Re: (Fwd) Re: xntp3-5.85: Linux trouble

lilo (
Wed, 5 Feb 1997 12:52:36 -0600 (CST)



Have you tried xntp lately? I'm running xntp 3-5.89 under linux kernel
2.0.28, Red Hat 4.0 distribution plus the updates, and it is truly a gem.
I'm very impressed. I'm cc:'ing Dave Mills; thank you, Dave, for not giving
up on us! It really is running smoothly, almost like clockw--um,
whatever... :) This is one user who's taking xntp out of the `active issues'
file---it is so helpful to have a solid clock again! :)

:) lilo

>xntpdc> version
>xntpdc 3-5.89 Wed Feb 5 09:59:32 CST 1997 (2)
>xntpdc> sysinfo
>system peer:
>system peer mode: client
>leap indicator: 00
>stratum: 3
>precision: -16
>root distance: 0.18008 s
>root dispersion: 0.12007 s
>reference ID: []
>reference time: b6a353ae.8431b000 Wed, Feb 5 1997 12:45:02.516
>system flags: auth monitor pll stats kernel_sync
>frequency: 0.000 ppm
>stability: 27.473 ppm
>broadcastdelay: 0.003906 s
>authdelay: 0.000122 s
>xntpdc> kerninfo
>pll offset: 0 us
>pll frequency: -104.919 ppm
>maximum error: 150904 us
>estimated error: 96000 us
>status: 0001
>pll time constant: 2
>precision: 1 us
>frequency tolerance: 512 ppm
>pps frequency: 0.000 ppm
>pps stability: 512.000 ppm
>pps jitter: 800 us
>calibration interval: 4 s
>calibration cycles: 0
>jitter exceeded: 0
>stability exceeded: 0
>calibration errors: 0
>offset: -0.081265 s
>frequency: -77.857 ppm
>poll adjust: -30
>watchdog timer: 47 s

On Mon, 23 Sep 1996, Ulrich Windl wrote:

> Dear kernel hackers,
> I've been trying to streamline the Linux NTP support in the last
> months, but didn't dare to change too much. With the message
> attached, I suspect we should work on standardized NTP support for
> the kernel if we don't want to drop it completely. Especially the
> last sentence worries me...
> Ulrich
> ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 96 13:42:23 EDT
> From:
> To: Ulrich Windl <>
> Cc:,
> Subject: Re: xntp3-5.85: Linux trouble
> Ulrich,
> I get about ten messages a day on some problem with NTP, some of them
> pretty green. Of those, eight are on Linux and of those four are
> on the darn timex.h problem. I've hollered and screamed for two years
> on this problem, but the Linux folk seem not to listen. It's real
> easy to fix, just use the current timex.h header file in the
> current kernel.tar.Z release, which has been stable for two years.
> My present course is to disable the kernel modifications, unless some
> interested soul cares to unravel the fine points. As it is, half the
> modifications (PPS support) don't work anyway with the broken
> structure definitions. The FreeBSD version works just fine. My marbles
> are on that system.
> Dave

Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv