From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 11 20:10:24 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83C5B16A5BB for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 20:10:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (smtpout.mac.com [17.250.248.175]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 568F043D5F for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 20:10:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin05-en2 [10.13.10.150]) by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/8.12.11/smtpout05/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id k9BKAMBF017858; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 13:10:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.214.13.96] (a17-214-13-96.apple.com [17.214.13.96]) (authenticated bits=0) by mac.com (Xserve/smtpin05/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id k9BKAK73028677; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 13:10:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6bcc7a470610111231g67186cc0n687a96bd4d808bb5@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bcc7a470610111231g67186cc0n687a96bd4d808bb5@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <3106CCC8-D978-4A3A-97CE-DCCDD8C6D089@mac.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Chuck Swiger Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 13:10:19 -0700 To: Rob X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Brightmail-scanned: yes Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is OpenNTPD better than the included NTPD? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 20:10:24 -0000 On Oct 11, 2006, at 12:31 PM, Rob wrote: > I don't plan on allowing anyone to connect to my machine or use it as > a NTPD server. I see that OpenNTPD (OpenBSD's version) by default > doesn't listen on any IP/port and seems a little more secure. OpenNTPD doesn't work-- ie, synchronize your clock-- unless you let it talk to higher-stratum timeservers, or unless you provide a local stratum-1 reference clock via GPS or the like, and provide the "timedelta sensor" that it needs to actually figure out what to do, versus the much more complete refclock support in the official NTPd distribution. > Is this a good one to use over the included one in FreeBSD, or is > there something better? No-- the stock ntpd which ships with FreeBSD works just fine. The experience of people using or offering NTP services for the NTP pool is that OpenNTPD experiences much wider variations from real time (offsets in the hundreds of milliseconds rather than a few to perhaps tens of milliseconds with ntpd). From http:// www.pool.ntp.org/join/configuration.html: "Use the standard ntpd We are all for software diversity, but a significant percentage of the "it's not working" questions that come in are for software other than ntpd. You can use the pool with any program speaking NTP, but if you are going to join the pool we recommend you use ntpd." -- -Chuck