Problem with Linux Machine's Request for Time from an XP Machine

"W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.inv> wrote:
>Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
>> "W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.inv> wrote:
>>
>>>Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
>>>
>...
>
>>>Installing ntp on my XP machine seems
>>>a better way to go in my situation.
>> That, as has been explained to you by others *in detail*,
>> simply
>> is not an option.
>Perhaps you should read the msgs from those who differ with
>you. Yes, NTP can be installed onto XP and yes the accuracy of
>8ms can be met. Perhaps we are having a little confusion over
>ms, millisecond, that's about 1/10th of a second.
>
>I hope you don't mind if I prove the above to myself.

Just take the time to actually read some of the material
supplied, and tell us how you are going to get a system that
won't keep better time than 500 ms to provide you with 8 ms
accuracy?

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com

W. Watson wrote:
> I think I detect a misunderstanding in my stipulation of 8ms
accuracy.
> Perhaps you folks think of that as 8 microseconds. To me it mean 8
> milliseconds. That is, a bit less that 1/10 th of a second.

Were you the other person I read today that confused 8 ms with 80 ms?
8/1000=0.008 not 0.08 Yes, you are the same. You do get around.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...b11b65bc7047d1

> I think I can safely say this thread at its end (EOT). I have more
than
> enough information to proceed in my own way. First, I plan to check
out
> snowbat's very interesting discovery, and, if that fails, I will
check out
> the claim that NTP of some sort better than what XP provides can be
> installed. If either of these fail, I have other goals to attain the
> accuracy needed, and will persue them as time and money allow.
Presently,
> this discussion narrows down to snowbat and myself, privately.
>
> Thank you for your interest.

Good luck. But you're both wasting your time with the 3rd party
software snowbat posted. It's not as capable as xp's w32time ;)

You've been chasing a silver bullet solution all over 5-6 newsgroups
for two months now and never staid with one long enough to see it
through. Snowbat should take a look at your history on this project so
he knows what he's in for. W.W. got almost all he needed for a
solution in Nov. 04.

http://groups-beta.google.com/groups...obhaIlF7GRBHw&

You're both welcome to check the link in my last post -- or W.W. can
just check his thread in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general

You're even welcome to post for more help at that ng thread or read the
other Section posts I plan to put there -- I may need them for future
reference even if you do not. Once posted, Google grabs 'em, indexes
'em, and makes 'em available with a browser -- a good way to archive my
work ;-)

Good luck,
prg
email above disabled

You are right. He has been running around in circles constantly for the
past two or three months or more. And he never listens to anyone. Must get
some sort of perverse pleasure out of riling up people who try to help him.


"prg" <rdgentry1@cablelynx.com> writes:


>W. Watson wrote:
>> I think I detect a misunderstanding in my stipulation of 8ms
>accuracy.
>> Perhaps you folks think of that as 8 microseconds. To me it mean 8
>> milliseconds. That is, a bit less that 1/10 th of a second.

>Were you the other person I read today that confused 8 ms with 80 ms?
>8/1000=0.008 not 0.08 Yes, you are the same. You do get around.

>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...b11b65bc7047d1

>> I think I can safely say this thread at its end (EOT). I have more
>than

Great. But he will probably start up a new thread and start all over again,
hooking in some new poor suckers.


>> enough information to proceed in my own way. First, I plan to check
>out
>> snowbat's very interesting discovery, and, if that fails, I will
>check out
>> the claim that NTP of some sort better than what XP provides can be
>> installed. If either of these fail, I have other goals to attain the
>> accuracy needed, and will persue them as time and money allow.
>Presently,
>> this discussion narrows down to snowbat and myself, privately.
>>
>> Thank you for your interest.

>Good luck. But you're both wasting your time with the 3rd party
>software snowbat posted. It's not as capable as xp's w32time ;)

>You've been chasing a silver bullet solution all over 5-6 newsgroups
>for two months now and never staid with one long enough to see it
>through. Snowbat should take a look at your history on this project so
>he knows what he's in for. W.W. got almost all he needed for a
>solution in Nov. 04.

>http://groups-beta.google.com/groups...obhaIlF7GRBHw&

>You're both welcome to check the link in my last post -- or W.W. can
>just check his thread in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general

>You're even welcome to post for more help at that ng thread or read the
>other Section posts I plan to put there -- I may need them for future
>reference even if you do not. Once posted, Google grabs 'em, indexes
>'em, and makes 'em available with a browser -- a good way to archive my
>work ;-)

>Good luck,
>prg
>email above disabled

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:56:40 -0900, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

> Snowbat <snowbat@geocities.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:59:50 +0000, W. Watson wrote:
>>
>>> I'm awake again. Which of the three docs to you use for the ntp
>>> approach?
>>
>>http://www.windowsnetworking.com/art...ce.htmlPrimary
>>guide for setting up.
>>
>>http://dtdocs.ntp-systems.com/kb/kb2...aspInformation about the
>>three W32Time service modes.
>>
>>http://www.greyware.com/software/dom...ocols.aspBrief
>>description of various time protocols including NTP/SNTP, NetRemoteTOD,
>>and their own Domain Time products.
>>
>>> Are your registry changes something you derived from one of these
>>> docs?
>>
>>Straight from the windowsnetworking.com article.
>
> He says he wants 8ms accuracy (and actually probably needs 1 ms). The
> above system, according to the information they provide at
>
> http://www.greyware.com/software/dom.../targeting.asp
>
> has the following specs:
...

Floyd, something strange is going on, either in your newsreader or mine.

The greyware.com URL I posted details eight time protocols:
http://www.greyware.com/software/dom.../protocols.asp

The URLs you quote me as having posted each have the first word of the
following line wrapped on the end. This can also be seen in Google
Groups. Specifically, the greyware.com URL with the word 'Brief' wrapped
on the end in your quote happens to give a sales pitch for Domain Time II:
http://www.greyware.com/software/dom...ocols.aspBrief

Your reply indicates you may have been reading the sales pitch? If that
is the case, I refer you to the URL I actually posted that details eight
time protocols. Otherwise, I fail to understand why have you singled out
Domain Time II from the eight time protocols.


Elsewhere in this thread, other posters considerably more qualified than I
have discussed the suitability (or lack thereof) of SNTP for WW's project.
I just wanted to address the problem listed in the subject - see if XP
could serve time data in a format that a Linux box could sync to.

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:17:48 -0800, prg wrote:

> Good luck. But you're both wasting your time with the 3rd party
> software snowbat posted. It's not as capable as xp's w32time ;)

What 3rd party software did I post? Are you having the same URL issue
as "Floyd" ;-)

Snowbat <snowbat@geocities.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:56:40 -0900, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
>> Snowbat <snowbat@geocities.com> wrote:
>
>Floyd, something strange is going on, either in your newsreader or mine.
>
>The greyware.com URL I posted details eight time protocols:
>http://www.greyware.com/software/dom.../protocols.asp
>
>The URLs you quote me as having posted each have the first word of the
>following line wrapped on the end. This can also be seen in Google
>Groups. Specifically, the greyware.com URL with the word 'Brief' wrapped
>on the end in your quote happens to give a sales pitch for Domain Time II:
>http://www.greyware.com/software/dom...ocols.aspBrief

Sorry for not trimming that off. It is indeed a bug in the GNUS
newsreader version that I'm using, where the word following a
URL is not separated by whitespace. The results are what you've
seen, and yes it is annoying!

>Your reply indicates you may have been reading the sales pitch? If that
>is the case, I refer you to the URL I actually posted that details eight
>time protocols. Otherwise, I fail to understand why have you singled out
>Domain Time II from the eight time protocols.

It appeared to be the one of choice.

>Elsewhere in this thread, other posters considerably more qualified than I
>have discussed the suitability (or lack thereof) of SNTP for WW's project.
> I just wanted to address the problem listed in the subject - see if XP
>could serve time data in a format that a Linux box could sync to.

I have no problem with the fact that XP can indeed run a time
server that Linux can sync to. That has never actually been in
question by anyone other than the OP. The question for the rest
of us is how accurate is it, and how flexible is it.

The specs on the pages you reference are interesting, though it
is extremely difficult to find meaningful data.

For example,

http://www.greyware.com/software/dom.../protocols.asp

has a lot of interesting data. It does not mention accuracy,
but does talk about "precision". Note that on that page it says
the "precision" for Domain Time II (UDP & TCP) is "5-10
milliseconds typical".

Note that the description of "NTP/SNTP" discusses SNTP (rather
than NTP), and apparently uses the terms precision and accuracy
as synonyms. Whatever, it says the precision/accuracy is
typically about 50-250 milliseconds.

Whatever, clearly the only protocol that even comes close to
being suitable for 8 ms accuracy is Domain Time II.

The problem, for the OP, is that 5-10 ms *precision*, with a 500
ms *accuracy* is not even close to accurate enough. And buried
in the rest of their technical discussion the do say that the
target accuracy (as opposed to the precision) is 500ms for the
client.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com

Snowbat wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:17:48 -0800, prg wrote:
>
> > Good luck. But you're both wasting your time with the 3rd party
> > software snowbat posted. It's not as capable as xp's w32time ;)
>
> What 3rd party software did I post? Are you having the same URL
issue
> as "Floyd" ;-)

Actually, I have no idea what 3rd party software may have been eyed. I
was just commenting on dr. Watson's "...I will check out the claim that
NTP of some sort better than what XP provides can be installed", and
"... this discussion narrows down to snowbat and myself, privately." I
know W.W. ain't gonna install no stinkin' 3rd party wares without help
-- presumably, you. Maybe not, if you're lucky.

His connection is of such a quality that there is no such beast as
"better than what XP provides". The connection quality -- rather the
lack thereof -- will swamp any "better" (real and imagined) ntp
implementation.

As for urls, I did go to the protocols page. It was so laughable I
looked no further into their offerings -- why would I?
Youse guys have fun and good luck,
prg
email above disabled

Snowbat <snowbat@geocities.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:17:48 -0800, prg wrote:
>
>> Good luck. But you're both wasting your time with the 3rd party
>> software snowbat posted. It's not as capable as xp's w32time ;)
>
>What 3rd party software did I post? Are you having the same URL issue
>as "Floyd" ;-)

What "URL issue" did I have, other than reading farther than the
sales pitch...

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com

Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
> Snowbat <snowbat@geocities.com> wrote:
> >On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:17:48 -0800, prg wrote:
> >
> >> Good luck. But you're both wasting your time with the 3rd party
> >> software snowbat posted. It's not as capable as xp's w32time ;)
> >
> >What 3rd party software did I post? Are you having the same URL
issue
> >as "Floyd" ;-)
>
> What "URL issue" did I have, other than reading farther than the
> sales pitch...

When talk of GPS came up I wondered if you might comment. Imagined you
had probably had more than average exposure to the use of such gizmos.
Thanks for your input -- learned a thing or two...or three :-)
regards,
prg
email above disabled

Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
> If you
> want to see what is involved, here is a very good description:
>
> http://www.wraith.sf.ca.us/ntp/

Since you brought it up, let me just mention the fine print for the
record. I use a GPS 35 to keep my machine at home in sync (side effect
of some network measurement work). It seems to need to "see" a good
chunk of the sky in order to work well. It took a bit of
experimentation to get it placed just right. A house at the bottom of
the north side of a hill might be problematic.