Dave Hart writes:
>On Mar 26, 2:39=A0am, Unruh wrote:
>>
>> So, again I am confused.
>> I have
>> server tick.usask.ca
>> server ntp.ubc.ca
>> server 127.127.28.0 minpoll 4 prefer
>>
>> where 127.127.28.0 is the PPS via shm and this system seems to have no
>> problems.
>> So again my confusion m
Thank you. Your quote at the top is correct
"Listen carefully to what I say; it is very complicated."
But I have no idea if I have listened carefully.
So, I have PPS running the shm refclock, with the seconds supplied by the
local clock (ie the reading from the system clock) and the usec from the
On Mar 26, 2:39 am, Unruh wrote:
>
> So, again I am confused.
> I have
> server tick.usask.ca
> server ntp.ubc.ca
> server 127.127.28.0 minpoll 4 prefer
>
> where 127.127.28.0 is the PPS via shm and this system seems to have no
> problems.
> So again my confusion may be irrelevant (well my confusi
Bill,If you had taken the trouble to look at the documentation , you
would have found the "Mitigation Rules and the Prefer Peer"
http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/prefer.html page which clearly
describes how the contraptoin works.
Unruh wrote:
>Dave Hart writes:
>
>
>
>>On Mar 25,
Dave,
The NTP discipline executes a frequency correction once per second; the
kernel executes a correction once per timer interrupt. Assume an
intrinsic oscilator frequency error of 100 PPM. Do the math.
Dave
Dave Hart wrote:
>On Mar 25, 9:19 pm, Unruh wrote:
>
>
>>I have no idea why and w
"alkope...@googlemail.com" writes:
>On Mar 26, 12:48=A0am, Unruh wrote:
>> However if the only concern was losing PPS discipline due to prefer peer
>> problems, then I agree this is tangential.
>Yes, it was ;-)
>> >I think he's monitoring the self-reported offsets between the NTP
>> >disciplin
On Mar 26, 12:48 am, Unruh wrote:
> However if the only concern was losing PPS discipline due to prefer peer
> problems, then I agree this is tangential.
Yes, it was ;-)
> >I think he's monitoring the self-reported offsets between the NTP
> >disciplined clock and the local GPS receiver. Network
Dave Hart writes:
>On Mar 25, 9:19=A0pm, Unruh wrote:
>>
>> I have no idea why and whether kernel PPS code is any better ( or worse)
>> than say PPS discipline using the shm PPS refclock using parallel port
>> interrupt. Ie, both can discipline
>> to about 1-2usec level.
>Re-read the thread, t
On Mar 25, 9:19 pm, Unruh wrote:
>
> I have no idea why and whether kernel PPS code is any better ( or worse)
> than say PPS discipline using the shm PPS refclock using parallel port
> interrupt. Ie, both can discipline
> to about 1-2usec level.
Re-read the thread, then. A kernel clock discipli
On Mar 25, 9:08 pm, Unruh wrote:
>
> If you have enough servers they should be outvoted.
That's true for -dev (4.2.5) but not -stable (4.2.4) which still has
the old "or" logic where any surviving source having a leap bit set
causes the local leap bit to be set.
> Note that ntp will ignore lea
"alkope...@googlemail.com" writes:
>> 1. Immediately fire the Linux OS and replace with FreeBSD. It has PPS sup=
>port ex box and very good serial drivers. You need to disable the hardware/=
>driver FIFOs to get good serial time. This of course will be secondary to t=
>he PPS.
I have no idea why
Augustine writes:
>On Mar 25, 2:30=A0pm, "David J Taylor" this-bit.nor-this.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> ntp1.arse.org
>I'm not surprised about this one... :-D
>Jokes aside, why do we still see such announcements months after the
>event? What can be done to mitigate and weed out such servers? Can
>NTP
On Mar 25, 8:23 pm, mi...@udel.edu (David Mills) wrote:
> alkopedia,
>
> We do something like that here with two GPS receivers and two busy servers.
> However, we assign one GPS receiver and PPS signal to each server. In your
> case, you want to duplex the receivers and PPS signals. Suggestions:
Augustine wrote:
> On Mar 25, 2:30 pm, "David J Taylor" this-bit.nor-this.co.uk> wrote:
>> ntp1.arse.org
>
> I'm not surprised about this one... :-D
>
> Jokes aside, why do we still see such announcements months after the
> event? What can be done to mitigate and weed out such servers? Can
> N
On Mar 25, 2:30 pm, "David J Taylor" wrote:
>
> ntp1.arse.org
I'm not surprised about this one... :-D
Jokes aside, why do we still see such announcements months after the
event? What can be done to mitigate and weed out such servers? Can
NTP be improved to discard such servers? Should it?
__
Augustine wrote:
> On Mar 25, 2:30 pm, "David J Taylor" this-bit.nor-this.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> ntp1.arse.org
>
> I'm not surprised about this one... :-D
>
> Jokes aside, why do we still see such announcements months after the
> event? What can be done to mitigate and weed out such servers? Can
>
I have a system using NMEA and PPS, from which I'm getting microseconds of
jitter but hundreds of microseconds of offset. OK, perhaps the crystal is
cheap, and the room temperature is definitely not stabilised! This is
with ntp 4.2.4p6, and a 16 second minpoll for the refclock (and minpoll
10
You can now call the program with a list of ntp nodes to check on the
command line:
http://www.satsignal.eu/software/net.htm#NTPLeapTrace
On my own system, the following nodes are incorrectly showing a
leap-second for April 1st:
ntp1.arse.org
dns0.rmplc.co.uk
calx.pulsewidth.org.uk
I think
alkopedia,
We do something like that here with two GPS receivers and two busy servers.
However, we assign one GPS receiver and PPS signal to each server. In your
case, you want to duplex the receivers and PPS signals. Suggestions:
1. Immediately fire the Linux OS and replace with FreeBSD. It ha
Steve Kostecke wrote:
> On 2009-03-25, David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> I sent a message to the WebMaster on 19 March 2009 at 09:26 and it
>> seems to be in a state:
>>
>> "has been placed on hold, waiting for a human moderator to examine
>> it and take appropriate action"
>>
>> I've heard nothing sin
On 2009-03-25, David J Taylor wrote:
> I sent a message to the WebMaster on 19 March 2009 at 09:26 and it
> seems to be in a state:
>
> "has been placed on hold, waiting for a human moderator to examine
> it and take appropriate action"
>
> I've heard nothing since then.
Your message in no lon
Hi!
Thanks a lot for your detailed answer!
Greg Dowd schrieb:
> Most if not all commercial ntp appliance manufacturers have some sort of
> hardware support, either RTOS, custom clock, better oscillator or even
> modified Ethernet devices to support hardware time stamping.
Well I'm mostly interes
I sent a message to the WebMaster on 19 March 2009 at 09:26 and it seems
to be in a state:
"has been placed on hold, waiting for a human moderator to examine it
and take appropriate action"
I've heard nothing since then. Is this normal?
Thanks,
David
__
23 matches
Mail list logo
