[vox-tech] rdate servers and apt-get for redhat

[Matt Holland]

Eric Nelson wrote:
> Uh oh.  I didn't know it was anything but some government service.  Do 
> you know any ntp servers which are less restrictive?  I don't want to 
> have bad dreams about stratum 1 servers.  They sound a little scary.

This page: http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/clock2.html contains a 
list of stratum 2 servers, along with their policies.  Usually you just 
need to email the server admin and tell them that you're using their server.

Matt

> On Sunday 15 December 2002 17:57, Rick Moen wrote:
> 
>>Quoting Eric Nelson (en77@attbi.com):
>>
>>>Here is what I use in crontab:
>>>59 * * * * /usr/sbin/ntpdate ntp-dec.usno.navy.mil >> /dev/null
>>
>>The hostname is a CNAME for usno.pa-x.dec.com, operated by Compaq
>>in Palo Alto for the U.S. Naval Observatory.  It's a stratum 1
>>server. Posted access policy is "Access Policy: open access for
>>stratum 2 servers, Compaq, others by arrangement."
>>(http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ntp.html)
>>
>>USNO states at the top of the listing at the top of the page: "All
>>of the following stratum 1 NTP servers are open to stratum 2
>>servers within the same time zone and to others by arrangement."
>>
>>http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/servers.html states:  "Please
>>respect the access policy as stated by the responsible person. It
>>is very important that potential clients avoid use of servers not
>>listed as open access, unless approved first by the responsible
>>person. This especially includes indiscriminate use of servers not
>>listed in the list, since this can be disruptive. The responsible
>>person should always be notified upon establishment of regular
>>operations with servers listed as open access. Servers listed as
>>closed access should NOT be used without prior permission, since
>>this may disrupt ongoing activities in which these servers are
>>involved."
>>
>>That page clarifies about what is meant by a stratum 2 server: 
>>"The secondary server provides synchronization to a sizable
>>population of other servers and clients on the order of 100 or
>>more."  (There's more.)
>>
>>It is not unknown for members of the general public who sync to
>>statum 1 servers without prior arrangement to find their entire IP
>>blocks blocked by the statum 1 server operator.
>>
>>On the bright side, doing the sort of periodic ntpdate you discuss
>>is less likely to risk the wrath of a statum 1 server than would
>>running ntpd against it -- as I've seen people urge on other
>>mailing lists that I guess should go nameless.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> vox-tech mailing list
> vox-tech@lists.lugod.org
> http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech