home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!still3.chem.columbia.edu!shenkin
- From: shenkin@still3.chem.columbia.edu (Peter Shenkin)
- Subject: Re: NTP Time?
- References: <C08w41.65J@rahul.net> <ud00eh0@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com>
- Sender: nobody@ctr.columbia.edu
- Organization: Dept. of Chem, Columbia U, New York
- Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 15:29:44 GMT
- Message-ID: <1993Jan4.152944.22633@sol.ctr.columbia.edu>
- X-Posted-From: still3.chem.columbia.edu
- NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu
- Lines: 41
-
- In article <ud00eh0@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com>
- vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver) writes:
-
- >`xntpd` or `timeslave` can be used to synchronize the clock of one
- >machine to an external standard, such as machine on the Internet with a
- >good NTP connections, a radio receiver, or (with timeslave) just some
- >other machine offering standard TCP services that has a trusted clock.
- >Then `timed` can be used to synchronize a passle of IRIR's to the first
- >machine....
-
- I've been looking into this for our machines here. I have several questions:
-
- 1. If there's a trusted time-server, why not run timeslave on all machines,
- rather than running timeslave on one and timed on the others? What
- is the difference between timeslave and timed -H?
-
- 2. Would there be any advantage to someone in my position's running NTP
- rather than timeslave/timed? My position is as follows: several
- machines at Columbia will be running NTP synched to a Higher Authority;
- as I understand it, several hosts will be NTP servers in some sense,
- to provide redundancy. We could synch to them either by means of
- timeslave/timed or else by running NTP ourselves. My understanding
- so far is that the advantage of running NTP would be a smaller load
- on system/network resources (though I find it hard to imagine that
- timeslave/timed constitutes a heavy load), and possibly the ability
- to make better use of the three-host redundancy. For example, if we
- were running timeslave or timed -H to some trusted host, and the
- trusted host went down, there might be problems. Maybe under NTP
- we could put in the names of all three trusted hosts. On the other
- hand, why should I have to obtain and compile and maintain another
- program if my native SGI (and ubiquitous UNIX) tools can do the job?
- -- again, unless there's some compelling advantage. So I guess that's
- what I'm asking: is there?
-
- Thanks,
- -P.
- --
- ************************f*u*cn*rd*ths*u*cn*gt*a*gd*jb************************
- Peter S. Shenkin, Box 768 Havemeyer Hall, Dept. of Chemistry, Columbia Univ.,
- New York, NY 10027; shenkin@still3.chem.columbia.edu; (212) 854-5143
- ******* ...ghostlier demarcations, keener sounds. (Wallace Stevens) ********
-