nanog mailing list archives
Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server
From: "Majdi S. Abbas" <msa () samurai sfo dead-dog com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 07:05:41 -0700
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 09:55:21AM -0400, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
No. http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&selm=3C32924F.994E1D01%40udel.edu
"Every critical organization should run at least four low-stratum servers configured as above, so dependant servers and clients can do the same thing. Each critical server should run NTP symmetric mode (better yet manycast mode) with each of the other servers at the same stratum, together with at least one peer at the same stratume in another trusted organization." By this criteria, a stratum 2 mesh of a bunch of top tier routers or diverse hosts, with external influence, should be okay. --msa
Current thread:
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server, (continued)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server CARL . P . HIRSCH (Aug 27)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server Mike Lyon (Aug 27)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server John Todd (Aug 27)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server bmanning (Aug 27)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server Majdi S. Abbas (Aug 27)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server David G. Andersen (Aug 27)
- Message not available
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server David G. Andersen (Aug 28)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server John Todd (Aug 27)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server Mike Lyon (Aug 27)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server Randy Bush (Aug 28)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server Robert E. Seastrom (Aug 28)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server Majdi S. Abbas (Aug 28)
- Re: Standalone Stratum 1 NTP Server Johannes Ullrich (Aug 28)