On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 11:37:52AM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 01:32:14PM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
>
> > Yes, but if you know the length of the chain and charateristics of all
> > clocks and their timestamping, you can tune the servos to minimize
> > their gain
On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 01:32:14PM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> Yes, but if you know the length of the chain and charateristics of all
> clocks and their timestamping, you can tune the servos to minimize
> their gain peaking for the synchronization of the last clock. This can
> be done with
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 07:18:17AM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
> > BTW, synchronization with BCs can work better than TCs if the PLLs are
> > well implemented and tuned. TCs are the simpler and safer approach.
>
> There was a simulation study showing "gain peaking" from a long chain
> of
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 08:28:54PM +, Nemo Crypto wrote:
> What does NIH mean? Not Invented Here?
yes.
___
Linuxptp-users mailing list
Linuxptp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users
What does NIH mean? Not Invented Here?
On Wednesday, 8 February, 2023 at 10:18:21 am GMT-5, Richard Cochran
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 09:33:49AM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 07:39:48PM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
> > Sure, if you have a chain
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your valuable inputs. 802.1AS is chosen not for better performance
in this particular case, but because we should be using Automovitve Profile and
compliant to AVnu gPTP standard.But I agree with you, I am waiting for the
prototype HW to see how ptp4l BC functions with
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 09:33:49AM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 07:39:48PM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
> > Sure, if you have a chain topology of 15 hops, then you would start to
> > see benefits from using TAB over BC. But who has that kind of network?
> >
> > Even
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 07:39:48PM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
> Sure, if you have a chain topology of 15 hops, then you would start to
> see benefits from using TAB over BC. But who has that kind of network?
>
> Even then, would an 802.1as TAB outperform an ieee 1588 TC?
The draft I saw
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 03:59:23PM +, Nemo Crypto wrote:
> >As a practical matter, I don't see why you can't simply use linuxptp's
> >BC mode, configuring the two ports with 802.1as settings.
>
> >Who could tell the difference?
> Would the linuxptp's BC send all the TLVs required for
>As a practical matter, I don't see why you can't simply use linuxptp's
>BC mode, configuring the two ports with 802.1as settings.
>Who could tell the difference?
Would the linuxptp's BC send all the TLVs required for 802.1AS? I mean, the
Time Follower that receives Sync/Followup from
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 01:49:42PM +, Nemo Crypto wrote:
> Then the actual question becomes, whether linuxptp has support for
> IEEE802.1AS Time Aware Bridge (Time Relay)?
No, TAB/Time Relay is not supported. There was some initial work done
(check the archives), but that was never
Thanks Miroslav!
Then the actual question becomes, whether linuxptp has support for IEEE802.1AS
Time Aware Bridge (Time Relay)?
Can any other expert comment please?
On Tuesday, 7 February, 2023 at 03:29:48 am GMT-5, Miroslav Lichvar
wrote:
On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 04:17:30PM +,
On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 04:17:30PM +, Nemo Crypto wrote:
> Hi Miroslav,
> Thanks!
> In my understanding of "Time Aware Bridge", it doesn't correct/adjust/tune
> the PHC. Is that not correct?
Looking at some freely available drafts of 801.AS, yes, it seems the
clocks are supposed to be
Hi Miroslav,
Thanks!
In my understanding of "Time Aware Bridge", it doesn't correct/adjust/tune the
PHC. Is that not correct?
Nemo
On Monday, 6 February, 2023 at 11:01:51 am GMT-5, Miroslav Lichvar
wrote:
On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 03:21:25PM +, Nemo Crypto wrote:
> Hi
On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 03:21:25PM +, Nemo Crypto wrote:
> Hi Linuxptp-users,
> I am using gPTP 802.1AS profile for my network. My simplified network
> topology looks like this,
> TimeLeader --> Eth Switch (802.1as Time Aware Bridge)-->Processor
> (BC?)--->TimeFollower
> In the above
Hi Linuxptp-users,
I am using gPTP 802.1AS profile for my network. My simplified network topology
looks like this,
TimeLeader --> Eth Switch (802.1as Time Aware Bridge)-->Processor
(BC?)--->TimeFollower
In the above topology, The processor runs linuxptp (ptp4l & phc2sys) has 2
interfaces. One
16 matches
Mail list logo
