Hi Richard, Thanks for the quick reply!
Could you explain what I would use the TIME_STATUS_NP.ingress_time for when monitoring the end station? Best regards, Mikael -----Original Message----- From: Richard Cochran <richardcoch...@gmail.com> Sent: den 18 november 2021 23:23 To: Mikael Arvids <mikael.arv...@arriver.com> Cc: linuxptp-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Linuxptp-users] Monitoring an automotive-slave node On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 08:50:36AM +0000, Mikael Arvids via Linuxptp-users wrote: > > 1. Is this the expected behavior when using the automotive profile > (especially the inhibit_announce option set to true)? Yes, looks about right to me. Remember, without Announce messages, the GM identity is lost. > 2. Is there a recommended way to monitor the end-stations as our earlier > approach might not be the best, especially when introducing bridges? It really depends on your requirements. There is no "one size fits all" when it comes to synchronization monitoring. > We want to ensure that the end-stations are synchronized to the dedicated > time server and that the accuracy is at least X microseconds. Well, you can monitor TIME_STATUS_NP.master_offset and TIME_STATUS_NP.ingress_time for starters. Good luck, Richard *************************************************************** To read the Company's Information and Confidentiality Notice, follow this link: https://www.arriver.com/important-information-and-confidentiality-notice *************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-users mailing list Linuxptp-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users
