Again, this was the count of US IPv6 servers, a figure which is fairly steady for the past 6 months. In each of these episodes when people report that servers which have been solid for literally years suddenly fall out of the pool for days, that count of US IPv6 serves shows a significant and sudden decline. When the problem resolves itself, the count goes back to that steady-state number it was at before. Sure, 15% or 40% of US IPv6 servers might all be removed at the same time, and then all be replaced at the same time a couple of days later, at the same time that people are reporting that there are connectivity issues to fully operational servers, but Occam would suggest that’s a ridiculous proposition. Clearly, though, denial is more important than figuring out what’s wrong with the monitoring, so I won’t worry about it any more.
And clearly a passive aggressive response and ignoring that I think we all want more active servers will help improve things
Time for a cuppa…
The monitoring station in NY clearly has NTP IPv4 and sometimes IPv6 connectivity issues.
The zone https://www.ntppool.org/zone/de constantly flaps between minus and plus 100 servers and so is my personal server. In reality my server is fully operational and clients use it without issues.
Since we are talking about ~10% of the servers in the pool the IPv4 traffic to the servers flaps accordingly. Munin statistic for reference: https://abload.de/img/ntp_ip-yearajkt8.png
If the issue gets worse the overall pool stability is questionable and the operations team should have a look.
i could confirm it, too.
My server is listed with his IPv4 and IPv6 address. The monitoring showed the last 2 weeks (or so) a massiv up and down with a lot of timeouts:
During this time, the monitoring of the IPv6 address doesn’t show any problem:
The server is monitored by Pingdom from different locations on the world (not directly the ntpd, but the web- and nameserver on this server) and both connections where testet every 60 seconds. Between the 09/01/2019 and 09/30/2019 Pingdom recorded a uptime of 100%.
On my opinion, it’s clearly a problem with the monitoring-server. The operations team really should a look on it.
Dear @aubergine, @Jens and @ntppool,
What you see as a problem with the monitoring server itself is a network issue. There are servers even across the Atlantic ocean from Newark which never shows failure, for example: https://www.ntppool.org/user/cp8t2gudho2eojnkjni . If the outbound packets from the monitoring server takes the NTT network, this network sometimes drops the packets. Other networks do not have this malicious behavior. The details of the founding of that serious network problem is here: Holy assymetrical routes, Batman! Is this an as7012.net routing issue?
Hi all, maybe it’s helpful to quote a couple of @Ask’s posts here.
(TL;DR: the plan is to increase the number of monitors in the pool and have them in different countries. Testing is underway in the Beta site.)
This thread also gives some details of plans.
To be clear, I don’t think there’s a problem with a monitoring server in itself, but rather with its connectivity.
You have to remember NTP traffic is UDP and just because TCP traffic is traversing the network okay, does not mean UDP traffic is. Any monitoring other then actual monitoring of your NTP service is not the same thing. UDP is best effort and has no error checking. There is also the issue with NTP traffic is often rate limited on networks or by same “bad” network operators completely blocked because of the NTP DDOS attacks that left a bad taste in some admin’s mouths.
Again (as mentioned previous posts) NTP services are fine as seen from other points on the internet. I don’t understand why people keep bringing up TCP and explaining basic networking, as though everyone experiencing intermittent connectivity issues from the monitoring service has found themselves at the rodeo for the first time.
I can see that ntppool monitoring is as broken as it’s ever been
I’ll check back in a year or so.
Also have an issue here in the UK:
Our connection is solid no reports of anything else having issues.
P.S Can we have a 95Mbit option as selecting 100Mb with a 100Mb connection generally starts to cause issues as the units are hitting line speed.
From here, I see a 70% packet loss to that server, so I’d say the monitoring is working fine. As usual lately, only the port 123 is affected. Other ports are ok.
$ mtr -u -P 123 220.127.116.11 Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev ... 7. de-fra04d-rc1-ae-6-0.aorta.net 0.0% 147 22.8 21.4 18.5 35.7 2.3 8. de-fra02a-ri1-ae-1-0.aorta.net 0.0% 147 22.2 21.9 17.9 38.6 3.5 9. ae-21.r00.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net 63.0% 147 22.0 21.3 18.8 25.1 1.3 10. ae-14.r24.frnkge08.de.bb.gin.ntt.net 72.6% 147 22.3 21.5 19.0 25.4 1.7 11. ae-5.r24.londen12.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net 72.1% 147 45.3 42.5 38.7 48.8 2.2 12. ae-3.r05.londen12.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net 74.7% 147 41.9 43.1 38.7 50.3 2.3 ae-1.r04.londen12.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net 13. ae-1.a00.londen12.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net 70.7% 147 45.0 43.2 38.6 58.0 3.9 ae-0.a00.londen12.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net 14. ??? 15. vl-50.ae6.cr1.th-lon.zen.net.uk 75.3% 147 54.7 45.4 38.3 74.3 8.3 16. ae4-0.cr1.wh-man.zen.net.uk 74.7% 147 50.3 47.2 39.6 77.2 9.7 17. ae0-0.ar6.wh-man.zen.net.uk 72.6% 147 48.2 48.1 44.6 57.9 2.3 18. 88-98-152-106.dsl.zen.co.uk 71.9% 147 61.5 61.7 58.4 64.8 1.7
It’s a UK server, serving UK clients, taken out of the pool by a single station in USA due to packet loss somewhere in Frankfurt.
This is such a waste of good will.
No sorry I don’t think the monitoring works fine.
If a monitoring server has the purpose to monitor port 123 UDP and is connected via networks that drop UDP Port 123 packets, the server fails its only job.
Your MTR shows that the packet loss starts in the routing path and the server owner has no impact on that. Since the project works DNS location based it’s also kind of uninteresting what a station in NY thinks the status of the servers in the EU might be.
The monitoring of the project will be probably ok once the station in Amsterdam is live and connected via a network which fits the requirements.
In this case the problematic point is closer to the NTP server than the monitoring host and most of the servers in the UK zone don’t seem to have this problem, so I’d not blame the network connection of the monitoring host. FWIW, my mtr test was within EU.
There may be nothing the server admin can do except move to a different network. It’s bad luck. Internet is becoming more and more hostile to NTP. Some of my servers were affected too.
Yes, it would be nice to have a monitoring host in each zone, so servers could be selectively enabled/disabled per zone.
Ideally, instead of having few specialized monitoring hosts, I’d like each NTP server to have an option to monitor other servers. It could be a simple shell script (e.g. running as a cronjob) that would fetch a list of servers, measure its offset against them, and upload the results. With so much data it would be easier to decide if a server should be enabled in a zone or not.
So the issue here isn’t the server (Its our prototype serial number #001 LeoNTP thats been running fine for years) or its connectivity (its on a 1Gbps leased line set to 50Mbit for purposes of pool). I did some tests from a few hosts within the UK and there no loss to the server on port 123. Somewhere between the monitoring and the server an intermediate host is dropping NTP packets. This is likely out of my control and the monitoring stations control.
(Side note can we get an MTR from the monitoring to my host to see where the issue lies ?)
However the monitoring is relying on a single result to dictate whether a host is “suitable” for inclusion in the pool. This is crazy for the reasons highlighted above. There needs to be some santiy checking, tests from multiple servers in different locations before a host is deemed unreliable.
That is a feature in the works to have monitoring from multiple locations (like on the beta site).
NTT seems to pop up a lot when people have issues with NTP traffic being dropped…
Yes they timeout as in the path to use UDP-packets are dropped.
As such you get a bad score.
If you try the beta-server it monitors from Amsterdam and the results are different.
A lot different.
Do not trust the NJ monitoring station as it does not have a clear path to all when it comes to UDP.
How do I use the beta server ?