David Woolley wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
>>
>> Precision is the smallest possible difference between two successive
>> readings of the clock. It has nothing to do with accuracy. Precision
>
> The only reason it is reported is that it does affect accuracy. It is
> one of the compon
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
> Precision is the smallest possible difference between two successive
> readings of the clock. It has nothing to do with accuracy. Precision
The only reason it is reported is that it does affect accuracy. It is
one of the components that go to make root dispers
Towli wrote:
>
> "David Woolley" skrev i
> meddelelsen news:4a0b04b5$0$516$5a6ae...@news.aaisp.net.uk...
>> Towli wrote:
>>>
>>> "David Woolley" skrev i
>>> meddelelsen news:4a0ab078$0$513$5a6ae...@news.aaisp.net.uk...
>>
>> #sh ntp ass de
What command are you running?
>>>
>
On May 9, 2:17 am, "David J Taylor" wrote:
>
> Background: I have a GPS 18 and USB
> serial converter, and I wanted to see how well that actually performs.
Very interesting experiment. May I suggest using USB directly?
TIA
___
questions mailing list
Redwood City, CA - 2009/05/12 - The NTP Public Services Project
(http://support.ntp.org/) is pleased to announce that NTP 4.2.4p7-RC7,
a Release Candidate of the NTP Reference Implementation from the
NTP Project, is now available at http://www.ntp.org/downloads.html and
http://support.ntp.org/down
johum...@yahoo.com wrote:
> The theoretical precision of GetSystemTimeAsFileTime() or equivalent
> procs is 100 nanoseconds. However my tests show the accuracy is
The is what I meant by the architectural limit in another current thread.
> minimum 1 millisecond and all updates are done in multipl
On May 13, 8:12 pm, johum...@yahoo.com wrote:
> The theoretical precision of GetSystemTimeAsFileTime() or equivalent
> procs is 100 nanoseconds. However my tests show the accuracy is
> minimum 1 millisecond and all updates are done in multiples of 1
> millisecond. I ran the tests on a new consumer
On Wed, 13 May 2009 20:04:14 +0200, Towli wrote:
>
>
> Im using Cisco 3750 switches synching with a DFC77 appliance box and
> external (InetProviders) Stratum 1 servers.
>
> If i erase the ntp clock-period from my switches when they are in synch with
> my appliance box - would the precision impro
The theoretical precision of GetSystemTimeAsFileTime() or equivalent
procs is 100 nanoseconds. However my tests show the accuracy is
minimum 1 millisecond and all updates are done in multiples of 1
millisecond. I ran the tests on a new consumer-type PC desktop (quad
processor) and a new consumer-
"David J Taylor"
writes:
>Unruh wrote:
>[]
>> Since the same machine can run Linux or BSD whose resolution is usec
>> or
>> nsec, yes, the hardware can do better. The question is how good is the
>> software in the kernel. If I do a timestamp on an event, how accurate
>> is
>> that timestamp?
>>
"David Woolley" skrev i meddelelsen
news:4a0b1dab$0$518$5a6ae...@news.aaisp.net.uk...
> Towli wrote:
>
>>
>> I am really trying to understand this, and i feel a little
>> stupid, -perhaps i dont get it because english is not my native language:
>> Why is my 3750 switch reporting a precison of 2
Alain,
I don't know what you mean by spoofer, unless you assume it does not
have the group2 server keys. In any case, upon restart it rolls a new
private value and the client will retrieve the new cookie via the
protocol. Since this is a signed exchange, the client could not complete
the excha
Towli wrote:
>
> I am really trying to understand this, and i feel a little stupid,
> -perhaps i dont get it because english is not my native language:
> Why is my 3750 switch reporting a precison of 2**-6 when using my
> appliance DCF77 box, but reporting precison of 2**-18 when talking about
On 2009-05-13, David Woolley wrote:
> Towli wrote:
>>
>> "David Woolley" skrev i
>> meddelelsen news:4a0ab078$0$513$5a6ae...@news.aaisp.net.uk...
>
>>>
> #sh ntp ass de
>>>
>>> What command are you running?
>>
>> Show ntp association detail - sry
>
> What OS are you using; that command is
"David Woolley" skrev i meddelelsen
news:4a0b04b5$0$516$5a6ae...@news.aaisp.net.uk...
> Towli wrote:
>>
>> "David Woolley" skrev i
>> meddelelsen news:4a0ab078$0$513$5a6ae...@news.aaisp.net.uk...
>
>>>
> #sh ntp ass de
>>>
>>> What command are you running?
>>
>> Show ntp association detail
Unruh wrote:
[]
> Since the same machine can run Linux or BSD whose resolution is usec
> or
> nsec, yes, the hardware can do better. The question is how good is the
> software in the kernel. If I do a timestamp on an event, how accurate
> is
> that timestamp?
> Is it msec? Is it 15msec?
The precis
Towli wrote:
>
> "David Woolley" skrev i
> meddelelsen news:4a0ab078$0$513$5a6ae...@news.aaisp.net.uk...
>>
#sh ntp ass de
>>
>> What command are you running?
>
> Show ntp association detail - sry
What OS are you using; that command is not part of the standard ntpd
distribution.
_
"David J Taylor"
writes:
>David Woolley wrote:
>> David J Taylor wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> - with operating system calls, the main clock can be read with a
>>> precision of 1 millisecond (although the ticks may be only 15
>>> milliseconds). There are higher resolution counters which can also
>>> be rea
David Woolley wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> - with operating system calls, the main clock can be read with a
>> precision of 1 millisecond (although the ticks may be only 15
>> milliseconds). There are higher resolution counters which can also
>> be read.
>
>
> The architectural resolutio
"David Woolley" skrev i meddelelsen
news:4a0ab078$0$513$5a6ae...@news.aaisp.net.uk...
> Towli wrote:
>
>> Therefore my core switches choose to trust the to more agreeing servers
>> as opposed to my internal server, which is quite alone in its view on the
>> time and whose time differs from the
Towli wrote:
>
> What i dont get ,is that the precison of 2**-6 seems to steem from
> 10.200.138.20 which is the DCF77 appliance box (that is - not a switch)
> on my internal network. How come it has this low precision ? is it bad
> hardware could it be bad network connection/ bandwidth?
Prec
Towli wrote:
> Therefore my core switches choose to trust the to more agreeing servers
> as opposed to my internal server, which is quite alone in its view on
> the time and whose time differs from the 2, due to the closer proximity
> /smaller delay.
In principle that can happen, however I thi
David J Taylor wrote:
>
> - with operating system calls, the main clock can be read with a
> precision of 1 millisecond (although the ticks may be only 15
> milliseconds). There are higher resolution counters which can also be
> read.
The architectural resolution is much higher than this.
"Dave Hart" skrev i meddelelsen
news:eee8cec8-5004-49b3-b708-16c6dc1c5...@y6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On May 12, 8:41 pm, "Towli" wrote:
> I think i may have the answer to my own question above...
> I read somewhere that a man with 2 watches never know what time it is...
>
> My switches sees
Hi,
Suppose the following configuration is running, with IFF for each host.
Trusted_1 (group 1)
|
Server 1
|
Server2
|
Trusted_2 (group 2)
|
Server3
|
Client1
Suppose server3 is replaced by a spoofer, server3_spoofer which has the
client group2 key and
25 matches
Mail list logo
