[LoN]Kamikaze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My original intention was just to say that openntpd works just out of the > box, > while ntpd doesn't.
That's just plain wrong. ntpd _does_ work out of the box (unless your configuration is broken), and it seems to be more accurate than openntpd. Demanding to replace ntpd with openntpd in the FreeBSD base system because you cannot get the configuration right is ridiculous. > > ntp.conf > > server 0.de.pool.ntp.org minpoll 4 maxpoll 8 > server 1.de.pool.ntp.org minpoll 4 maxpoll 8 > server 2.de.pool.ntp.org minpoll 4 maxpoll 8 > server ntp1.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de minpoll 4 maxpoll 8 > server ntp2.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de minpoll 4 maxpoll 8 > server ntp3.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de minpoll 4 maxpoll 8 > server ntp4.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de minpoll 4 maxpoll 8 > > restrict default ignore > restrict 127.0.0.1 You need to add proper restrict lines for the servers, of course. Basically you have configured ntpd to ignore all servers. Also, putting "minpoll 4 maxpoll 8" on all servers is somewhat suboptimal and puts an unnecessary burden on the servers and networks without reason. I recommend to use low polling intervals and the iburst option for one or two local servers only (e.g. for NTP servers located in your direct upstream or at your ISP), and higher polling intervals for other public servers. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd "Software gets slower faster than hardware gets faster." -- Niklaus Wirth _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
