a
configuration decision that
MR/ MiSS
* al madinah international university which win dependence Malaysian
Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (MOHE) and also winning the adoption of
all academic programs and courses, the university that are approved by the
Malaysian funds and private academy, which deals with
Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
Everyone seems to think that GPS equates NMEA. Wrong.
...
It apparently assumes anyone who has a PPS signal also has a
device that provides date and time information, which is wrong.
...
But of
Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Brian Inglis
brian.ing...@systematicsw.ab.ca wrote:
There may be no problem with time only messages: the NMEA driver page,
shows support of GLL and GGA which provide only time.
Other drivers may allow similarly limited
brian.cun...@gmail.com brian.cun...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
Is there a suggested way to rate-limit queries by broken clients?
There isn't any. In fact, many methods to do that are likely to make
the problem worse.
For example, people suggest to limit the number of queries answered
or even
On 15/06/14 15:16, Jason Rabel wrote:
On a related note, is there any way to determine if the requests are made by
ntpdate vs ntpd? I realize ntpdate is depreciated but
ntpdate cannot send a valid stratum or reference time. Strictly
speaking it should obey the SNTP rules and send most of
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
Did you put prefer on the PPS and not on another source?
That was the complete output of ntpq. The local clock is marked prefer; it
can reliably number the seconds. This is just a demonstration and I think
it unwise to run this
Jason Rabel writes:
On a related note, is there any way to determine if the requests are
made by ntpdate vs ntpd? I realize ntpdate is depreciated but it is
still used (or a hacked down version) by a lot of routers, and many
distros still include it too.
Not that I'm aware of - each sends a
Hello,
I'm looking for a way to speed up the ntp convergence of a system which would
be restarted after several days being off. Does the use of PPS improve this
convergence time ?
This is local configuration, with one LAN and one NTP server, with about 30 NTP
clients.
Thank you.
JT
jthul...@gmail.com writes:
Hello,
I'm looking for a way to speed up the ntp convergence of a system
which would be restarted after several days being off. Does the use of
PPS improve this convergence time ?
This is local configuration, with one LAN and one NTP server, with
about 30 NTP
On 16/06/2014 04:29, jthul...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I'm looking for a way to speed up the ntp convergence of a system which would
be restarted after several days being off. Does the use of PPS improve this
convergence time ?
This is local configuration, with one LAN and one NTP server, with
12 matches
Mail list logo
