Re: Non-GPS derived timing sources (was Re: NTp sources that work in a datacenter)

2003-06-02 Thread Peter Lothberg

 I don't expect GPS to spin out of control soon..

So GPS tracks TAI and the difference is published (2 months after the
fact..)

But it's simple to build a 'jamer' that makes GPS reception not work
in a limited area, same for Loran-C used in combination with GPS in
many Sonet/SDH S1 devices.

 but I did wonder how
 hard it is to find a another reliable clock source of similar quality to
 GPS to double check GPS.

Short for a lab part of TAI, I really don't knew. GPS
price/perfromance is fenomenal.

 US clocks account for 40% of the input to TAI.

In the month of April 2003;

   NIST was 4.662%
   USNO was 44.314%

   (and we where 0.501%...)

-Peter



Re: Non-GPS derived timing sources (was Re: NTp sources that work in a datacenter)

2003-06-02 Thread David G. Andersen

On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 08:13:08AM -0700, Peter Lothberg quacked:
 
  I don't expect GPS to spin out of control soon..
 
 So GPS tracks TAI and the difference is published (2 months after the
 fact..)
 
 But it's simple to build a 'jamer' that makes GPS reception not work
 in a limited area, same for Loran-C used in combination with GPS in
 many Sonet/SDH S1 devices.
 
  but I did wonder how
  hard it is to find a another reliable clock source of similar quality to
  GPS to double check GPS.

   For NTP purposes, WWVB is actually just fine, as long as you properly
configure your distance from the transmitter.  The NTP servers list shows
several WWVB synchronized clocks.  CDMA clocks synch indirectly to GPS,
but are typically locally stabalized by a rubidium or ovenized quartz
oscillator with decent holdover capabilities for a few days of GPS outages.
But they'll suffer the same fate if GPS went just plain wrong.

   The NIST timeservers are available over the net, if you can deal with
that degree of synch.  Lots of them just use ACTS dialup synch to get the
offset, and have very good local clocks.  ACTS is certainly a good fall-back
for GPS, since it uses a wired path instead of a wireless one.

  So if you're really paranoid:  GPS + WWVB + ACTS + internet to tick/tock or
one of the NIST primaries.  Ultimately, WWVB, ACTS, and ntp to NIST are
all synched from pretty much the same source, but the odds that they'd
all go bad are pretty slim.  GPS is steered from the USNO time, but the
clocks on the satellites are pretty good.

-Dave 

-- 
work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  me:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  MIT Laboratory for Computer Science   http://www.angio.net/
  I do not accept unsolicited commercial email.  Do not spam me.


Re: Non-GPS derived timing sources (was Re: NTp sources that work in a datacenter)

2003-06-02 Thread Marshall Eubanks
Hello;

GPS maintains a set of its own clocks at Falcon AFB and does not really
track or steer to TAI - however, they are very close in practice 
(except that the AF did not know
about Leap Seconds when they started out and synced it to UTC in the 
early 1980's -
thus, there is a 19 second offset between the GPS time system and TAI.)

Every major time service and most national standards labs maintain a 
set of clocks of comparable accuracy - US, UK, France, Germany, Russia, 
Japan, Australia, etc., so there is no shortage of timing info to 
compare it with.

The International GPS Service (IGS - http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/ - a 
collaboration between
various geodetic and time service users of GPS -
has a rapid service with information including clock offsets with 17 
hours latency
see http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/components/prods_cb.html  for data 
availability.

These solutions are NOT based on the official DOD tracking data but 
instead on the
much more accurate carrier phase (and are not affected by either 
Anti-Spoofing or
Selective Availability  when these are turned on - see 
www.timingtechnologies.com/Gpswp1.pdf
for a description of these degradations for civilian users). There is 
no doubt  that a major perturbation
in the GPS clocks (say, several 100 nanoseconds as is typical with SA) 
would be detected by the IGS
within 24 hours.

These was a pilot program set up to use these data for official time 
transfer - see
http://maia.usno.navy.mil/gpst.html for a host of details. I do not 
know its status since Jim Ray
left the USNO.

GLONASS maintains another set of clocks and satellites.
Of course, once Galileo is launched there will be yet another source of 
time sync.

All of this is important if you need synchronization at 100 nanoseconds 
or better.
LORAN will not give you this by several orders of magnitude - nor will 
WWVB nor
NTP. If you do care about time at this level, get at least a Rubidium 
clock and sync it
to GPS. If you do not, I would not worry about it even at the highest 
paranoia levels -
there  are other equally paranoid people who will start screaming well 
before you notice.



On Sunday, June 1, 2003, at 09:57 PM, David G. Andersen wrote:

On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 08:13:08AM -0700, Peter Lothberg quacked:

I don't expect GPS to spin out of control soon..
So GPS tracks TAI and the difference is published (2 months after the
fact..)
But it's simple to build a 'jamer' that makes GPS reception not work
in a limited area, same for Loran-C used in combination with GPS in
many Sonet/SDH S1 devices.
but I did wonder how
hard it is to find a another reliable clock source of similar 
quality to
GPS to double check GPS.
   For NTP purposes, WWVB is actually just fine, as long as you 
properly
configure your distance from the transmitter.  The NTP servers list 
shows
several WWVB synchronized clocks.  CDMA clocks synch indirectly to GPS,
but are typically locally stabalized by a rubidium or ovenized quartz
oscillator with decent holdover capabilities for a few days of GPS 
outages.
But they'll suffer the same fate if GPS went just plain wrong.

   The NIST timeservers are available over the net, if you can deal 
with
that degree of synch.  Lots of them just use ACTS dialup synch to get 
the
offset, and have very good local clocks.  ACTS is certainly a good 
fall-back
for GPS, since it uses a wired path instead of a wireless one.

  So if you're really paranoid:  GPS + WWVB + ACTS + internet to 
tick/tock or
one of the NIST primaries.  Ultimately, WWVB, ACTS, and ntp to NIST are
all synched from pretty much the same source, but the odds that they'd
all go bad are pretty slim.  GPS is steered from the USNO time, but the
clocks on the satellites are pretty good.

-Dave

--
work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  me:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  MIT Laboratory for Computer Science   
http://www.angio.net/
  I do not accept unsolicited commercial email.  Do not spam me.

 Regards
 Marshall Eubanks
T.M. Eubanks
Multicast Technologies, Inc.
e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.multicasttech.com
Test your network for multicast :
http://www.multicasttech.com/mt/


Re: Non-GPS derived timing sources (was Re: NTp sources that work in a datacenter)

2003-06-02 Thread Leo Bicknell
In a message written on Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 11:57:21PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
 Actually my question wasn't so much about other national standards labs,
 but that almost every major Internet backbone worldwide seems to trace
 their time source to GPS.  Maybe not that surprising for US/North American
 providers, but even non-american backbones seem to use GPS.

Could it be that providers actually have multiple sources, but for
some reason GPS is always picked as the primary source for the
public facing function?  At least a few providers keep their actual
sources (the receivers themselves) hidden, and provide a unix box
syncing to all of them as the front end.  From my limited knowledge,
that front end box will only show the one source it has picked as
best.

-- 
   Leo Bicknell - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - [EMAIL PROTECTED], www.tmbg.org


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature