wayne wrote:
Raising the cut-off from 5 to 19 sounds
drastic, but really, it would only take 6 hours more to return to the
pool. Raising it to 19.9 would take longer for a server to get back
into the pool and would probably be very similar to a "long-term"
rating that you are suggesting.
Yes and no. My pool server is a dedicated stratum 2 server connected to
a private stratum 1 server by half a meter of cat-5 cable. However, I'm
in México, so sometimes network jitter causes a big offset from the
monitoring servers and causes my server's score to drop below 19. If you
look at:
http://www.pool.ntp.org/scores/132.248.81.29
you can see that this happened last Tuesday. With the current monitoring
system, my server stays in the pool. With a more strict system, it would
drop out regularly.
Now, is my server a "bad" server? Normally, it is excellent, even when
seen from outside México. However, every now and again, it suffers large
jitter. Aren't the ntpd algorithms supposed to filter this stuff out?
Furthermore, my server may be a bad server when seen from outside
México, but since I suspect most of the jitter is caused by the line to
the outside world, from within México it is probably an excellent
server. However, there is currently no mx.pool.ntp.org subdomain.
The current setup seems fine to me. I think we need to think carefully
both about our goals and about the law of unintended consequences before
changing it.
Regards,
Alan
--
Dr Alan Watson
Centro de Radioastronomía y Astrofísica
Universidad Astronómico Nacional de México
_______________________________________________
timekeepers mailing list
[email protected]
https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
