In the original design, we *were* concerned about being underpowered for
a full fledged NTP implementation. As you point out it's possible that
this may not have been a problem, but our choice of OS was also pretty
constraining and would have required a significant porting effort or
rewrite. We have since switched to Linux where NTP wouldn't have
required a major porting effort.
We also decided that for the use cases we were considering that SNTP was
a better choice. Part of our formula is that the device must operate
standalone and be trivial to configure. We didn't want to require
inputting NTP servers, and we couldn't in good concious "pre-load" the
NTP servers like some devices have done. And we wanted the user to be
able to plug the device in behind a firewall and not have to worry about
having to reconfigure the firewall to let through NTP.
So although it's possible that someday we could run Cuckoo as an NTP
device, this isn't part of the existing design.
--Andy Gryc
President, Airchitex
http://airchitex.com
Andy Gryc wrote:
Hi all,
* It's only SNTP.
Yes, that's correct. Nowhere do we imply that we are NTP. We do use
the NTP *protocol*, because there is no such thing as an
SNTP-specific protocol. A client cannot tell the different between
an NTP server or SNTP server, and vice versa.
So just out of interest why didn't you run a "real" ntp on it ? ntp
runs on some pretty minimal hardware (like Soekris 4501's) ....
John
_______________________________________________
timekeepers mailing list
[email protected]
https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
