On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, der Mouse wrote:

>> Listen to this, your ISP would run 3 ntpservers, each one at the
>> bottom of an independent pyramid.  Each one of the 3 servers could
>> even be at the bottom of 3 independant pyramids for a total of 9
>> independent pyramids.  So there you go, that's all you need to
>> prevent against false tickers.  No need for a whole bunch of messy
>> cross-links between the pyramids in my humble opinion.
>
> If this happens at every stratum, that *is* cross-links; the pyramids
> aren't independent.
>
> If it doesn't happen at every stratum, what's magic about the strata
> where it does?  Why doesn't it count as "a whole bunch of messy
> cross-links" when every provider does this?  I sure have trouble seeing
> the difference.
>
>> I have been designing failsafe network communication architecture for
>> very large projects and beleive me, ntp is a big mess right now.
>
> Very large projects where the entire communication network architecture
> is imposed top-down by the designer(s)?  That'll never fly for NTP.
> NTP needs something that can be independently managed at all levels,
> including joining and leaving.

OK here is an example to inspire yourself and help you understand; Look at 
the DNS system. It is "simple and beautiful" and works fine according to 
me. No need for volunteers in a pool of DNS servers to handle the load.

Why is that ? Because DNS is more critical than time for the Internet to 
function properly and yes like in the big projects I have worked on, it is 
top-down and it is imposed.

What is so different about ntp ? After all we do a simple lookup for time. 
It is very similar than doing a lookup for an IP address.

Anyway, I'll rest my case for now, there are just to many people in the 
pool that are convinced that the pool is the right way to go. At some 
point, it becomes a religious debate and it is useless to keep debating 
;-)


-lou


>
> /~\ The ASCII                         der Mouse
> \ / Ribbon Campaign
> X  Against HTML              [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> / \ Email!         7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
> _______________________________________________
> timekeepers mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
>

Louis
http://blogtech.oc9.com
_______________________________________________
timekeepers mailing list
[email protected]
https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers

Reply via email to