From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Oct 25 22:00:17 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA04096 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:00:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dt053nb4.san.rr.com (dt053nb4.san.rr.com [204.210.34.180]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA04083 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:00:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Studded@gorean.org) Received: from gorean.org (Studded@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dt053nb4.san.rr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA02534; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 21:58:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Studded@gorean.org) Message-ID: <36340F95.926168A@gorean.org> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 21:58:45 -0800 From: Studded Organization: Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2.7-STABLE-1015 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Lehey CC: Dan Nelson , FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: Time calibration ? References: <3632EBDA.FD5F1529@gorean.org> <19981026114552.H16609@freebie.lemis.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Greg Lehey wrote: > > On Sunday, 25 October 1998 at 1:14:02 -0800, Studded wrote: > > It's generally considered rude for an "average user" to synch to a > > stratum 1 server without permission. > > It's generally considered rude for an "average user" to synch to any > ntp server without permission. But there are plenty of stratum 1 > servers available which have an open access policy. I've read quite a bit of the documentation about ntp, followed the comp.protocols.time.ntp newsgroup, etc. The commonly accepted practice is that public stratum 1 servers exist for public stratum 2 servers to synch to. Those of us not providing publicly available time service are encouraged to maintain stratum 3 servers for our own networks to synch to. It's not written in stone, but it's part of the common culture. > Note that this also implies that Dan's idea of finding the closest > server, apart from bringing no advantage, is also considered > inappropriate. *nod* I wasn't going to go there, but yes, you should have permission from any time server you synch to regularly that is not open for public access. > Who were you talking to? My answer about xntpd vs. ntp was directed at another post on this thread. Sorry for the confusion. > Why didn't they want to commit it? I was told by one person that a port would not be necessary because the sources would be updated in the tree (they weren't). I was told by another person not to bother with a port because having a port of up to date xntpd sources would make the project look bad and I'd just be wasting my time because he would make sure it never got committed. I would be happy to hear that is no longer the prevailing view as I think a port of more recent sources would be of tremendous value. Doug -- *** Chief Operations Officer, DALnet IRC network *** To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message