From: Poul-Henning Kamp
[]
Personally, I feel that the ability to monitor the workings of an NTP
implementation remotely is an important feature of the (present) software.
So, this is one thing I really don't understand...
You can monitor all your clients from your server if you want to,
by looing at the timestamp the client sends you.
I implemented this feature in NTPns over a decade ago (see below)
Why on Earth would anybody prefer to monitor it on each client separately
instead of getting one central unified view ?
Yes, of course you should be able to tell if your timekeeping is good
on the local machine, but I don't think the control-mode NTP packets
is a good idea.
Poul-Henning
===================================
Poul-Henning,
But if I understand NTPns correctly (I didn't know about it, by the way), it
does not address the task I have in mind. I don't want to monitor clients
from my server. I don't want to monitor servers from my client. I want to
be able to monitor a number of servers from a central monitoring point
(which might not even be running NTP), and using ntpq with its different
options is, for me, an ideal way to do that. I use Perl scripts to
interpret the output and plot it with MRTG. What I'm doing at the moment
happens to run on Windows, but as it's a combination of ntpq, Perl and MRTG
is could be run almost anywhere....
Cheers,
David
--
SatSignal Software - Quality software written to your requirements
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
Email: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
