>> Note that it is using the old nonce. > I had to stare at this for quite a while before I figured it out. > When I switched from the old C code's buggy use of a counter to trigger the > new nonce request to a timeout, I also needed to invert the order of > operation of the nonce request and the MRU fragment request from the way C > ntpq did it. It was kinda subtle.
The second batch all started to work after I learned enough about the code to find the place to drop in the 2 or 3 lines of code to process the new nonce in the returned data. I'm not sure the code you are describing works correctly. I've seen lots of confusion on a lossy link. I haven't looked into it. > I think you'll find it works better now. There's a fair chance this fixes > Sanjeev's tracker bug #206, too. It's more complicated than that. I'll try in another message. -------- > I'm going to have a look at improving that documentation today. It's in a > rather parlous state. I added a few lines for maxlsint. There are also KoD and ??? that are shortcuts for something else. There is some simple mapping. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
