On Jun 12, 2007, at 12:50 AM, George Ross wrote: >> ... monitoring of port 80 (and have a requirement of >> either not answering or redirecting to www.pool.ntp.org). > > I expect you would lose some servers from the pool then: our two > (extntp[01].inf.ed.ac.uk) at least. We're happy to serve time > because we > can, but it's not the machines' primary purpose and I can't see us > putting > resources towards dedicated servers.
I would second this perspective. We're happy to provide three NTP servers in the pool, but these machines all have other purposes and are never going to be dedicated to just doing NTP. Public IPs are becoming scarce and involve a charge of about $50 per static IP per year for most of the connectivity options available in my region. It's probably not a big deal to set up a vhost for pool.ntp.org, as some have suggested, but I'm not convinced that trying to support people browsing to random pool.ntp.org IPs is worth worrying about. -- -Chuck _______________________________________________ timekeepers mailing list [email protected] https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
