On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 12:21:44PM +0300, Tal Mizrahi wrote: > Specifically, this concern about Khronos is addressed in the current > version of the draft (as you indeed noted): > While Khronos > queries around 3 times more servers per polling interval than NTP, > Khronos's polling interval can be longer (e.g., 10 times longer) than > NTPv4, thereby, minimizing the load on NTP servers and the > communication overhead. Moreover, Khronos's random server selection > may even help to distribute queries across the whole pool. The last sentence in the quoted paragraph actually points out another problem. The servers in pool.ntp.org are not supposed to share the NTP traffic equally. The owners set a connection speed for each NTP server according to their traffic and CPU limits. It sets a weight of the address on the DNS server. There is a 1:2000 ratio between the slowest and fastest servers. If a significant portion of the clients implement Khronos as currently specified, it will effectively equalize the weights and increase traffic to slower servers, which might force their owners to remove them from the pool and decrease its global capacity. -- Miroslav Lichvar -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
