[Ntp] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Calls for Adoption -- NTP Extension Field drafts -- Four separate drafts

"Ulrich Windl" <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> Mon, 07 October 2019 08:53 UTC

Return-Path: <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46D2D120142 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 01:53:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WQ4fbfmyuwN9 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 01:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.uni-regensburg.de (mx1.uni-regensburg.de [IPv6:2001:638:a05:137:165:0:3:bdf7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 927BA1200DB for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 01:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 52D366000052 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 10:53:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by mx1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEC96600004D for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 10:53:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 07 Oct 2019 10:53:19 +0200
Message-Id: <5D9AFCFF020000A1000342D2@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 18.1.1
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 10:53:19 +0200
From: "Ulrich Windl" <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
To: "Hal Murray" <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>,<mlichvar@redhat.com>
Cc: "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>
References: <7E451B3D020000C32D505500@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <0AF611CC020000A286EDC2A6@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <5D66392D020000A100033273@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <7DA437750200007486EDC2A6@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <EC0267640200002C6A6A8CFC@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <A7C4D27502000083822C0D04@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <D5F28766020000316A6A8CFC@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <2E18D20E0200009A822C0D04@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <4B834D170200006586EDC2A6@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <831B91BE020000B87ED719BE@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <5D6CB84E020000A100033405@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <6A31A7C90200006043047E14@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <87F2C84C0200007A6A6A8CFC@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <0A3D67B1020000F643047E14@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <6FF2BC4A020000476A6A8CFC@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <5249D1890200002F43047E14@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <5249D1890200002F43047E14@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/M42B0yWs6w12Cy_D7wsN_cxgOSU>
Subject: [Ntp] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Calls for Adoption -- NTP Extension Field drafts -- Four separate drafts
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 08:53:30 -0000

>>> Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>; schrieb am 16.09.2019 um 08:36 in
Nachricht <20190916063649.3343940605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>;:

> mlichvar@redhat.com said:
>>> Can we assume that every server will have an Ethernet host address?
>> The vast majority will, but I'm not sure we can rely on them being random.

> 
> They are definitely not random.  They are unique.  (unless somebody screws 
> up)

Hi & sorry for the late reply!

On unique: Once we had a defective motherboard with on-board NICs (HP
server).
After having replaced the board we had some strange network errors.
As it turned out, the new motherboard's NICs had the same hardware addresses
as som NAS storage also sold by HP...

When I had asked the technican to reprogram the NICs addresses on the
replacement board, they sent another board instead...

> 
> Within a batch of Ethernet cards, they will probably be sequential.  (I'll 
> say 
> more if anybody wants.)

On such HP server boards, the on-board NICs have a sequentiual MAC, meaning
that it's programmed (see above).

> 
> My handwave guess is that the chances of a collision is in the same ballpark

> 
> as the chances of poor random numbers.

Regards,
Ulrich

> 
> 
> ‑‑ 
> These are my opinions.  I hate spam.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list
> ntp@ietf.org 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp