Discussion in 'Tomato Firmware' started by tstrike2000, Feb 27, 2007.
Is it possible to use the router itself as an NTP Server with Tomato for the LAN side?
i guess that means you have to install ntpd in the router?
You could try to compile it yourself, like they have done for / on OpenWRT:
But why would you?!
syncronize time on LAN clients over internet (NTP) works flawlessly with Tomato here. So why do you need a local NTP server on Tomato ?
I was only curious if anyone's done it with Tomato where the router syncs with NTP and multiple PC's on the LAN side then pull from it so not everyone is pulling the time from an outside source. It's no biggie, was more out of curiosity then anything else.
It's fun and cool to load all these extras on your router, but lets watch out for the "bloat" factor. toys means resources means a slower router... slower router means drops, hangs, crashes... means a less stable network...
Exactly, for those you want to play around with all that addons there's still openwrt :wink:
But as Jon mentioned sometime ago "keep tomato lean and simple" :thumbup:
for those who don't mind bloat theres DD-WRT
Originally Posted by der_Kief
Exactly, for those you want to play around with all that addons there's still openwrt
But as Jon mentioned sometime ago "keep tomato lean and simple"
so keep YOUR tomato lean and simple... just because you don't have a need for something like an NTP server doesn't mean it's a toy... I'm not sure WHY he needs an NTP server either, but I don't care why... he could be in a classified environment shielded from RF leakage, with no connection to the internet, and wanting a simple way to provide a service... it doesn't matter why...
startup scripts and firewall scripts also use resources, but they aren't considered bloat... I would guess that QOS is "bloat" on 1/4 of all tomatoes...
so many people love their tomatoes or previously their hyperwrt with tofu or thibor and they come to these forums asking for help in doing something outside the box... what do they get? the arrogance of "why would you want to do that?" or "thats bloat!"
either help them or stfu
-- Off topic --
Hold your horses, dude!
You have a point here, but I don't see what's wrong with helping AND asking "what for" at the same time... The guy might have had a perfect good explanation for running an NTP-server on his Tomato and I was just curious. No arrogance involved.
I'm not sure if its a good idea. Interesting of course, but not very good. Look in your logs, I don't know about your routers, but my clock is always corrected about 10 seconds every time its updated. I changed it to update every hour and now its 3 between 4 seconds behind every hour.
I'm sorry... I didn't mean to attack you... I also wonder why someone is trying to do something... many times, seeing why they are doing something gives me insight on a completely different solution to their problem, or helps me apply their solutions to a similar problem I might have... You probably were asking out of curiosity also, but there was another "why?" asked in this very thread and when the "why?" was answered is when the "it's bloat!" crew responded.
For what it's worth, I think openntpd would make a great addition to Tomato. The recommended setup for NTP when you have a lot of clients on your network is to have a local NTP server if possible which connects to one of the many public NTP servers. This takes load off of those servers, while still keeping all of your local machines synchronized properly. The router is the perfect place to have a low-volume, low overhead service like this running.
I understand the desire to avoid having Tomato become as bloated as some of the other firmware distributions. I just think in this case, a tiny bit of bloat adds a very useful service. Others will obviously disagree, and none of this matters if the developer(s) aren't aware that there's a need.
In the mean time, how hard would it be for people to build their own openntpd binaries for Tomato? I tried using openntpd from an OpenWRT ipkg but it was giving me a segmentation fault. If anyone makes progress on this, I think there's more than a few people interested.
Having been the one to raise the bloat alarm... I should mention that I have posted (in the wishlist thread) it would be nice to have some installable addons (or pkgs) so rather overload the firmware with all kinds of silly addons that 1% of the users will get some use of... allow us to install only those extras we individually need.
so tstrike2000 if you want to put an NTP server on your router, please go ahead an do it. you can even share your experience here (infact several will probably enjoy the info)
sorry to have hijacked your thread... sorry to bring up the bloat war guys.
I appreciate the feedback, but I must say I'm a little surprised at some of the responses to my question. Though I also understand why it's not a good idea to do it. First off, I was only curious if anyone's done it because I've worked in networked environments for about the last 11 or 12 years and offices big and small have all had their PC's sync from a central reliable time source, ie a Cisco router, master domain controller, or a master and/or primary time source on our current Novell network that syncs with an NTP internet source.
I have limited Linux experience with scripts and builds and would try the NTP server for fun, but I have no intention to bloat the current Tomato installation I have. The thought occurred that in a home or even a small business environment where there's no domain controller or centralized server, that the router could fill that role. In the end, was just a thought that occurred and thanks for some of the responses.
If you want to have a time server there are a couple of PC based options that may help anybody needing this, these are:
If you have Linux you have one already, just configure the NTPd packages I used to run Suse and you could configure NTP from the GUI.
If you have Windows try searching for the ATS Time Server I think it used to be free but may now be a few dollars to buy, I use an old version and it just sit in your systray of the host computer responding to ntp requests.
Re the debate above in larger networks at least you would expect a single time source in the local network with (if required) only one or two hosts connecting external to internet time servers. But in general these are normally more likely to be server rather than network equipment such as routers. As a net-etiquette (to the internet time server providers) just think of it from a bandwidth point of view there is already millions of connection to internet time servers and they only have a finite bandwidth so if every networked bit of kit connected individually it would cause kaos.... For smaller home networks that in reality tend to be getter bigger and more complex with more nodes it would be a good idea to provide this function if required on the router but it would be also nice if as stated above it could be an optional installable package.