IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Ntp] Re: NTP speed of synchronization question

Tony Li <li.tony@comcast.net> Sun, 25 August 2024 00:44 UTC

Return-Path: <li.tony@comcast.net>
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 5626AC14F6FD for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Aug 2024 17:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=comcast.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nFiziavQghT0 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Aug 2024 17:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resqmta-c2p-570110.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-c2p-570110.sys.comcast.net [96.102.19.43]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE3B9C14F6F3 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Aug 2024 17:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resomta-c2p-555662.sys.comcast.net ([96.102.18.235]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 256/256 bits) (Client did not present a certificate) by resqmta-c2p-570110.sys.comcast.net with ESMTPS id i0qwsUrZWghfMi1KyshCqR; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 00:42:32 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=20190202a; t=1724546552; bh=h7GqD4Lglq7Qx7OWV4Bns3a/3mi3jxNkGN8OBy30umg=; h=Received:Received:From:Message-Id:Content-Type:Mime-Version: Subject:Date:To:Xfinity-Spam-Result; b=QDO0jC0gkAJECYDc+fDYQ33s84nBJ0whb+QZvkkW0c8HR45nyUFlt7xpnSsG/f67L rxA4aKnXz4CZfkGLtnDW0ZogtvEGlV5GQCm3E40+S4sfsw2W51jlxUwCayvia90Q32 ljbOvl4eALLFKjUsM/7VQtSBgfV1ljxhD67W/rjzlfj443/QZrmbxxQvou9Xdn0lt+ nhCvnPVRt+n0wZ6SgKBz/dvVa30NpcVGv9MebH2Aeho1p8j5MnZ3lpbYEEkmHOmTs7 pFs8bIKjhOSseQVUP6skp4wgPtEeyUzPt0tmEqI34AoCgnuqYy5suIZDjppzgbqJW8 EIOqunfbhkZAA==
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([73.93.167.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 256/256 bits) (Client did not present a certificate) by resomta-c2p-555662.sys.comcast.net with ESMTPSA id i1KwsXn8jkhVgi1KxshUNK; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 00:42:31 +0000
From: Tony Li <li.tony@comcast.net>
Message-Id: <00A46BF8-7C2B-4EB0-B89D-BD231A7A1666@comcast.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_11962426-9936-4B3B-A01F-2A985E58463B"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51\))
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2024 17:42:19 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CAMbSiYCkU1bMq7Svynf6cmYDs2LRzR2RXmr5gFURUCfq3hMJyA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Hart <davehart@gmail.com>
References: <tte@cs.fau.de> <ZrxmPeWAKqsIv86j@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <20240821102828.9398E62003D@107-137-68-211.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> <CAMbSiYCkU1bMq7Svynf6cmYDs2LRzR2RXmr5gFURUCfq3hMJyA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3776.700.51)
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfDlAIRS0yEmwdqxqDjSbSIgRLtOkmBGfpiDslVrMRkNprmWNq8szXEzXCluPp4p369X33SjYU+bQRee+stZVfQYWDzjp+onKU1KolGgxNbrzVYaoZlsh Oi3d6OGYJqhE8Kwr8g7yqX5QepDJcz1bDOtKESAlXCg6XpFog8ySRYSXAOmmDe64Of5UNZaUCocn9JnhU0uHUuFPrcnL7/+rVddtcL8SbQ9VSheIsy3z2SZJ 4abQ/3iA73cyQOSsJKuEumJ7mf26HavRdRx1wyv5cuA=
Message-ID-Hash: KGDGI7ROUXJKL22ONBTJ2HZN5LEJH2W3
X-Message-ID-Hash: KGDGI7ROUXJKL22ONBTJ2HZN5LEJH2W3
X-MailFrom: li.tony@comcast.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ntp.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Hal Murray <halmurray+ietf@sonic.net>, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [Ntp] Re: NTP speed of synchronization question
List-Id: Network Time Protocol <ntp.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/aDtX3dBOPx8PGSwwnnE4KihWbdg>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ntp-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ntp-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ntp-leave@ietf.org>

> I am not familiar with carrier-grade routers either, but I know in the past Cisco used the reference implementation of NTP in some of their IOS routers.  I have no idea how closely they track upstream changes to that code.

Most router vendors are not religious about tracking upstream.  Feel free to tickle your salescritter if you see things are falling behind, especially if there is an outstanding security issue.

T

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status