From owner-freebsd-current Fri Nov 29 2:44:10 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B63237B401 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 02:44:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.tcoip.com.br (erato.tco.net.br [200.220.254.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5495043ED1 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 02:44:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dcs@tcoip.com.br) Received: from tcoip.com.br ([10.0.2.6]) by mail.tcoip.com.br (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gATAheV22953; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 08:43:41 -0200 Message-ID: <3DE744DC.5030201@tcoip.com.br> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 08:43:40 -0200 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021125 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, pt-br, ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Daniel O'Connor" Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Problem with ntpdate References: <3DE667DF.9060200@tcoip.com.br> <3DE66E2E.7050201@tcoip.com.br> <1038523933.21586.2.camel@chowder.gsoft.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3DE667DF.9060200@tcoip.com.br> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Daniel O'Connor wrote: > On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 05:57, Daniel C. Sobral wrote: > > >ntpdate_flags="-s -b 200.220.255.229": > > > >Nov 28 15:15:38 dcs ntpdate[259]: no server suitable for synchronization > >found > >Nov 28 15:15:39 dcs ntpd[377]: ntpd 4.1.1b-a Thu Nov 28 11:09:29 BRST > >2002 (1) > >Nov 28 15:15:39 dcs ntpd[377]: kernel time discipline status 2040 > >Nov 28 15:15:50 dcs ntpd[377]: sendto(200.220.255.229): No route to host > > > >That is, the extra time taken NOT resolving clock.tcoip.com.br was, > >apparently, enough for something in the IP stack to go up. > > > >This looks, after all, like a more serious bug than I first assumed. > > > You could try running FreeBSD so that it thinks the CMOS clock is local > time the same as windows does.. > > Have you tried ntpdate debugging? > > ntptrace can be handy too.. > (Although if it works after boot then probably not) > > I see the 'no route to host message' given by ntpd - perhaps some routes > aren't set when ntpdate runs? Not a FreeBSD problem, after all. I checked the interfaces, checked the routes, and then I finally got a tcpdump running. Seems like for some switching reason the arp who-has packets are taking too long to be properly propagated. Now, I seem to recall there were some tcp delay changes between 4.x and 5.x, so now 5.x is much faster. Apparently, so much so it gives up before I get an arp is-at, whereas 4.x would wait enough for the link level protocolo to get it's act together. Or maybe 4.x tried to use something before running ntpdate, so that the arp table was ok by the time it got to ntpdate. Or maybe both. I'll try using the -g option on ntpd like someone else suggested. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) Gerencia de Operacoes Divisao de Comunicacao de Dados Coordenacao de Seguranca TCO Fones: 55-61-313-7654/Cel: 55-61-9618-0904 E-mail: Daniel.Capo@tco.net.br Daniel.Sobral@tcoip.com.br dcs@tcoip.com.br Outros: dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org capo@notorious.bsdconspiracy.net Ankh if you love Isis. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message