Groups > comp.protocols.time.ntp > #164195

Re: [EXT] Re: Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18

From	"Miroslav Lichvar via questions Mailing List" <questions@lists.ntp.org>
Newsgroups	comp.protocols.time.ntp
Subject	Re: [EXT] Re: Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18
Date	2025-07-02 14:58 +0000
Organization	Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Message-ID	<aGVIVbdlZAqr0YxA@localhost> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <e0bf2cdc994241049f4036a014892cd8@ukr.de> <CAD9nGEw-FxVp4YhonS2XNLACfDY0BfJ4ZMsNie0LVsHTqXq1vQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbSiYAfxWmzdx494b5AWNGnfbFwCL7NfZnjMy0jxjY7GpTC_w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbSiYCjHLqga5+A5i60dLm04bP8M+T_i_zdTpeSro5ScYXXwA@mail.gmail.com> <f5ff0fc9703e414b999c5845039667fa@ukr.de>

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 09:50:37AM +0000, Windl, Ulrich wrote:
> Miroslav,
> 
> from the RFC citations found in the bug report it seems to be specified differently, or I misunderstood.

If you are referring to the Figure 24 of RFC 5905, which has "return
(UNSYNC)" for this path, there doesn't seem to be anything suggesting
that should be handled by resetting the clock to an unsynchronized
state.

The clock_select() function in A.5.5.1 doesn't have a return value and
in this case when no usable sources are present it doesn't do
anything, it just returns.

        /*
         * There must be at least NSANE survivors to satisfy the
         * correctness assertions.  Ordinarily, the Byzantine criteria
         * require four survivors, but for the demonstration here, one
         * is acceptable.
         */
        if (s.n < NSANE)
                return;

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar

Back to comp.protocols.time.ntp | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18 "Harlan Stenn via questions Mailing List" <questions@lists.ntp.org> - 2025-07-01 03:48 +0000
  Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18 Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> - 2025-07-01 11:00 +0000
    RE: [EXT] Re: Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18 "Windl, Ulrich" <u.windl@ukr.de> - 2025-07-02 10:23 +0000
      Re: [EXT] Re: Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18 "Miroslav Lichvar via questions Mailing List" <questions@lists.ntp.org> - 2025-07-02 14:58 +0000
        RE: [EXT] Re: Re: Re: Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18 "Windl, Ulrich" <u.windl@ukr.de> - 2025-07-07 10:58 +0000
    Re: [EXT] Re: Re: Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18 "Miroslav Lichvar via questions Mailing List" <questions@lists.ntp.org> - 2025-07-07 09:38 +0000
  Re: [EXT] Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18 "Miroslav Lichvar via questions Mailing List" <questions@lists.ntp.org> - 2025-07-02 10:43 +0000
    RE: [EXT] Re: Re: Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18 "Windl, Ulrich" <u.windl@ukr.de> - 2025-07-04 17:08 +0000

csiph-web