Home

 


Re: NTP servers redundancy Posted on: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:26:20 -0500

Rob wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> The fundamental problem with two servers is this: which one do you
>> believe when the two differ? You know that at least one of the two must
>> be wrong but it's impossible to determine WHICH one!
>
> This is not relevant when the two servers return the same time within
> the margin that one considers acceptable.
>

It would be wonderful if we could rely on two servers always agreeing!

The last "NTP Survey" (google for it) found at least one server that
responded with the wrong year!

> So when you have two servers that each are synchronized to the same
> GPS PPS clock, there should be no problem. They return the same time
> or no response at all (when down) and the clients will lock on either
> of them without problem.
>
And when that "GPS PPS Clock" fails? It should not but that's not the
same as cannot!

> When a server returns the wrong time and still says it is synchronized,
> there is a software bug. This you aren't going to solve with as many
> servers as you like (all setup the same way). Then you would need to
> run many servers with different software versions, different OS, different
> hardware, etc.
>
> Probably more trouble than the problem is worth.
56512. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56513. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56514. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56515. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56516. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56517. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56518. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56519. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56520. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56521. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56522. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56523. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56524. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56525. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56526. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56527. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56528. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56529. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56530. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56531. Re: NTP servers redundancy