On 18/03/14 10:17, Martin Burnicki wrote:
Paul wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Joe Gwinn <joegw...@comcast.net> wrote:

People are also lusting after sub-microsecond sync.


Sure but not optimally in comp.protocols.ntp/questions@lists.ntp.org.
With some help NTP can be quite good but the intent really isn't
nanosecond
accuracy.

We have mades some tests and found that NTP can yield the same accuracy
as NTP if also hardware timestamping of NTP packets is supported on all
nodes, similar as for PTP.

In fact this isn't surprising, is it?

No, it's not. NTP is being perceived to be "software timestamping" but nothing prohibits you from doing it in hardware. Similarly can you implement PTP with software time-stamping (with shitty performance).

Doing HNTP makes NTP match up against PTPv1 to some degree, but PTP then pulls out the explicit means to make PTP-aware transparent clocks to correct for delays, cancelling some of the asymmetry. You could do NTP with PTP 2-step processing, but what we would call such a bastard would be an interesting thing, NPTP?

Cheers,
Magnus

_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
          • ... Martin Burnicki
            • ... E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
            • ... Magnus Danielson
            • ... Martin Burnicki
  • Re: [ntp:quest... Joe Gwinn
    • Re: [ntp:... Paul
      • Re: [... Joe Gwinn
        • R... E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
        • R... Paul
          • ... Martin Burnicki
            • ... Magnus Danielson
            • ... E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
            • ... Martin Burnicki
            • ... Miroslav Lichvar
            • ... Magnus Danielson
            • ... Martin Burnicki
            • ... Magnus Danielson
      • Re: [... Martin Burnicki
    • Re: [ntp:... Hans Jørgen Jakobsen

Reply via email to