Re: Uptime and pf stats difference.

2006-10-26 Thread Melameth, Daniel D.
RCF wrote: > The server had been in testing for almost a month with rdate > configured to run every 6 hours before I rebooted. So I don't really > think the clock was off. I don't have this issue, but if you're running rdate every six hours, you might want to 'man ntpd' instead.

Re: Uptime and pf stats difference.

2006-10-26 Thread Matthew R. Dempsky
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 12:44:25PM +0100, RCF wrote: > The server had been in testing for almost a month with rdate > configured to run every 6 hours before I rebooted. So I don't really > think the clock was off. Clocks naturally drift over time. Four minutes over about 1.5 years seems reasonabl

Re: Uptime and pf stats difference.

2006-10-26 Thread RCF
The server had been in testing for almost a month with rdate configured to run every 6 hours before I rebooted. So I don't really think the clock was off. On 26/10/06, Alexander Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: RCF wrote: > [11:16:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ uptime > 11:16AM up 440 days, 22:15, 1 user

Re: Uptime and pf stats difference.

2006-10-26 Thread Alexander Hall
RCF wrote: [11:16:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ uptime 11:16AM up 440 days, 22:15, 1 user, load averages: 0.39, 0.26, 0.19 [11:16:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo pfctl -s info Status: Enabled for 440 days 22:20:03 Debug: Urgent I guess your time was off by a few minutes when you started your com

Uptime and pf stats difference.

2006-10-26 Thread RCF
Hi all, I came across this curiosity, it looks like the firewall was running ~4 minutes before the computer booted. Wouldn't be a bad idea I guess. I have checked 3.8 and 3.9 and such difference is not there, although those machines have only weeks of uptime. [11:15:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ uname