On 8/23/2011 22:26, A C wrote:
On 8/23/2011 21:26, David Lord wrote:
A C wrote:
On 8/23/2011 15:27, unruh wrote:
On 2011-08-23, Uwe Klein wrote:
unruh wrote:
But from his test, his system is labelling both edges.
so he has bounces on the line?
either that or rise/falltime is so low and no
On 8/23/2011 21:50, Mischanko, Edward T wrote:
-Original Message-
From: questions-
bounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormittal@lists.ntp.org
[mailto:questions-
bounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormittal@lists.ntp.org] On
Behalf Of A C
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 8:25 PM
To: questions@li
On 8/23/2011 21:26, David Lord wrote:
A C wrote:
On 8/23/2011 15:27, unruh wrote:
On 2011-08-23, Uwe Klein wrote:
unruh wrote:
But from his test, his system is labelling both edges.
so he has bounces on the line?
either that or rise/falltime is so low and noise so high
that receiver hyster
A C wrote:
On 8/23/2011 15:27, unruh wrote:
On 2011-08-23, Uwe Klein wrote:
unruh wrote:
But from his test, his system is labelling both edges.
so he has bounces on the line?
either that or rise/falltime is so low and noise so high
that receiver hysteris is not sufficient to supress multi
> -Original Message-
> From: questions-
> bounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormittal@lists.ntp.org
> [mailto:questions-
> bounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormittal@lists.ntp.org] On
> Behalf Of A C
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 8:25 PM
> To: questions@lists.ntp.org
> Subject: Re: [ntp:q
On 8/23/2011 15:27, unruh wrote:
On 2011-08-23, Uwe Klein wrote:
unruh wrote:
But from his test, his system is labelling both edges.
so he has bounces on the line?
either that or rise/falltime is so low and noise so high
that receiver hysteris is not sufficient to supress multiple
HL/LH ch
On 2011-08-23, Uwe Klein wrote:
> unruh wrote:
>> But from his test, his system is labelling both edges.
>>
> so he has bounces on the line?
>
> either that or rise/falltime is so low and noise so high
> that receiver hysteris is not sufficient to supress multiple
> HL/LH changes?
No, his test
On 8/23/2011 13:05, Uwe Klein wrote:
unruh wrote:
But from his test, his system is labelling both edges.
so he has bounces on the line?
either that or rise/falltime is so low and noise so high
that receiver hysteris is not sufficient to supress multiple
HL/LH changes?
uwe
I'll check the cle
unruh wrote:
But from his test, his system is labelling both edges.
so he has bounces on the line?
either that or rise/falltime is so low and noise so high
that receiver hysteris is not sufficient to supress multiple
HL/LH changes?
uwe
___
questio
On 2011-08-23, Dave Hart wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 13:02, Thomas Laus wrote:
>> The capture / assert configuration options does
>> not select reading the leading or trailing edge of a PPS pulse, NTP
>> only reads timestamps to the on the leading edge and you may require
>> an inverter to s
On 8/23/2011 10:57, David Lord wrote:
I've only just noticed this.
Not by default.
On i386 NetBSD-5.1 my kernel conf has amongst other changes
# options PPS_SYNC
options PPS_SYNC
However I don't know if it applies to your architecture.
Yes, I've made the same change and recompiled the kern
A C wrote:
Hi everyone,
I read through most of the archives on various discussions on PPS from a
GPS and tried the suggestions listed there but none have seemed to work
in my case.
I am using a Globalsat ET212 GPS SiRF III based receiver module which
was originally used in cellular phone st
On 8/23/2011 08:49, Terje Mathisen wrote:
A C wrote:
The duty cycle is about 10% (100ms on 900ms off). I'll try tossing in
This is pretty much perfect.
the pulse stretcher and/or inverter just after the GPS receiver and see
what happens.
Won't help probably. :-(
At the very least I'll to
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 13:02, Thomas Laus wrote:
> The capture / assert configuration options does
> not select reading the leading or trailing edge of a PPS pulse, NTP
> only reads timestamps to the on the leading edge and you may require
> an inverter to swap polatity for NetBSD to read and syn
A C wrote:
The duty cycle is about 10% (100ms on 900ms off). I'll try tossing in
This is pretty much perfect.
the pulse stretcher and/or inverter just after the GPS receiver and see
what happens.
Won't help probably. :-(
Terje
--
-
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in
David Lord wrote:
A C wrote:
On 8/20/2011 17:41, David Lord wrote:
My config for NetBSD-5.1 on i386:
# GPS Sure serial tty00 /dev/gps2
server 127.127.20.2 mode 18 prefer
fudge 127.127.20.2 time2 0.350 refid GPSb
server 127.127.22.2
fudge 127.127.22.2 flag2 0 flag3 1 refid PPSb
The Sure outp
A C wrote:
On 8/20/2011 17:41, David Lord wrote:
My config for NetBSD-5.1 on i386:
# GPS Sure serial tty00 /dev/gps2
server 127.127.20.2 mode 18 prefer
fudge 127.127.20.2 time2 0.350 refid GPSb
server 127.127.22.2
fudge 127.127.22.2 flag2 0 flag3 1 refid PPSb
The Sure output is at a higher b
On 8/23/2011 06:02, Thomas Laus wrote:
On 2011-08-22, A C wrote:
Yes but ntpd still doesn't see the PPS signal on DCD with or without
flag3. So I'm lost on how to solve this problem. I know the PPS signal
is there on the wire, I know DCD is being asserted and cleared. I know
the test code ca
On 2011-08-22, A C wrote:
> Yes but ntpd still doesn't see the PPS signal on DCD with or without
> flag3. So I'm lost on how to solve this problem. I know the PPS signal
> is there on the wire, I know DCD is being asserted and cleared. I know
> the test code can see it but for some reason I
19 matches
Mail list logo
