Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 13:43:34 +0000 (UTC) From: Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-16:16.ntp Message-ID: <slrnni9dk6.27hm.naddy@lorvorc.mips.inka.de> References: <20160429082953.DB31D1769@freefall.freebsd.org> <9e6342a420259fec7bd21d6222cc6e05@zahemszky.hu> <1461929003.67736.2.camel@yandex.com> <CINIP100NTSBSRqf69a0000002a@cinip100ntsbs.irtnog.net> <BABF8C57A778F04791343E5601659908237051@cinip100ntsbs.irtnog.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2016-04-29, "Matthew X. Economou" <xenophon@irtnog.org> wrote: >> What are the reasons FreeBSD has not deprecated ntpd in favor of >> openntpd? > > While I cannot speak for anyone other than myself, the two simply aren't > equivalent. OpenNTPD is intended to cover the most common usage scenarios. The single most common use of NTP is a client that simply gets the time from a server or set of servers. The second most common use is a server that fetches the time from other servers and redistributes it to a bunch of clients. These two scenarios cover what, 99% of all ntpd users? (OpenNTPD also has support for reference clocks, but that code uses OpenBSD's sensor framework and is not portable.) > As a conscious design choice, OpenNTPD trades off accuracy > for code simplicity. There has been no such design choice. OpenNTPD is simply accurate enough in practice that the matter hasn't really come up. Accuracy is a complete red herring if you are getting your time from the Internet, where packet jitter is a few milliseconds anyway. > It lacks support for NTP authentication, access controls, > reference clocks, multicast/broadcast operation, or any kind of > monitoring/reporting. Only a tiny fraction of NTP users will use any of that. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?slrnni9dk6.27hm.naddy>