From owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org  Sat Apr 30 13:55:06 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A5A2B1FD4C
 for <freebsd-security@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Sat, 30 Apr 2016 13:55:06 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from news@mips.inka.de)
Received: from mail.inka.de (quechua.inka.de
 [IPv6:2a04:c9c7:0:1073:217:a4ff:fe3b:e77c])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45BB21F7B
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 13:55:06 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from news@mips.inka.de)
Received: from mips.inka.de (news@[127.0.0.1])
 by mail.inka.de with uucp (rmailwrap 0.5) 
 id 1awVMO-00037n-Ro; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 15:55:04 +0200
Received: from lorvorc.mips.inka.de (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by lorvorc.mips.inka.de (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u3UDqLc2074281
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 15:52:21 +0200 (CEST)
 (envelope-from news@lorvorc.mips.inka.de)
Received: (from news@localhost)
 by lorvorc.mips.inka.de (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id u3UDqLTd074280
 for freebsd-security@freebsd.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 15:52:21 +0200 (CEST)
 (envelope-from news)
To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
From: Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de>
Newsgroups: list.freebsd.security
Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-16:16.ntp
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 13:52:21 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <slrnni9e4l.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>
 <201604300015.u3U0FB3k058050@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.2 (FreeBSD)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
 <freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 13:55:06 -0000

On 2016-04-29, Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com> wrote:

>> While I cannot speak for anyone other than myself, the two simply aren't
>> equivalent.  As a conscious design choice, OpenNTPD trades off accuracy
>> for code simplicity.
>
> IIRC openntpd is accurate down to ~100ms.

I have no idea where you get that absurd number from.  OpenNTPD is
accurate at least down to 1 ms.  I don't have better time sources.


$ ntpctl -sa
1/1 peers valid, clock synced, stratum 2

peer
   wt tl st  next  poll          offset       delay      jitter
2001:6f8:124a::8 ntp
 *  1 10  1  250s 1506s        -0.193ms     0.493ms     0.067ms

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy@mips.inka.de