(please don't Cc me on list-mail, I read all the lists I post to. sigh) >> Unfortunately, if you've got a whole bunch of servers waiting to start >> to synchronize with your main time server(s). In a hierarchical >> environment you can get up to hours until they all are in sync :( >> >> Running ntpdate and starting ntpd immediately after doesn`t address >> that problem, I'm afraid. But that, I guess, is the tradeoff for ntpds >> deep black, but very precise magic... On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 22:58:14 EDT, Tom Allison writes: >The answer is.... > >Use a simple server for your ntpd and never ever let it go down. >Some places I know have something not much better than a Pentium 1 with >kernel 2.2.xx on it. Uptimes for things like this and DNS servers >should be in the years, if all goes well. That would strike me, and most customers, even on fairly big networks, as overkill. ntp doesn't put much load on a server and wasting an entire box just for that... Also for convergence times to minimise you'd have to use extra boxen for the better part of your hierarchy, which of course implies even more boxes, say one per site. But it isn`t that much of a problem, anyway. cheers, &rw -- -- I'm picturing Windows NT jamming a network backbone -- going "la la la la I can't hear you la la la la la" -- - Graham Reed
Attachment:
pgpyzrPt2yf0a.pgp
Description: PGP signature