Actions
Feature #10404
open
Consider using chrony for NTP services
Start date:
04/01/2020
Due date:
12/31/2020 (over 5 years late)
% Done:
0%
Estimated time:
Plus Target Version:
Release Notes:
Description
Please consider chronyd's advantages and disadvantages vs ntpd - see https://chrony.tuxfamily.org/comparison.html
In my opinion, chrony is better for the job, for security, management and performance reasons. Red Hat, for example, has it in its list of supported packages and it's enabled by default on RHEL8 (https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/7/html/system_administrators_guide/ch-configuring_ntp_using_the_chrony_suite)
There's a great guide for migration + script on https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/8/html/configuring_basic_system_settings/using-chrony-to-configure-ntp
Updated by e 1/1 almost 6 years ago
Forgot to add - it might be a good topic for when TNSR's base gets to be CentOS 8.
Updated by
Updated by Chris Palmer 7 days ago
Updated by Patch Public about 23 hours ago
As a step in this direction, adding Chrony to the Netgate repro would be useful to minimise compatibility risk particularly with the chrony dependencies both for pfsense plus and CE.
- I'm not sure if chrony licensing is actually a barrier for Netgate / pfsense https://gitlab.com/chrony/chrony/-/issues/36 However looking at the worst case of licence being a barrier
- I don't think adding chrony to the Netgate repro infringes any licensing restrictions as it is not "aggregation of another work".
- Permitting use of chrony via a pfsense package would also enable conservative compliance with licensing restrictions should this be a concern for Netgate. https://forum.netgate.com/post/1234990 and https://forum.netgate.com/post/1234790
Actions