Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2) - NTP

This is a discussion on Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2) - NTP ; Hello All, I'd like to solve my doubt about my GPS (SPECTRACOM(2)). I have one GPS that never work. I dont know why, but my GPS is working now. Anyway my doubt is about the syncronization. Now it's syncronized as ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 36

Thread: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

  1. Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Hello All,

    I'd like to solve my doubt about my GPS (SPECTRACOM(2)). I have one
    GPS that never work.
    I dont know why, but my GPS is working now. Anyway my doubt is about
    the syncronization.
    Now it's syncronized as below, but i cant to consult the GPS. What is wrong?

    # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -q localhost
    Looking for host localhost and service ntp
    host found : localhost
    server ::1, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
    28 Feb 11:13:44 ntpdate[1074]: no server suitable for synchronization found


    # /usr/local/bin/ntptrace localhost
    localhost: stratum 1, offset -0.000110, root distance 0.000000, refid 'WWVB'


    # /usr/local/bin/ntpq
    ntpq> pe
    remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
    ================================================== ============================
    *SPECTRACOM(2) .WWVB. 0 l 44 64 377 0.000 -0.095 0.019

    ntpq>
    ntpq> as
    ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
    ================================================== =========
    1 27956 9624 yes yes none sys.peer reachable 2

    ntpq>
    ntpq> as
    ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
    ================================================== =========
    1 27956 9624 yes yes none sys.peer reachable 2

    ntpq>
    ntpq> rv 27956
    status=9624 reach, conf, sel_sys.peer, 2 events, event_reach,
    srcadr=SPECTRACOM(2), srcport=123, dstadr=127.0.0.1, dstport=123,
    leap=00, stratum=0, precision=-13, rootdelay=0.000,
    rootdispersion=1.000, refid=WWVB, reach=377, unreach=0, hmode=3,
    pmode=4, hpoll=6, ppoll=6, flash=00 ok, keyid=0, ttl=0, offset=-0.095,
    delay=0.000, dispersion=1.048, jitter=0.019,
    reftime=c9900cc2.0046862e Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:14:26.001,
    org=c9900cc2.0046862e Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:14:26.001,
    rec=c9900cc3.a75eb068 Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:14:27.653,
    xmt=c9900cf8.a78cb75d Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:15:20.654,
    filtdelay= 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00,
    filtoffset= -0.09 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 -0.09 -0.13 -0.12 -0.10,
    filtdisp= 0.12 1.08 2.03 3.00 3.98 4.94 5.90 6.84

    ntpq>
    ntpq> q
    #

    If my hardware is syncronized with the SPECTRACOM(2), why i cant consult then?
    Why i receive this message "no server suitable for synchronization found"?
    Can someone helpe me?

    I appreciate some help,

    Thanks a lot,

    Marcos Luiz Onisto
    _______________________________________________
    questions mailing list
    questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


  2. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    mlonisto@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:

    > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -q localhost
    > Looking for host localhost and service ntp
    > host found : localhost
    > server ::1, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
    > 28 Feb 11:13:44 ntpdate[1074]: no server suitable for synchronization found


    "::1" suggests it's trying to use IPv6. What do you get for

    /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -qd 127.0.0.1

    and

    /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -qd localhost

    What does "netstat -an | grep 123" show?

    The ntpq output shows that your system is synchronised.

    --
    Ronan Flood

  3. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Following myself:

    > The ntpq output shows that your system is synchronised.


    Also, what "restrict" lines do you have in ntp.conf?

    --
    Ronan Flood

  4. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Hello,

    I dont understand the output of this command , but follow below:

    # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -qd 127.0.0.1
    28 Feb 14:37:12 ntpdate[1081]: ntpdate 4.2.0@1.1161-r Thu Apr 1
    03:24:08 EST 2004 (1)
    Looking for host 127.0.0.1 and service ntp
    host found : localhost
    transmit(127.0.0.1)
    receive(127.0.0.1)
    transmit(127.0.0.1)
    receive(127.0.0.1)
    transmit(127.0.0.1)
    receive(127.0.0.1)
    transmit(127.0.0.1)
    receive(127.0.0.1)
    transmit(127.0.0.1)
    server 127.0.0.1, port 123
    stratum 1, precision -20, leap 00, trust 000
    refid [WWVB], delay 0.02580, dispersion 0.00002
    transmitted 4, in filter 4
    reference time: c9903c22.a8a70d71 Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:36:34.658
    originate timestamp: c9903c48.4aab241b Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:37:12.291
    transmit timestamp: c9903c48.4a9c6e1b Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:37:12.291
    filter delay: 0.02621 0.02586 0.02580 0.02580
    0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
    filter offset: 0.000186 0.000036 0.000009 0.000010
    0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
    delay 0.02580, dispersion 0.00002
    offset 0.000009

    28 Feb 14:37:12 ntpdate[1081]: adjust time server 127.0.0.1 offset 0.000009 sec
    #
    # netstat -an | grep 123
    *.123 Idle
    *.123 Idle
    127.0.0.1.123 Idle
    10.0.0.2.123 Idle
    192.168.64.69.123 Idle
    *.123 Idle
    #

    Everything is all right? What's is wrong?

    Tks a lot,

    Marcos Luiz Onisto



    On 28 Feb 2007 16:58:49 GMT, Ronan Flood wrote:
    > mlonisto@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:
    >
    > > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -q localhost
    > > Looking for host localhost and service ntp
    > > host found : localhost
    > > server ::1, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
    > > 28 Feb 11:13:44 ntpdate[1074]: no server suitable for synchronization found

    >
    > "::1" suggests it's trying to use IPv6. What do you get for
    >
    > /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -qd 127.0.0.1
    >
    > and
    >
    > /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -qd localhost
    >
    > What does "netstat -an | grep 123" show?
    >
    > The ntpq output shows that your system is synchronised.
    >
    > --
    > Ronan Flood
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > questions mailing list
    > questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    > https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
    >

    _______________________________________________
    questions mailing list
    questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


  5. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    On Feb 28, 9:39 am, mloni...@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > I dont understand the output of this command , but follow below:
    >
    > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -qd 127.0.0.1
    > 28 Feb 14:37:12 ntpdate[1081]: ntpdate 4...@1.1161-r Thu Apr 1
    > 03:24:08 EST 2004 (1)
    > Looking for host 127.0.0.1 and service ntp
    > host found : localhost
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > server 127.0.0.1, port 123
    > stratum 1, precision -20, leap 00, trust 000
    > refid [WWVB], delay 0.02580, dispersion 0.00002
    > transmitted 4, in filter 4
    > reference time: c9903c22.a8a70d71 Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:36:34.658
    > originate timestamp: c9903c48.4aab241b Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:37:12.291
    > transmit timestamp: c9903c48.4a9c6e1b Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:37:12.291
    > filter delay: 0.02621 0.02586 0.02580 0.02580
    > 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
    > filter offset: 0.000186 0.000036 0.000009 0.000010
    > 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
    > delay 0.02580, dispersion 0.00002
    > offset 0.000009
    >
    > 28 Feb 14:37:12 ntpdate[1081]: adjust time server 127.0.0.1 offset 0.000009 sec
    > #
    > # netstat -an | grep 123
    > *.123 Idle
    > *.123 Idle
    > 127.0.0.1.123 Idle
    > 10.0.0.2.123 Idle
    > 192.168.64.69.123 Idle
    > *.123 Idle
    > #
    >
    > Everything is all right? What's is wrong?
    >
    > Tks a lot,
    >
    > Marcos Luiz Onisto
    >


    Marcos,
    All the above looks perfectly normal.

    I don't think anything is wrong at all.

    If you want some assurance, simply add a few external sites into your
    config.

    Roger


  6. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Marcos Onisto wrote:
    > Hello All,
    >
    > I'd like to solve my doubt about my GPS (SPECTRACOM(2)). I have one
    > GPS that never work.
    > I dont know why, but my GPS is working now. Anyway my doubt is about
    > the syncronization.
    > Now it's syncronized as below, but i cant to consult the GPS. What is wrong?
    >
    > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -q localhost
    > Looking for host localhost and service ntp
    > host found : localhost
    > server ::1, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
    > 28 Feb 11:13:44 ntpdate[1074]: no server suitable for synchronization found
    >
    >
    > # /usr/local/bin/ntptrace localhost
    > localhost: stratum 1, offset -0.000110, root distance 0.000000, refid 'WWVB'
    >
    >
    > # /usr/local/bin/ntpq
    > ntpq> pe
    > remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
    > ================================================== ============================
    > *SPECTRACOM(2) .WWVB. 0 l 44 64 377 0.000 -0.095 0.019
    >


    That is not "GPS". It's a VLF (Very Low Frequency) receiver tuned to
    60 KHz. WWVB is the VLF broadcast from the National Institute of
    Standards and Technology (NIST) located in Fort Collins, Colorado.

    GPS is a satellite based system. It's an entirely different technology!


    > ntpq>
    > ntpq> as
    > ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
    > ================================================== =========
    > 1 27956 9624 yes yes none sys.peer reachable 2
    >
    > ntpq>
    > ntpq> as
    > ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
    > ================================================== =========
    > 1 27956 9624 yes yes none sys.peer reachable 2
    >
    > ntpq>
    > ntpq> rv 27956
    > status=9624 reach, conf, sel_sys.peer, 2 events, event_reach,
    > srcadr=SPECTRACOM(2), srcport=123, dstadr=127.0.0.1, dstport=123,
    > leap=00, stratum=0, precision=-13, rootdelay=0.000,
    > rootdispersion=1.000, refid=WWVB, reach=377, unreach=0, hmode=3,
    > pmode=4, hpoll=6, ppoll=6, flash=00 ok, keyid=0, ttl=0, offset=-0.095,
    > delay=0.000, dispersion=1.048, jitter=0.019,
    > reftime=c9900cc2.0046862e Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:14:26.001,
    > org=c9900cc2.0046862e Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:14:26.001,
    > rec=c9900cc3.a75eb068 Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:14:27.653,
    > xmt=c9900cf8.a78cb75d Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:15:20.654,
    > filtdelay= 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00,
    > filtoffset= -0.09 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 -0.09 -0.13 -0.12 -0.10,
    > filtdisp= 0.12 1.08 2.03 3.00 3.98 4.94 5.90 6.84
    >
    > ntpq>
    > ntpq> q
    > #
    >
    > If my hardware is syncronized with the SPECTRACOM(2), why i cant consult then?
    > Why i receive this message "no server suitable for synchronization found"?
    > Can someone helpe me?
    >


    In what way are you unable to "consult"? Nothing you have posted above
    shows any problem other than not knowing what technology you are using.

    If an NTP client attempts to synchronize with your server it should have
    no difficulty in doing so if it's properly configured.





  7. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Hello,

    I forgot do show the ntp.conf configuration, follow below:

    # cat /etc/ntp.conf
    # Arquivo :/etc/ntp.conf (versao 4)
    #
    # ultima atualizacao: 13/06/2006
    #
    server 127.127.4.2 # loopback
    #
    # ---- OPCOES DE CONTROLE DE ACESSO -----
    #
    restrict default ignore notrust
    restrict 200.160.0.0 nomodify
    restrict 200.160.1.0 nomodify
    restrict 127.0.0.1 # loopback
    #
    # -------- OPCOES DE MONITORAMENTO -------
    statistics loopstats
    statsdir /var/log/ntp/
    filegen peerstats file peers type day link enable
    filegen loopstats file loops type day link enable
    #
    # ------ OPCOES DE LOGGING -------
    logconfig all
    logfile /var/log/ntp/ntp.log
    #
    # ------ OPCOES DIVERSAS -------
    driftfile /etc/ntp.drift

    It's rigth? or something is wrong?

    Tks a lot,

    Marcos Luiz Onisto



    On 28 Feb 2007 17:07:06 GMT, Ronan Flood wrote:
    > Following myself:
    >
    > > The ntpq output shows that your system is synchronised.

    >
    > Also, what "restrict" lines do you have in ntp.conf?
    >
    > --
    > Ronan Flood
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > questions mailing list
    > questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    > https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
    >

    _______________________________________________
    questions mailing list
    questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


  8. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Hello All,

    My doubt is about how can I consult my SPECTRACOM(2)? What the correct
    way? I only can consult using the command ntpq or I can use de command
    ntpdate with the serial port (127.127.4.2)? follow below:

    # ntpdate -qd 127.127.4.2
    28 Feb 17:04:10 ntpdate[1090]: ntpdate 3-5.93e Mon Sep 20 15:45:30 PDT 1999 (1)
    transmit(127.127.4.2)
    transmit(127.127.4.2)
    transmit(127.127.4.2)
    transmit(127.127.4.2)
    transmit(127.127.4.2)
    server 127.127.4.2, port 123
    stratum 0, precision 0, leap 00, trust 000
    refid [0.0.0.0], delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000
    transmitted 4, in filter 4
    reference time: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 3:28:16.000
    originate timestamp: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 3:28:16.000
    transmit timestamp: c9905ebd.1ddcb000 Wed, Feb 28 2007 17:04:13.116
    filter delay: 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
    0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
    filter offset: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
    0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
    delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000
    offset 0.000000

    28 Feb 17:04:14 ntpdate[1090]: no server suitable for synchronization found

    Tks a lot,

    Marcos Luiz Onisto



    On 2/28/07, Richard B. gilbert wrote:
    > Marcos Onisto wrote:
    > > Hello All,
    > >
    > > I'd like to solve my doubt about my GPS (SPECTRACOM(2)). I have one
    > > GPS that never work.
    > > I dont know why, but my GPS is working now. Anyway my doubt is about
    > > the syncronization.
    > > Now it's syncronized as below, but i cant to consult the GPS. What is wrong?
    > >
    > > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -q localhost
    > > Looking for host localhost and service ntp
    > > host found : localhost
    > > server ::1, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000
    > > 28 Feb 11:13:44 ntpdate[1074]: no server suitable for synchronization found
    > >
    > >
    > > # /usr/local/bin/ntptrace localhost
    > > localhost: stratum 1, offset -0.000110, root distance 0.000000, refid 'WWVB'
    > >
    > >
    > > # /usr/local/bin/ntpq
    > > ntpq> pe
    > > remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
    > > ================================================== ============================
    > > *SPECTRACOM(2) .WWVB. 0 l 44 64 377 0.000 -0.095 0.019
    > >

    >
    > That is not "GPS". It's a VLF (Very Low Frequency) receiver tuned to
    > 60 KHz. WWVB is the VLF broadcast from the National Institute of
    > Standards and Technology (NIST) located in Fort Collins, Colorado.
    >
    > GPS is a satellite based system. It's an entirely different technology!
    >
    >
    > > ntpq>
    > > ntpq> as
    > > ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
    > > ================================================== =========
    > > 1 27956 9624 yes yes none sys.peer reachable 2
    > >
    > > ntpq>
    > > ntpq> as
    > > ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
    > > ================================================== =========
    > > 1 27956 9624 yes yes none sys.peer reachable 2
    > >
    > > ntpq>
    > > ntpq> rv 27956
    > > status=9624 reach, conf, sel_sys.peer, 2 events, event_reach,
    > > srcadr=SPECTRACOM(2), srcport=123, dstadr=127.0.0.1, dstport=123,
    > > leap=00, stratum=0, precision=-13, rootdelay=0.000,
    > > rootdispersion=1.000, refid=WWVB, reach=377, unreach=0, hmode=3,
    > > pmode=4, hpoll=6, ppoll=6, flash=00 ok, keyid=0, ttl=0, offset=-0.095,
    > > delay=0.000, dispersion=1.048, jitter=0.019,
    > > reftime=c9900cc2.0046862e Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:14:26.001,
    > > org=c9900cc2.0046862e Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:14:26.001,
    > > rec=c9900cc3.a75eb068 Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:14:27.653,
    > > xmt=c9900cf8.a78cb75d Wed, Feb 28 2007 11:15:20.654,
    > > filtdelay= 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00,
    > > filtoffset= -0.09 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 -0.09 -0.13 -0.12 -0.10,
    > > filtdisp= 0.12 1.08 2.03 3.00 3.98 4.94 5.90 6.84
    > >
    > > ntpq>
    > > ntpq> q
    > > #
    > >
    > > If my hardware is syncronized with the SPECTRACOM(2), why i cant consult then?
    > > Why i receive this message "no server suitable for synchronization found"?
    > > Can someone helpe me?
    > >

    >
    > In what way are you unable to "consult"? Nothing you have posted above
    > shows any problem other than not knowing what technology you are using.
    >
    > If an NTP client attempts to synchronize with your server it should have
    > no difficulty in doing so if it's properly configured.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > questions mailing list
    > questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    > https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
    >

    _______________________________________________
    questions mailing list
    questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


  9. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)


    >My doubt is about how can I consult my SPECTRACOM(2)? What the correct
    >way? I only can consult using the command ntpq or I can use de command
    >ntpdate with the serial port (127.127.4.2)? follow below:
    >
    ># ntpdate -qd 127.127.4.2


    I think you are confused about how ntpd works.

    ntpd talks to your spectracom box. If you want the time,
    you should talk to ntpd.

    You can't talk to the 127.127.x.y class of IP addresses
    (unless your system is a bit strange and you have something
    out there). That's a funny IP address that ntpd uses internally
    as a hook to get to special hardware that is directly connected
    rather than talking to another server over the internet.

    --
    These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.


  10. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Marcos Onisto wrote:
    > Hello All,
    >
    > My doubt is about how can I consult my SPECTRACOM(2)? What the correct
    > way? I only can consult using the command ntpq or I can use de command
    > ntpdate with the serial port (127.127.4.2)? follow below:
    >



    You can't talk to your Spectracom directly. Ntpd does that for you.

    ntpq -p
    Will show you the status of the Spectracom

    Like this (this is my reference clock which is a GPS receiver (Motorola
    Oncore))
    sunblok_$ ntpq -p
    remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset
    jitter
    ================================================== ============================
    *GPS_ONCORE(0) .GPS. 0 l 12 16 377 0.000 0.001
    0.001
    (Internet servers omitted)

    This tells me that the Motorola is selected as the synchronization
    source (the "*" in the first column). It also tells me that ntpd polled
    it 12 seconds ago, that the poll interval is 16 seconds, that the last
    eight poll attempts were successful (the 377), that the round trip delay
    is too small to measure, and that the offset of my local clock from the
    GPS receiver is one microsecond.

    Your ntpq banner (copied from an earlier post)
    remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset
    jitter

    ================================================== ============================
    *SPECTRACOM(2) .WWVB. 0 l 44 64 377 0.000 -0.095
    0.019

    Shows that the Spectracom has been selected as the synchronization
    source, was last polled 44 seconds ago, that the poll interval is 64
    seconds, that the Spectracom responded to the last eight poll attempts,
    that the round trip delay is too small to measure and that the offset of
    your local clock from the Spectracom is 95 microseconds.

    It looks good to me!


  11. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    mlonisto@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:

    > I dont understand the output of this command , but follow below:
    >
    > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -qd 127.0.0.1
    > 28 Feb 14:37:12 ntpdate[1081]: ntpdate 4.2.0@1.1161-r Thu Apr 1
    > 03:24:08 EST 2004 (1)
    > Looking for host 127.0.0.1 and service ntp
    > host found : localhost
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > server 127.0.0.1, port 123
    > stratum 1, precision -20, leap 00, trust 000
    > refid [WWVB], delay 0.02580, dispersion 0.00002
    > transmitted 4, in filter 4
    > reference time: c9903c22.a8a70d71 Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:36:34.658
    > originate timestamp: c9903c48.4aab241b Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:37:12.291
    > transmit timestamp: c9903c48.4a9c6e1b Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:37:12.291
    > filter delay: 0.02621 0.02586 0.02580 0.02580
    > 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
    > filter offset: 0.000186 0.000036 0.000009 0.000010
    > 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
    > delay 0.02580, dispersion 0.00002
    > offset 0.000009
    >
    > 28 Feb 14:37:12 ntpdate[1081]: adjust time server 127.0.0.1 offset 0.000009 sec


    It worked! Transmitted 4 queries, received 4 replies, reported offset
    of 9 microseconds; which is about as expected as the server is querying
    its own system clock. That's what you wanted to see, isn't it?

    > # netstat -an | grep 123
    > *.123 Idle
    > *.123 Idle
    > 127.0.0.1.123 Idle
    > 10.0.0.2.123 Idle
    > 192.168.64.69.123 Idle
    > *.123 Idle
    >
    > Everything is all right? What's is wrong?


    Looks like your server is not listening on the IPv6 local address ::1,
    which is what your "ntpdate -q localhost" said it was trying before

    > > > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -q localhost
    > > > Looking for host localhost and service ntp
    > > > host found : localhost
    > > > server ::1, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000


    and that's why that did not work.

    What operating system are you using? Perhaps you have some problem with
    the definition of localhost in /etc/hosts (or maybe /etc/inet/ipnodes) ?
    Or some IPv6 configuration problem?

    Your ntpdate says "version 4.2.0@1.1161-r", what is your ntpd version,
    shown by "ntpq -crv" ?

    --
    Ronan Flood

  12. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    mlonisto@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:

    > I forgot do show the ntp.conf configuration, follow below:
    >
    > # cat /etc/ntp.conf
    > # Arquivo :/etc/ntp.conf (versao 4)
    > #
    > # ultima atualizacao: 13/06/2006
    > #
    > server 127.127.4.2 # loopback


    That's not "loopback", it identifies an ntpd refclock driver,
    4 = refclock_wwvb.c, reading input from /dev/wwvb2 which I expect
    is a link to a serial port /dev/tty... or something like that.

    ls -l /dev/wwvb2


    > restrict default ignore notrust


    "ignore" is enough to block everything, you don't need "notrust" too.

    > restrict 200.160.0.0 nomodify
    > restrict 200.160.1.0 nomodify
    > restrict 127.0.0.1 # loopback


    OK, so you should be able to do most things from 200.160.{0,1}.0
    and everything from 127.0.0.1, and nothing from anywhere else.

    I think this leaves all IPv6 access open, so if you get IPv6
    working you'll want to add

    restrict -6 default ignore
    restrict ::1 # loopback

    > It's rigth? or something is wrong?


    It's OK, and not the cause of your problem as shown before.

    --
    Ronan Flood

  13. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Hello All,

    I see, thanks a lot guys for your help, but I'd like to solve my last
    doubt that is about the output of serial cable that come of
    SPECTRACOM(2). My doubt if is possible to have 2 hardwares using the
    same channel or serial cable? On the output of this cable there is one
    adapter that convert the serial port db9 to 2 x db25. I tried to use
    before the 2 hardwares using these 2 x db25, but I havent successfull.
    Is it possible? I dont know if explain right, but anyway I can explain
    again in another way.

    Thanks a lot,

    Marcos Luiz Onisto



    On 1 Mar 2007 14:23:30 GMT, Ronan Flood wrote:
    > mlonisto@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:
    >
    > > I dont understand the output of this command , but follow below:
    > >
    > > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -qd 127.0.0.1
    > > 28 Feb 14:37:12 ntpdate[1081]: ntpdate 4.2.0@1.1161-r Thu Apr 1
    > > 03:24:08 EST 2004 (1)
    > > Looking for host 127.0.0.1 and service ntp
    > > host found : localhost
    > > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > > receive(127.0.0.1)
    > > transmit(127.0.0.1)
    > > server 127.0.0.1, port 123
    > > stratum 1, precision -20, leap 00, trust 000
    > > refid [WWVB], delay 0.02580, dispersion 0.00002
    > > transmitted 4, in filter 4
    > > reference time: c9903c22.a8a70d71 Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:36:34.658
    > > originate timestamp: c9903c48.4aab241b Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:37:12.291
    > > transmit timestamp: c9903c48.4a9c6e1b Wed, Feb 28 2007 14:37:12.291
    > > filter delay: 0.02621 0.02586 0.02580 0.02580
    > > 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
    > > filter offset: 0.000186 0.000036 0.000009 0.000010
    > > 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
    > > delay 0.02580, dispersion 0.00002
    > > offset 0.000009
    > >
    > > 28 Feb 14:37:12 ntpdate[1081]: adjust time server 127.0.0.1 offset 0.000009 sec

    >
    > It worked! Transmitted 4 queries, received 4 replies, reported offset
    > of 9 microseconds; which is about as expected as the server is querying
    > its own system clock. That's what you wanted to see, isn't it?
    >
    > > # netstat -an | grep 123
    > > *.123 Idle
    > > *.123 Idle
    > > 127.0.0.1.123 Idle
    > > 10.0.0.2.123 Idle
    > > 192.168.64.69.123 Idle
    > > *.123 Idle
    > >
    > > Everything is all right? What's is wrong?

    >
    > Looks like your server is not listening on the IPv6 local address ::1,
    > which is what your "ntpdate -q localhost" said it was trying before
    >
    > > > > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -q localhost
    > > > > Looking for host localhost and service ntp
    > > > > host found : localhost
    > > > > server ::1, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000

    >
    > and that's why that did not work.
    >
    > What operating system are you using? Perhaps you have some problem with
    > the definition of localhost in /etc/hosts (or maybe /etc/inet/ipnodes) ?
    > Or some IPv6 configuration problem?
    >
    > Your ntpdate says "version 4.2.0@1.1161-r", what is your ntpd version,
    > shown by "ntpq -crv" ?
    >
    > --
    > Ronan Flood
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > questions mailing list
    > questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    > https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
    >

    _______________________________________________
    questions mailing list
    questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


  14. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    mlonisto@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:

    > I see, thanks a lot guys for your help, but I'd like to solve my last
    > doubt that is about the output of serial cable that come of
    > SPECTRACOM(2). My doubt if is possible to have 2 hardwares using the
    > same channel or serial cable? On the output of this cable there is one
    > adapter that convert the serial port db9 to 2 x db25. I tried to use
    > before the 2 hardwares using these 2 x db25, but I havent successfull.
    > Is it possible? I dont know if explain right, but anyway I can explain
    > again in another way.


    I think I see what you mean, you are trying to feed the output from
    one Spectracom unit to two servers using a splitter cable. That might
    work, but it depends on the Spectracom, the cable, and the software.
    First point: if you plug one db25 into one server, does it work if
    you use either of the db25s or only with a specific one?

    What type of Spectracom have you got, model number?

    --
    Ronan Flood

  15. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    That's it!

    In front of the Spectracom hardware there are information like below:
    DIGITAL CLOCK DISTRIBUTOR
    LOCAL PRIMARY REFERENCE
    DCD - LPR/C
    GTI/C - GPS

    I have two servers Sun Netra T1 with Solaris 9 Operation System like
    below, but only one is connected now because I had a problem before. I
    dont know It because the two servers disputing the same channel or if
    there is a problem.

    # uname -a
    SunOS br-nsps19 5.9 Generic_118558-27 sun4u sparc SUNW,UltraSPARC-IIi-cEngine

    Tks a lot,

    Marcos



    On 1 Mar 2007 17:29:44 GMT, Ronan Flood wrote:
    > mlonisto@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:
    >
    > > I see, thanks a lot guys for your help, but I'd like to solve my last
    > > doubt that is about the output of serial cable that come of
    > > SPECTRACOM(2). My doubt if is possible to have 2 hardwares using the
    > > same channel or serial cable? On the output of this cable there is one
    > > adapter that convert the serial port db9 to 2 x db25. I tried to use
    > > before the 2 hardwares using these 2 x db25, but I havent successfull.
    > > Is it possible? I dont know if explain right, but anyway I can explain
    > > again in another way.

    >
    > I think I see what you mean, you are trying to feed the output from
    > one Spectracom unit to two servers using a splitter cable. That might
    > work, but it depends on the Spectracom, the cable, and the software.
    > First point: if you plug one db25 into one server, does it work if
    > you use either of the db25s or only with a specific one?
    >
    > What type of Spectracom have you got, model number?
    >
    > --
    > Ronan Flood
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > questions mailing list
    > questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    > https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
    >

    _______________________________________________
    questions mailing list
    questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


  16. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    > Looks like your server is not listening on the IPv6 local address ::1,
    > which is what your "ntpdate -q localhost" said it was trying before


    >> > > # /usr/local/bin/ntpdate -q localhost
    >> > > Looking for host localhost and service ntp
    >> > > host found : localhost
    >> > > server ::1, stratum 0, offset 0.000000, delay 0.00000


    > and that's why that did not work.


    > What operating system are you using? Perhaps you have some problem with
    > the definition of localhost in /etc/hosts (or maybe /etc/inet/ipnodes) ?
    > Or some IPv6 configuration problem?


    It could be the case that getaddrinfo() (I trust ntpdate is calling
    getaddrinfo?) is returning more than one address and the IPv6 one
    happens to be first in the list - does ntpdate walk the list or just
    try the first one?

    There is also an option/hint - AI_ADDRCONFIG (or something like that)
    which will cause getaddrinfo to only return that versoin of IP address
    for which there are "real" interfaces configured with that address
    version - ie it will only return v4 addresses if there is an interface
    configured with a v4 address, and only v6 if there is an interface
    configured with a v6 address. Loopback (IIRC) does not
    count. (leaving open I suppose the question of what happens with that
    set and only a loopback address configured

    rick jones
    --
    Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events.
    these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
    feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

  17. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Rick Jones wrote:

    > It could be the case that getaddrinfo() (I trust ntpdate is calling
    > getaddrinfo?) is returning more than one address and the IPv6 one
    > happens to be first in the list - does ntpdate walk the list or just
    > try the first one?


    I think ntpdate 4.2.0 just uses the first returned address, and
    now that Marcos has said he's running Solaris I've remembered
    that ntpdate 4.2.0 on Solaris doesn't work with IPv6 anyway
    because Solaris changes the IPv6 socket structure in a way which
    ntpdate doesn't expect

    http://lists.ntp.isc.org/pipermail/q...ch/004535.html

    --
    Ronan Flood

  18. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    I'm not using using IPv6 here!

    On 2 Mar 2007 12:03:11 GMT, Ronan Flood wrote:
    > Rick Jones wrote:
    >
    > > It could be the case that getaddrinfo() (I trust ntpdate is calling
    > > getaddrinfo?) is returning more than one address and the IPv6 one
    > > happens to be first in the list - does ntpdate walk the list or just
    > > try the first one?

    >
    > I think ntpdate 4.2.0 just uses the first returned address, and
    > now that Marcos has said he's running Solaris I've remembered
    > that ntpdate 4.2.0 on Solaris doesn't work with IPv6 anyway
    > because Solaris changes the IPv6 socket structure in a way which
    > ntpdate doesn't expect
    >
    > http://lists.ntp.isc.org/pipermail/q...ch/004535.html
    >
    > --
    > Ronan Flood
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > questions mailing list
    > questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    > https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
    >

    _______________________________________________
    questions mailing list
    questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


  19. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    mlonisto@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:

    > I'm not using using IPv6 here!


    Not using it doesn't mean there isn't enough of it there
    to confuse ntpdate, otherwise why would it try to use ::1 ?

    What does "ifconfig -a6" show?

    --
    Ronan Flood

  20. Re: Doubt about Syncronization of GPS SPECTRACOM(2)

    Follow below the output of the command:
    $ /sbin/ifconfig -a6
    $


    On 2 Mar 2007 14:34:08 GMT, Ronan Flood wrote:
    > mlonisto@gmail.com (Marcos Onisto) wrote:
    >
    > > I'm not using using IPv6 here!

    >
    > Not using it doesn't mean there isn't enough of it there
    > to confuse ntpdate, otherwise why would it try to use ::1 ?
    >
    > What does "ifconfig -a6" show?
    >
    > --
    > Ronan Flood
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > questions mailing list
    > questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    > https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
    >

    _______________________________________________
    questions mailing list
    questions@lists.ntp.isc.org
    https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast