RE: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NTP) OptionsforDHCPv6
Brad Knowles <brad@shub-internet.org> Wed, 28 November 2007 13:55 UTC
Return-path: <dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1IxNNi-0006Tv-Gi; Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:55:14 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix5ZF-00056P-70
for dhcwg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:53:57 -0500
Received: from smtp102.his.com ([216.194.225.125])
by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix5ZA-00078O-A9
for dhcwg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:53:52 -0500
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp102.his.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F32D413E4286;
Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:53:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from smtp102.his.com ([216.194.225.125])
by localhost (smtp102.his.com [216.194.225.125]) (amavisd-new,
port 10024)
with ESMTP id 15857-06; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:53:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from vhost109.his.com (vhost109.his.com [216.194.225.101])
by smtp102.his.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0FE413E42ED;
Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:53:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [192.168.1.101] (localhost.his.com [127.0.0.1])
by vhost109.his.com (8.13.1/8.12.3) with ESMTP id lARIrkEL018716;
Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:53:47 -0500 (EST)
(envelope-from brad@shub-internet.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240800c37214d60719@[192.168.1.101]>
In-Reply-To: <548EC156325C6340B2E85DF90CAE85860199F92F@E03MVB3-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.
net>
References: <548EC156325C6340B2E85DF90CAE85860199F92F@E03MVB3-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.
net>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:42:21 -0600
To: <anthony.flavin@bt.com>, <brad@shub-internet.org>, <Mark_Andrews@isc.org>
From: Brad Knowles <brad@shub-internet.org>
Subject: RE: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NTP) OptionsforDHCPv6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at smtp502.his.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.342 tagged_above=-99 required=5
tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1.8, AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599]
X-Spam-Score: -4.342
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:55:11 -0500
Cc: mayer@ntp.isc.org, ntpwg@lists.ntp.org, mellon@fugue.com, dhcwg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: dhcwg.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>,
<mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>,
<mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
On 11/27/07, <anthony.flavin@bt.com> wrote: > Completely wrong. My statement was with regards to most ISPs that I have experience with or or where we have had reports from others. Your specific ISP was not necessarily included in that statement. Therefore, your single solitary counter-example does not necessarily disprove anything. > I can assure you that we do run our own NTP servers, and our customer > routers are pre-configured with a Name not an IP address to get to them. > We let our DNS servers sort out the load balancing issues (if we ever > get any). You're just one ISP. You do not comprise the whole of all ISPs on the planet. > It's working fine, and several hundred-thousand clients can't be wrong! And I personally worked at AOL (tens of millions of customers) and the largest ISP in Belgium (over a million customers), and I've consulted at other ISPs around the world. We've also had reports regarding a number of other ISPs around the world. Your one counter example does not disprove our experience. -- Brad Knowles <brad@shub-internet.org> LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu> _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… Harlan Stenn
- Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… Mark Andrews
- Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… TS Glassey
- RE: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… anthony.flavin
- Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… Hui Deng
- Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… Brian Utterback
- RE: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… anthony.flavin
- Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… Mark Andrews
- Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… Brad Knowles
- RE: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… Brad Knowles
- Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… Brad Knowles
- Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NT… Danny Mayer