Why is Chrony taking over network time sync responsibilities?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I am wondering why is Chrony replacing NTPd as the default component for network time sync.
What is the advantage, and ideally, was there a discussion of pros-and-cons somewhere I can read for my education?
time ntp
asked Apr 13 at 3:12
0xF2
2,32721945
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I am wondering why is Chrony replacing NTPd as the default component for network time sync.
What is the advantage, and ideally, was there a discussion of pros-and-cons somewhere I can read for my education?
time ntp
asked Apr 13 at 3:12
0xF2
2,32721945
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I am wondering why is Chrony replacing NTPd as the default component for network time sync.
What is the advantage, and ideally, was there a discussion of pros-and-cons somewhere I can read for my education?
time ntp
asked Apr 13 at 3:12
0xF2
2,32721945
I am wondering why is Chrony replacing NTPd as the default component for network time sync.
What is the advantage, and ideally, was there a discussion of pros-and-cons somewhere I can read for my education?
time ntp
time ntp
asked Apr 13 at 3:12
0xF2
2,32721945
asked Apr 13 at 3:12
0xF2
2,32721945
asked Apr 13 at 3:12
0xF2
2,32721945
asked Apr 13 at 3:12
0xF2
2,32721945
asked Apr 13 at 3:12
0xF2
2,32721945
2,32721945
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
See bug report LP:1744072:
Rationale:
2.1 NTP in general is needed quite a lot, but we want to exchange ntpd
which is the current implementation in main with chrony for 18.04.
2.2 Security: chrony was considered easier to be maintained easier in
terms of security and provide a more modern ntp experience as well.
2.3 Efficiency: Furthermore several cloud people seem to be interested to
change to chrony in the guests for its lower memoy/cpu footprint
(efficiency I guess).
2.4 related to this MIR 6 years ago this is the same but for Fedora.
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChronyDefaultNTP
IIRC some limitations that were present have been eliminated since, so
it is even better than it was back then.
2.5 In general one has to realize that in a systemd-timesync world
ntp/chrony are mostly for the "serving" portion of an ntp service, and
not so much about the client (unless you the better accuracy vs
timesyncd is needed).
answered Apr 13 at 12:13
user535733
5,77222436
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
See bug report LP:1744072:
Rationale:
2.1 NTP in general is needed quite a lot, but we want to exchange ntpd
which is the current implementation in main with chrony for 18.04.
2.2 Security: chrony was considered easier to be maintained easier in
terms of security and provide a more modern ntp experience as well.
2.3 Efficiency: Furthermore several cloud people seem to be interested to
change to chrony in the guests for its lower memoy/cpu footprint
(efficiency I guess).
2.4 related to this MIR 6 years ago this is the same but for Fedora.
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChronyDefaultNTP
IIRC some limitations that were present have been eliminated since, so
it is even better than it was back then.
2.5 In general one has to realize that in a systemd-timesync world
ntp/chrony are mostly for the "serving" portion of an ntp service, and
not so much about the client (unless you the better accuracy vs
timesyncd is needed).
answered Apr 13 at 12:13
user535733
5,77222436
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
See bug report LP:1744072:
Rationale:
2.1 NTP in general is needed quite a lot, but we want to exchange ntpd
which is the current implementation in main with chrony for 18.04.
2.2 Security: chrony was considered easier to be maintained easier in
terms of security and provide a more modern ntp experience as well.
2.3 Efficiency: Furthermore several cloud people seem to be interested to
change to chrony in the guests for its lower memoy/cpu footprint
(efficiency I guess).
2.4 related to this MIR 6 years ago this is the same but for Fedora.
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChronyDefaultNTP
IIRC some limitations that were present have been eliminated since, so
it is even better than it was back then.
2.5 In general one has to realize that in a systemd-timesync world
ntp/chrony are mostly for the "serving" portion of an ntp service, and
not so much about the client (unless you the better accuracy vs
timesyncd is needed).
answered Apr 13 at 12:13
user535733
5,77222436
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
See bug report LP:1744072:
Rationale:
2.1 NTP in general is needed quite a lot, but we want to exchange ntpd
which is the current implementation in main with chrony for 18.04.
2.2 Security: chrony was considered easier to be maintained easier in
terms of security and provide a more modern ntp experience as well.
2.3 Efficiency: Furthermore several cloud people seem to be interested to
change to chrony in the guests for its lower memoy/cpu footprint
(efficiency I guess).
2.4 related to this MIR 6 years ago this is the same but for Fedora.
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChronyDefaultNTP
IIRC some limitations that were present have been eliminated since, so
it is even better than it was back then.
2.5 In general one has to realize that in a systemd-timesync world
ntp/chrony are mostly for the "serving" portion of an ntp service, and
not so much about the client (unless you the better accuracy vs
timesyncd is needed).
answered Apr 13 at 12:13
user535733
5,77222436
See bug report LP:1744072:
Rationale:
2.1 NTP in general is needed quite a lot, but we want to exchange ntpd
which is the current implementation in main with chrony for 18.04.
2.2 Security: chrony was considered easier to be maintained easier in
terms of security and provide a more modern ntp experience as well.
2.3 Efficiency: Furthermore several cloud people seem to be interested to
change to chrony in the guests for its lower memoy/cpu footprint
(efficiency I guess).
2.4 related to this MIR 6 years ago this is the same but for Fedora.
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChronyDefaultNTP
IIRC some limitations that were present have been eliminated since, so
it is even better than it was back then.
2.5 In general one has to realize that in a systemd-timesync world
ntp/chrony are mostly for the "serving" portion of an ntp service, and
not so much about the client (unless you the better accuracy vs
timesyncd is needed).
answered Apr 13 at 12:13
user535733
5,77222436
answered Apr 13 at 12:13
user535733
5,77222436
answered Apr 13 at 12:13
user535733
5,77222436
answered Apr 13 at 12:13
user535733
5,77222436
5,77222436
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e)
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom))
StackExchange.using('gps', function() StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', location: 'question_page' ); );
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
;
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1024526%2fwhy-is-chrony-taking-over-network-time-sync-responsibilities%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e)
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom))
StackExchange.using('gps', function() StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', location: 'question_page' ); );
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
;
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e)
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom))
StackExchange.using('gps', function() StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', location: 'question_page' ); );
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
;
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e)
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom))
StackExchange.using('gps', function() StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', location: 'question_page' ); );
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
;
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password