Groups > comp.protocols.time.ntp > #164193

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

From	"Windl, Ulrich" <u.windl@ukr.de>
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 10:23 +0000
Organization	Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Message-ID	<e0bf2cdc994241049f4036a014892cd8@ukr.de> (permalink)
References	(2 earlier) <1040f45$2qa5k$1@dont-email.me> <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

Miroslav,

from the RFC citations found in the bug report it seems to be specified differently, or I misunderstood.

Kind regards,
Ulrich Windl

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2025 11:42 AM
> To: Windl, Ulrich <u.windl@ukr.de>
> Cc: Dave Hart <davehart@gmail.com>; questions@lists.ntp.org; Jürgen
> Perlinger <juergen.perlinger@t-online.de>; Jürgen Perlinger
> <perlinger@ntp.org>; Windl, Ulrich <windl@ntp.org>
> Subject: [EXT] Re: Re: Delay in Switching to Stratum 16 After Local Reference
> Loss on ntpd 4.2.8p18
> 
> Sicherheits-Hinweis: Diese E-Mail wurde von einer Person außerhalb des
> UKR gesendet. Seien Sie vorsichtig vor gefälschten Absendern, wenn Sie auf
> Links klicken, Anhänge öffnen oder weitere Aktionen ausführen, bevor Sie
> die Echtheit überprüft haben.
> 
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 09:23:12AM +0000, Windl, Ulrich wrote:
> > Actually, I had completely forgotten about that issue. Reading it again, it
> seems stratum should be 16 if all sources are unreachable (lost).
> 
> Why should it do that?
> 
> The idea in NTPv4 is that the decision if a source is acceptable
> should be made on the client side. If a server loses all time sources,
> its root dispersion will grow (15 ppm by default). If a client of that
> server has other sources, it can reselect when the distance becomes
> larger than that of the other sources.
> 
> If the server quickly switches to the unsynchronized state (as recent
> ntpd versions seem to be doing), the client can no longer synchronize
> to it, even if it has no other sources available. If there are
> multiple clients of that server, their clocks will not stay in sync,
> each will be drifting on its own.
> 
> --
> 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