https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210245
Ian Lepore <i...@FreeBSD.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|bu...@FreeBSD.org |i...@FreeBSD.org
Status|New |In Progress
CC| |i...@FreeBSD.org
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lepore <i...@FreeBSD.org> ---
I just stumbled across this; I updated ntp.conf to use the pool keyword last
year, without realizing this PR was here. I didn't realize until finding this
that the -4/-6 flags had become meaningless in ntp.conf. I've opened a
phabricator review to make that part of your changes to ntp.conf
It turns out that it is also no longer necessary to use the 'preempt' keyword
on pool statements. Associations mobilized via pools are automatically
preemptable in exactly the same way as those mobilized via manycast. I
verified that our current ntp.conf pool statement behaves this way by adding
ipfw rules to block packets from all the servers shown by ntpq -p. As they
became unreachable the associations were dropped and new ones were mobilized to
keep at least the number of good peers set by 'tos minclock'.
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D15974
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "
freebsd-bugs...@freebsd.org"