On 2011-09-02, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
> Comments bellow...
>
> On 2 September 2011 00:47, unruh wrote:
>
>> On 2011-09-01, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > Thanks for your reply. My comments bellow.
>> >
>> > On 1 September 2011 18:24, unruh wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 2011-09-01, Miguel Go
On 2011-09-02, Chris Albertson wrote:
> As I said, Without a PPS signal you will not get reasonable results. If
> the GPS lacks the PPS get another GPS. They are cheap. Really nice units
> with timing specs literally 100X better than the 18X can be bought on eBay
> for $20 to $30.
>
> The pro
Il 01/09/2011 16:08, Dave Hart ha scritto:
> That may tell you nothing, but it tells me the issue you see with
> multicast servers showing up with 1024s poll interval is not a problem
> with the ntp-stable release 4.2.6p3, meaning it's also unlikely to be
> an issue with ntp-dev (4.2.7).
You can t
Miguel Gonçalves wrote:
No. This is a stratum 2 server and it gets the time from stratum 1 servers
thus the names and not IP addresses.
Poorly connected stratum 1 servers. With current WAN speeds you should
have delays more like 10ms. Maybe you WAN is overloaded. Certainly you
haven't pr
Resend
Hello,
I'm struggling with the behavior of ntptime.
Let me first explain what i want to reach.
We have an embedded system where we have to log several inputs with timestamp.
The timestamp needs to be within 0,5sec accuracy.
When using ntp version 4.2.2.p3 I use the output of ntptime to s
On 2 September 2011 07:56, unruh wrote:
>
> Nope.
>
> It is completely unclear to me what your question is. Your 10.0.2.254 is
> an outside switch.
I had several questions in my first message. Your assumption is wrong.
You are telling me that a switch I installed in my rack and defined its man
Hi David!
On 2 September 2011 08:19, David Woolley wrote:
> Miguel Gonçalves wrote:
>
>
>> No. This is a stratum 2 server and it gets the time from stratum 1 servers
>> thus the names and not IP addresses.
>>
>
> Poorly connected stratum 1 servers. With current WAN speeds you should
> have delay
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 09:50:05AM +0100, Miguel Gonçalves wrote:
> I found out the problem and just for the record I'll explain...
>
> The offset is larger than the delay because NTPd is using 10.0.2.254 (more
> on this switch later) as a time source and it shouldn't because it has two
> local st
On 2011-09-02, Chris Albertson wrote:
> As I said, Without a PPS signal you will not get reasonable
> results.
I would appreciate advice on solving the problem I have, not buying
the equipment you wished I have. I don't need microsecond timing. I
don't need millisecond timing. I have a need to h
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 02:24:44AM +, Greg Hennessy wrote:
> Given that ntp in debug mode shows gpsread showing NTP at least sees
> the GPRMC messages, can anyone sugguest why NTP never syncs? Is there
> additional debug flags that would be useful?
NTP isn't syncing because the GPS is reportin
Greg Hennessy wrote:
> On 2011-09-02, Chris Albertson wrote:
>> As I said, Without a PPS signal you will not get reasonable
>> results.
>
> I would appreciate advice on solving the problem I have, not buying
> the equipment you wished I have. I don't need microsecond timing. I
> don't need milli
Greg Hennessy wrote:
On 2011-09-02, Chris Albertson wrote:
As I said, Without a PPS signal you will not get reasonable
results.
I would appreciate advice on solving the problem I have, not buying
the equipment you wished I have. I don't need microsecond timing. I
don't need millisecond timin
On 2011-09-02, Courtney Bane wrote:
> NTP isn't syncing because the GPS is reporting that it doesn't have a
> valid fix.
>
>> $GPRMC,195342,V,3855.3261,N,07704.0687,W,,,010911,010.8,W*68
Thank you. I will try to move it to a place with more visibility.
And if I can find the person who thought h
2011/9/2 Miguel Gonçalves :
> $ ntpq -p 10.0.2.2; ntpdc -c kerninfo 10.0.2.2
> remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset
> jitter
> ==
> +10.0.2.10 .GPS. 1 u 734 1024 377 0
On 2011-09-02, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
> On 2 September 2011 07:56, unruh wrote:
>
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> It is completely unclear to me what your question is. Your 10.0.2.254 is
>> an outside switch.
>
>
> I had several questions in my first message. Your assumption is wrong.
>
> You are telling me t
On 2011-09-02, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>
> Very good point really. This is probably why the FreeBSD machine performs
> better than the Linux one. The FreeBSD is embedded and doesn't produce a lot
> of heat while the Linux one is a Dell regular server. Perhaps removing the
> lid on the Linux server
Rob wrote:
You will find (you have found) that by posting on this group, your message
falls into the hands of a small group of people that will either base
all their solutions on much more stringent requirements than you actually
have (e.g. they don't consider using GPS serial messages because
Edward T. Mischanko | Maintenance Technician, Electrical
ArcelorMittal Burns Harbor
Finishing | 250 W. US Highway 12
Burns Harbor, IN 46304-9745
T +1 219 787 3601 | F +1 219 787 4510
www.arcelormittal.com
> -Original Message-
> From: questions-
> bounces+edward.mischanko=arcelormitt
Mischanko, Edward T wrote:
> My understanding is that IP addresses in the
> 192.168.xxx.xxx range are not routable?
RFC1918 Private Networks: 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12, 192.168.0.0/16
Those IPv4 reserved addresses may not be internet routable,
however they are internal enterprise intranet routab
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 12:06 AM, unruh wrote:
>
> No. ntp can use the GPS nmea sentences to time the clock to a few 10s of
> ms. -- you may need to fudge the time offset to make up for the delay of
> the nmea sentence.
>
>
Yes, maybe NTP can but not with this Garmin 18 unit. Some GPSes are bette
On 2011-09-02, David Woolley wrote:
> Rob wrote:
>
>>
>> You will find (you have found) that by posting on this group, your message
>> falls into the hands of a small group of people that will either base
>> all their solutions on much more stringent requirements than you actually
>> have (e.g. t
On 2011-09-03, Chris Albertson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 12:06 AM, unruh wrote:
>
>>
>> No. ntp can use the GPS nmea sentences to time the clock to a few 10s of
>> ms. -- you may need to fudge the time offset to make up for the delay of
>> the nmea sentence.
>>
>>
> Yes, maybe NTP can but no
22 matches
Mail list logo
