[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ntp 4.2.0 in experimental

* Marco d'Itri (md@Linux.IT) wrote:
> On Feb 15, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
>  >Hmm.  I don't think I fall into either category.  I have large numbers
>  >of Debian servers which all use Kerberos, which means they all run ntp.
>  >We run a single ntp server locally, that all the other machines point
>  >at; since being in sync with the KDC is more important here than being
>  >precisely in sync with the outside world, this provides a comparatively
>  >reliable method of achieving this goal.  It reduces the load we impose
>  >on busy public NTP servers, and there's been minimal need for config
>  >customization (firewalls can take care of most such issues).
>  >
>  >Which group would you classify our site in?
> One which needs a site-wide method of pushing config files to hosts.

This is stupid.  The previous setup worked and was exactly what at least
Steve and I needed.  Now you're claiming we're so special that Debian
can't handle it or shouldn't support it?  Sorry, that's just wrong.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: