NTP rejecting upstream due to “peer_dist”NTP fudge network source stratumSingle NTP server on isolate...
PTIJ: Why can't I eat anything?
The bar has been raised
Why would one plane in this picture not have gear down yet?
In the late 1940’s to early 1950’s what technology was available that could melt a LOT of ice?
Good for you! in Russian
What does a stand alone "T" index value do?
Why does Deadpool say "You're welcome, Canada," after shooting Ryan Reynolds in the end credits?
Is "history" a male-biased word ("his+story")?
Single word request: Harming the benefactor
Placing subfig vertically
How much attack damage does the AC boost from a shield prevent on average?
Do f-stop and exposure time perfectly cancel?
Can someone explain what is being said here in color publishing in the American Mathematical Monthly?
Why the color red for the Republican Party
Good allowance savings plan?
Is there an elementary proof that there are infinitely many primes that are *not* completely split in an abelian extension?
Is having access to past exams cheating and, if yes, could it be proven just by a good grade?
Am I not good enough for you?
Can you reject a postdoc offer after the PI has paid a large sum for flights/accommodation for your visit?
What is the chance of making a successful appeal to dismissal decision from a PhD program after failing the qualifying exam in the 2nd attempt?
How do you like my writing?
Things to avoid when using voltage regulators?
A three room house but a three headED dog
If the Captain's screens are out, does he switch seats with the co-pilot?
NTP rejecting upstream due to “peer_dist”
NTP fudge network source stratumSingle NTP server on isolate networkLeap-second flag not forwarded to NTP clientsHow can I test that I am correctly setting a new ntp server?NTP Version Checkntpd servers stuck in init state when defined by hostname, but sync correctly when defined by IP addressntpd appears to work with ipv6 servers, but not ipv4How to set up local ntp server without internet access on ubuntu?Why is NTP considering my server inadequate?NTP peer's upstream source has same IP causing sync loop
Currently NTP is rejecting its upstream and is drifting quite badly (15 seconds of offset so far and growing). When checking the reason using ntpq the flash code is flash=400 peer_dist.
Checking the NTP documentation the peer is marked as distant if the roundtrip takes longer than 1.5 seconds. However using tcpdump I can see the packets leave and the reply return in milliseconds:
09:06:36.304204 IP 10.127.255.230.ntp > 10.127.255.213.ntp: NTPv4, Client, length 68
09:06:36.304371 IP 10.127.255.213.ntp > 10.127.255.230.ntp: NTPv4, Server, length 68
The general architecture here is a 1 ntp server in this subnet (that gets its time from an upstream outside the cluster) that serves times to the nodes in the subnet. The server is in sync and serving time as normal, however all the nodes in the subnet report as unsynchronised.
Simply restarting ntpd has no effect as the peer is still rejected. However after changing the maxdist using tos maxdist 5000 in the ntp.conf, then it syncs (flash=00 ok).
Why would ntp think that the distance is greater than 1.5s when I can see (using ntpq/tcpdump) that requests complete in milliseconds? Is there some internal NTP parameter that I can tweak other than maxdist that would make sense here? Is there some more debugging that can be done to diagnose this?
This is just one example of a cluster where this is happening, but I see the same symptoms elsewhere.
For reference, here is the (snarky) ntp documentation for maxdist:
maxdist maxdistance
Specify the synchronization distance threshold used by the clock selection algorithm. The default is 1.5 s. This determines both the minimum number of packets to set the system clock and the maximum roundtrip delay. It can be decreased to improve reliability or increased to synchronize clocks on the Moon or planets.
configuration ntp ntpd debugging
asked Dec 7 '17 at 9:45
OverlordAlexOverlordAlex
1011
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 2 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
add a comment |
Currently NTP is rejecting its upstream and is drifting quite badly (15 seconds of offset so far and growing). When checking the reason using ntpq the flash code is flash=400 peer_dist.
Checking the NTP documentation the peer is marked as distant if the roundtrip takes longer than 1.5 seconds. However using tcpdump I can see the packets leave and the reply return in milliseconds:
09:06:36.304204 IP 10.127.255.230.ntp > 10.127.255.213.ntp: NTPv4, Client, length 68
09:06:36.304371 IP 10.127.255.213.ntp > 10.127.255.230.ntp: NTPv4, Server, length 68
The general architecture here is a 1 ntp server in this subnet (that gets its time from an upstream outside the cluster) that serves times to the nodes in the subnet. The server is in sync and serving time as normal, however all the nodes in the subnet report as unsynchronised.
Simply restarting ntpd has no effect as the peer is still rejected. However after changing the maxdist using tos maxdist 5000 in the ntp.conf, then it syncs (flash=00 ok).
Why would ntp think that the distance is greater than 1.5s when I can see (using ntpq/tcpdump) that requests complete in milliseconds? Is there some internal NTP parameter that I can tweak other than maxdist that would make sense here? Is there some more debugging that can be done to diagnose this?
This is just one example of a cluster where this is happening, but I see the same symptoms elsewhere.
For reference, here is the (snarky) ntp documentation for maxdist:
maxdist maxdistance
Specify the synchronization distance threshold used by the clock selection algorithm. The default is 1.5 s. This determines both the minimum number of packets to set the system clock and the maximum roundtrip delay. It can be decreased to improve reliability or increased to synchronize clocks on the Moon or planets.
configuration ntp ntpd debugging
asked Dec 7 '17 at 9:45
OverlordAlexOverlordAlex
1011
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 2 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
1
There is nothing snarky in the ntp docs for maxdist. Prof. Mills got a grant for interplanetary timekeeping
– dfc
Dec 7 '17 at 19:08
add a comment |
Currently NTP is rejecting its upstream and is drifting quite badly (15 seconds of offset so far and growing). When checking the reason using ntpq the flash code is flash=400 peer_dist.
Checking the NTP documentation the peer is marked as distant if the roundtrip takes longer than 1.5 seconds. However using tcpdump I can see the packets leave and the reply return in milliseconds:
09:06:36.304204 IP 10.127.255.230.ntp > 10.127.255.213.ntp: NTPv4, Client, length 68
09:06:36.304371 IP 10.127.255.213.ntp > 10.127.255.230.ntp: NTPv4, Server, length 68
The general architecture here is a 1 ntp server in this subnet (that gets its time from an upstream outside the cluster) that serves times to the nodes in the subnet. The server is in sync and serving time as normal, however all the nodes in the subnet report as unsynchronised.
Simply restarting ntpd has no effect as the peer is still rejected. However after changing the maxdist using tos maxdist 5000 in the ntp.conf, then it syncs (flash=00 ok).
Why would ntp think that the distance is greater than 1.5s when I can see (using ntpq/tcpdump) that requests complete in milliseconds? Is there some internal NTP parameter that I can tweak other than maxdist that would make sense here? Is there some more debugging that can be done to diagnose this?
This is just one example of a cluster where this is happening, but I see the same symptoms elsewhere.
For reference, here is the (snarky) ntp documentation for maxdist:
maxdist maxdistance
Specify the synchronization distance threshold used by the clock selection algorithm. The default is 1.5 s. This determines both the minimum number of packets to set the system clock and the maximum roundtrip delay. It can be decreased to improve reliability or increased to synchronize clocks on the Moon or planets.
configuration ntp ntpd debugging
asked Dec 7 '17 at 9:45
OverlordAlexOverlordAlex
1011
Currently NTP is rejecting its upstream and is drifting quite badly (15 seconds of offset so far and growing). When checking the reason using ntpq the flash code is flash=400 peer_dist.
Checking the NTP documentation the peer is marked as distant if the roundtrip takes longer than 1.5 seconds. However using tcpdump I can see the packets leave and the reply return in milliseconds:
09:06:36.304204 IP 10.127.255.230.ntp > 10.127.255.213.ntp: NTPv4, Client, length 68
09:06:36.304371 IP 10.127.255.213.ntp > 10.127.255.230.ntp: NTPv4, Server, length 68
The general architecture here is a 1 ntp server in this subnet (that gets its time from an upstream outside the cluster) that serves times to the nodes in the subnet. The server is in sync and serving time as normal, however all the nodes in the subnet report as unsynchronised.
Simply restarting ntpd has no effect as the peer is still rejected. However after changing the maxdist using tos maxdist 5000 in the ntp.conf, then it syncs (flash=00 ok).
Why would ntp think that the distance is greater than 1.5s when I can see (using ntpq/tcpdump) that requests complete in milliseconds? Is there some internal NTP parameter that I can tweak other than maxdist that would make sense here? Is there some more debugging that can be done to diagnose this?
This is just one example of a cluster where this is happening, but I see the same symptoms elsewhere.
For reference, here is the (snarky) ntp documentation for maxdist:
maxdist maxdistance
Specify the synchronization distance threshold used by the clock selection algorithm. The default is 1.5 s. This determines both the minimum number of packets to set the system clock and the maximum roundtrip delay. It can be decreased to improve reliability or increased to synchronize clocks on the Moon or planets.
configuration ntp ntpd debugging
configuration ntp ntpd debugging
asked Dec 7 '17 at 9:45
OverlordAlexOverlordAlex
1011
asked Dec 7 '17 at 9:45
OverlordAlexOverlordAlex
1011
asked Dec 7 '17 at 9:45
OverlordAlexOverlordAlex
1011
asked Dec 7 '17 at 9:45
OverlordAlexOverlordAlex
1011
asked Dec 7 '17 at 9:45
OverlordAlexOverlordAlex
1011
1011
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 2 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 2 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
1
There is nothing snarky in the ntp docs for maxdist. Prof. Mills got a grant for interplanetary timekeeping
– dfc
Dec 7 '17 at 19:08
add a comment |
1
There is nothing snarky in the ntp docs for maxdist. Prof. Mills got a grant for interplanetary timekeeping
– dfc
Dec 7 '17 at 19:08
1
1
There is nothing snarky in the ntp docs for maxdist. Prof. Mills got a grant for interplanetary timekeeping
– dfc
Dec 7 '17 at 19:08
There is nothing snarky in the ntp docs for maxdist. Prof. Mills got a grant for interplanetary timekeeping
– dfc
Dec 7 '17 at 19:08
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
If ntpd is reporting the peer_dist code for the upstream peer, that means that between the root dispersion reported by the peer and the dispersion measured in the peer association, the 1.5-second threshold has been exceeded.
Given that your requests complete within a few milliseconds, it seems likely that the problem lies with the upstream stratum. To confirm or deny this you'd need to analyse a packet capture. Are you in control of the upstream as well?
It's probably worth mentioning here that your design of having 1 NTP server in the subnet associating with 1 NTP server upstream means that you're nullifying the selection and clustering algorithms, which will result in less accurate time for clients. Each NTP stratum should have 4-10 sources for maximum accuracy.
answered Dec 12 '17 at 1:40
Paul GearPaul Gear
2,9641131
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "2"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f886995%2fntp-rejecting-upstream-due-to-peer-dist%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If ntpd is reporting the peer_dist code for the upstream peer, that means that between the root dispersion reported by the peer and the dispersion measured in the peer association, the 1.5-second threshold has been exceeded.
Given that your requests complete within a few milliseconds, it seems likely that the problem lies with the upstream stratum. To confirm or deny this you'd need to analyse a packet capture. Are you in control of the upstream as well?
It's probably worth mentioning here that your design of having 1 NTP server in the subnet associating with 1 NTP server upstream means that you're nullifying the selection and clustering algorithms, which will result in less accurate time for clients. Each NTP stratum should have 4-10 sources for maximum accuracy.
answered Dec 12 '17 at 1:40
Paul GearPaul Gear
2,9641131
add a comment |
If ntpd is reporting the peer_dist code for the upstream peer, that means that between the root dispersion reported by the peer and the dispersion measured in the peer association, the 1.5-second threshold has been exceeded.
Given that your requests complete within a few milliseconds, it seems likely that the problem lies with the upstream stratum. To confirm or deny this you'd need to analyse a packet capture. Are you in control of the upstream as well?
It's probably worth mentioning here that your design of having 1 NTP server in the subnet associating with 1 NTP server upstream means that you're nullifying the selection and clustering algorithms, which will result in less accurate time for clients. Each NTP stratum should have 4-10 sources for maximum accuracy.
answered Dec 12 '17 at 1:40
Paul GearPaul Gear
2,9641131
add a comment |
If ntpd is reporting the peer_dist code for the upstream peer, that means that between the root dispersion reported by the peer and the dispersion measured in the peer association, the 1.5-second threshold has been exceeded.
Given that your requests complete within a few milliseconds, it seems likely that the problem lies with the upstream stratum. To confirm or deny this you'd need to analyse a packet capture. Are you in control of the upstream as well?
It's probably worth mentioning here that your design of having 1 NTP server in the subnet associating with 1 NTP server upstream means that you're nullifying the selection and clustering algorithms, which will result in less accurate time for clients. Each NTP stratum should have 4-10 sources for maximum accuracy.
answered Dec 12 '17 at 1:40
Paul GearPaul Gear
2,9641131
If ntpd is reporting the peer_dist code for the upstream peer, that means that between the root dispersion reported by the peer and the dispersion measured in the peer association, the 1.5-second threshold has been exceeded.
Given that your requests complete within a few milliseconds, it seems likely that the problem lies with the upstream stratum. To confirm or deny this you'd need to analyse a packet capture. Are you in control of the upstream as well?
It's probably worth mentioning here that your design of having 1 NTP server in the subnet associating with 1 NTP server upstream means that you're nullifying the selection and clustering algorithms, which will result in less accurate time for clients. Each NTP stratum should have 4-10 sources for maximum accuracy.
answered Dec 12 '17 at 1:40
Paul GearPaul Gear
2,9641131
answered Dec 12 '17 at 1:40
Paul GearPaul Gear
2,9641131
answered Dec 12 '17 at 1:40
Paul GearPaul Gear
2,9641131
answered Dec 12 '17 at 1:40
Paul GearPaul Gear
2,9641131
2,9641131
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f886995%2fntp-rejecting-upstream-due-to-peer-dist%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
There is nothing snarky in the ntp docs for maxdist. Prof. Mills got a grant for interplanetary timekeeping
– dfc
Dec 7 '17 at 19:08