[ntpwg] KISS codes

[David L. Mills]

Brad,

I'm not sure you need to say anything about exponential backoff. The 
polling scheme which most implementers would choose is inherently 
exponential.

A sensible server needs to enforce both an average rate limit and a peak 
rate limit. The reference implementation allows an average headway of 5 
s and a peak headway of 1 s, an punishes the exceptions. These 
parameters allow an 8-packet burst every 64 s, but not 32 s and 16 s.

Not every implementation might agree on these parameters, but whats to 
stop somebody from setting them to one hour and on day? Spacecraft links 
maybe?

Dave

Brad Knowles wrote:

> On 7/9/07, Brad Knowles wrote:
>
>> So, you cut the problem into chunks, and you solve them as best and
>> as quickly as you can.
>
>
> I'm assuming that the server has some intelligence so that when it
> gets enough load that it is sending out a lot of RATEs, it can go
> into a "panic" mode and start sending out KoDs to everyone?
>
>
> On that same line of reasoning, do we want to enforce a mandatory
> exponential backoff for all clients during the initial volley, if
> they don't get responses to their queries? This would help the
> clients automatically reduce the load that they present to sites in a
> UWisc-type case, and hopefully reduce the need for the victim site to
> be sending out KoDs to everyone.
>
> Of course, this would have to be built into both the NTP and SNTP
> standards, otherwise most clients that would be likely to be
> misconfigured to cause these sorts of situations would not
> incorporate this feature.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/ntpwg/attachments/20070710/73af6208/attachment.html