> Even if the server is smart enough to wait as long as possible > before putting the time stamp into the reply, having the whole system > dependant on a potentially lengthy search through an on-disk > authorization database is going to greatly increase the latency and > jitter of the overall response, and greatly reduce the quality of > time that can be served to those clients.
Let me try again. The client ends up with two time stamps from the server: one when the request arrives at the server, the other when the response leaves the server. The server can insert an arbitrary delay in between those timestamps without degradation to the quality of time the client can maintain. (Well, not longer than the poll interval.) The time the packet sits on the server gets subtracted out. It's not part of the latency or jitter that you see in ntpq. -- The suespammers.org mail server is located in California. So are all my other mailboxes. Please do not send unsolicited bulk e-mail or unsolicited commercial e-mail to my suespammers.org address or any of my other addresses. These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ timekeepers mailing list [email protected] https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
