Take the 2-minute tour ×
Unix & Linux Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Linux, FreeBSD and other Un*x-like operating systems.. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm configuring NTP symmetric modes.
Say I have Peer A (192.168.101.1) and Peer B(192.168.101.2) and configure their ntp.conf as follows:

# Peer A
peer 192.168.101.2
server 127.127.1.0
fudge 127.127.1.0 stratum 10

For Peer B, I set both its server and peer to A.

# Peer B
peer 192.168.101.1
server 127.127.1.0
fudge 127.127.1.0 stratum 14

If I set their time apart (like 10 minutes), they each will synchronize locally instead of with each other(may I should've waited longer).

And I have to add A as B's server in B's ntp.conf:

# Peer B
peer 192.168.101.1
server 192.168.101.1
server 127.127.1.0
fudge 127.127.1.0 stratum 14

Then B will synchronize its time to A quickly.

This leaves me in doubt about the symmetric mode's effectiveness. Why not just set A as B's server and both of them as clients' servers? If A is down, the cluster time can still fail over to B and stay in synchronism.

share|improve this question
    
What is the problem you are trying to solve? –  dfc Jan 17 at 23:01
    
@dfc sorry, my question is not well formed and I've forgot what my problem was then. Thanks for your time –  manuzhang Jan 18 at 6:25

1 Answer 1

It is not entirely clear what problem you are trying to solve. It looks like you want to provide time to local clients and have some fault tolerance. You should use the orphan mode this is why it was added in 4.2.2. Does this diagram look like what you are interested in doing:

enter image description here

Why are you using the undisciplined local clock?

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.