Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Odd NTP behavior of D-Link router

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Michael T. Davis

unread,
Aug 7, 2007, 2:34:41 PM8/7/07
to
I have a client with a D-Link DI-707P router installed. For some
reason, it will periodically generate an NTP request to time.windows.com,
but it seems to think it's IP address is different than what's actually
statically assigned to it. The address it seems to want to use is
216.189.82.6. This has no relation to D-Link, as far as I can tell, and
the particular hardware version of the firmware (v. E) doesn't seem to have
any updates available from D-Link. Has anyone with this model router seen
similar behavior? If so, is there any way to stop it? (There's an upstream
firewall that effectively blocks it, but I'd rather not see it in the logs
at all.)

Thanks,
Mike

P.S. If there's a more apropriate newsgroup for this sort of thing, please let
me know.
--
| Systems Specialist: CBE,MSE
Michael T. Davis (Mike) | Departmental Networking/Computing
http://www.ecr6.ohio-state.edu/~davism/ | The Ohio State University
| 197 Watts, (614) 292-6928

glen herrmannsfeldt

unread,
Aug 15, 2007, 3:53:35 PM8/15/07
to
Michael T. Davis wrote:

> I have a client with a D-Link DI-707P router installed. For some
> reason, it will periodically generate an NTP request to time.windows.com,
> but it seems to think it's IP address is different than what's actually
> statically assigned to it. The address it seems to want to use is
> 216.189.82.6. This has no relation to D-Link, as far as I can tell, and
> the particular hardware version of the firmware (v. E) doesn't seem to have
> any updates available from D-Link. Has anyone with this model router seen
> similar behavior? If so, is there any way to stop it? (There's an upstream
> firewall that effectively blocks it, but I'd rather not see it in the logs
> at all.)

It seems that 216.189.82.6 belongs to worldlink.

If an NTP server does exist at that address, I would probably allow
the access.

Otherwise, comp.protocols.tcp-ip might be appropriate, and will likely
get more replies.

-- glen

0 new messages