Re: Spurious positive leap second announcement?
- From: "David J Taylor" <david-taylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 11:09:40 GMT
Martin Burnicki wrote:
Hi all,[]
David J Taylor wrote:
Noted this in my even log:
Detected positive leap second announcement for 2007-04-01 00:00:00
UTC
So if none of the upstream servers sends the announcement anymore,[]
the local ntpd just seems to "forget" the announcement it has seen
before. However, I'll have a closer look at this.
So end of March is also a candidate for faulty announcements, even
though there's currently no pending leap second announcement.
Martin
Martin,
Many thanks for your analysis. If NTP is capable of forgetting the false
announcement, that's great. However, I would like to know how to confirm
this on the particular system. Can anyone explain the significance of the
"leap_none" in the output below?
C:\>ntpq -c rv
assID=0 status=0664 leap_none, sync_ntp, 6 events, event_peer/strat_chg,
version="ntpd 4.2.0b@xxxxxxxxxxxx Dec 22 12:23:10 (UTC+01:00) 2005 (1)",
processor="unknown", system="WINDOWS/NT", leap=00, stratum=2,
precision=-23, rootdelay=1.395, rootdispersion=50.905, peer=53081,
refid=192.168.0.3,
reftime=c9991306.8c1ee90a Wed, Mar 7 2007 10:31:34.547, poll=10,
clock=c99919a7.de0c922d Wed, Mar 7 2007 10:59:51.867, state=4,
offset=7.139, frequency=11.194, jitter=0.583, noise=1.504,
stability=0.046, tai=0
C:\>
Does "leap_none" tell me anything about the way this client will behave?
I've tried searching but haven't found a simple, plain English
explanation!
Thanks,
David
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Spurious positive leap second announcement?
- From: Martin Burnicki
- Re: Spurious positive leap second announcement?
- References:
- Spurious positive leap second announcement?
- From: David J Taylor
- Re: Spurious positive leap second announcement?
- From: Martin Burnicki
- Spurious positive leap second announcement?
- Prev by Date: NTP Question
- Next by Date: Re: Spurious positive leap second announcement?
- Previous by thread: Re: Spurious positive leap second announcement?
- Next by thread: Re: Spurious positive leap second announcement?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|