On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 21:54, David Malone
wrote:
> Modern hardware that supports 802.11e (or 802.11n, which requires
> much of the QoS part of 11e) can control things like the number of
> retries, and you could hack the driver to inspect the packets and
> if it is NTP to reduce the number of ret
> Sorry for the offtopic post,
And sorry for bothering everyone uselessly -- all of my questions are
answered in RFC 891.
-- Juliusz
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Danny Mayer writes:
>No you don't want to do DNS over TCP if you can avoid it. It would be a
>major hit on the resolver servers and with the kind of high volume that
>you get as mobile devices make increasing use of such networks. You want
>WiFi to drop UDP packets if they are lost rather than at
Danny Mayer wrote:
On 12/24/2011 8:10 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
The bottom line is that the only thing that is relevant is how easy it is
to get to a GPS antenna with an open view of the sky.
Everything else is bloviation.
GPS is not used for this kind of thing, they are too inaccu
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 18:58, Rod Dorman wrote:
> Is this defined in an RFC or some other standards document?
http://standards.ieee.org/about/get/802/802.11.html
Cheers,
Dave Hart
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org
Hi,
Sorry for the offtopic post, but I really don't see another place to ask
this question.
I hear that the Fuzzball routing protocol used packet delay as a routing
metric. Does anyone recall if that's right? Was it the RTT, or was it
attempting to perform an estimate of one-way delay?
More ge
On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
> On 12/28/2011 12:09 AM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Danny Mayer wrote:
>>> On 12/27/2011 8:48 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Danny Mayer wrote:
> On 12/24/2011 8:10 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> John Hasler wrote:
On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
> On 12/28/2011 12:17 AM, unruh wrote:
>> On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
>>> On 12/24/2011 8:10 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
John Hasler wrote:
>> The open sky nearest the OPERA detector is straight up through 1400m of
>> rock.
>
On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
> On 12/27/2011 11:45 PM, Greg Hennessy wrote:
>> On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
>>> On 12/27/2011 9:08 PM, John Hasler wrote:
Danny writes:
> GPS is not used for this kind of thing, they are too inaccurate, so it
> doesn't matter. They use atomic
Why did they not do these computations in Mathematica. Once one defines a
framework (program) in Mathematica to do long and complex calculations, and
you test it with known good data to ensure it is correct, you are virtually
guaranteed to find the correct answer with real data. Many of the real
In article ,
Dave Hart wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 00:51, Danny Mayer wrote:
>> No you don't want to do DNS over TCP if you can avoid it. It would be a
>> major hit on the resolver servers and with the kind of high volume that
>> you get as mobile devices make increasing use of such networks
Danny Mayer wrote:
> On 12/28/2011 12:17 AM, unruh wrote:
>> On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
>>> On 12/24/2011 8:10 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
John Hasler wrote:
>> The open sky nearest the OPERA detector is straight up through 1400m of
>> rock.
>
> Jim Pennino w
Danny Mayer wrote:
> On 12/28/2011 12:09 AM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Danny Mayer wrote:
>>> On 12/27/2011 8:48 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Danny Mayer wrote:
> On 12/24/2011 8:10 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> John Hasler wrote:
The open sky n
Danny Mayer wrote:
> On 12/27/2011 11:45 PM, Greg Hennessy wrote:
>> On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
>>> On 12/27/2011 9:08 PM, John Hasler wrote:
Danny writes:
> GPS is not used for this kind of thing, they are too inaccurate, so it
> doesn't matter. They use atomic clocks.
>
On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
> No, they use synchronized Cesium atomic clocks for time accuracy. GPS is
> only used to get a fix on the location and I'm not sure that 10's of
> centimeters is good enough for what they are trying to prove.
Your comment is false. It is not try that GPS is used
>> GPS is not used for this kind of thing, they are too inaccurate, so it
>> doesn't matter. They use atomic clocks.
>
> No they do not. They use GPS.
The experiment between Cern and San Grasso for superluminal neutrinos
uses atomic clocks which are synchrononized with GPS.
_
On 12/28/2011 12:17 AM, unruh wrote:
> On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
>> On 12/24/2011 8:10 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> John Hasler wrote:
> The open sky nearest the OPERA detector is straight up through 1400m of
> rock.
Jim Pennino writes:
> And the easiest
On 12/28/2011 12:09 AM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Danny Mayer wrote:
>> On 12/27/2011 8:48 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> Danny Mayer wrote:
On 12/24/2011 8:10 PM, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> John Hasler wrote:
>>> The open sky nearest the OPERA detector is
On 12/27/2011 11:45 PM, Greg Hennessy wrote:
> On 2011-12-28, Danny Mayer wrote:
>> On 12/27/2011 9:08 PM, John Hasler wrote:
>>> Danny writes:
GPS is not used for this kind of thing, they are too inaccurate, so it
doesn't matter. They use atomic clocks.
>>>
>>> The requirement is for sy
19 matches
Mail list logo
