Hello Dag-Erling
On 14.01.2014 14:11, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote:
> Garrett Wollman <wollman@bimajority.org> writes:
>> For a "pure" client, I would suggest "restrict default ignore" ought
>> to be the norm. (Followed by entries to unrestrict localhost over v4
>> and v6.)
>
> Pure clients shouldn't use ntpd(8). They should use sntp(8) or a
> lightweight NTP client like ttsntpd.
I think it is a bad advice, then ntpd is much nicer to NTP =
servers (mainly the NTP Pool), then sntp is.
I am running a few NTP servers which are also in the NTP Pool and =
I do volunteer to be also in the tr (Turkey) zone. In Turkey =
there is one large telecommunication company with a lot of CPEs =
which are doing sntp requests quite often. Even if the IP =
addresses for the Pool are rotated quickly, they are all using =
the same few DNS server to resolve and those hammering the same =
few IP address at the same time. It is quite well visible in my =
graphs [1] with the large peaks. The quiet stable ground traffic =
is from nice ntpd clients which are distributed evenly on the NTP =
Pool.
[1] http://www.home4u.ch/ntp/
bye
Fabian
_______________________________________________
freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"