Hello!
I've got the following configuration:
tos mindist 0.128
tinker panic 0 stepout 60
# TSIP,PPS reference clock
server 127.127.8.0 mode 10 prefer maxpoll 3 true
fudge 127.127.8.0 refid TSIP time1 0.08
server 127.127.22.0 maxpoll 3
fudge 127.127.22.0 refid PPSI
The main goal: I want 1 ms or
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 11:09:29 GMT, Nickolay Orekhov
wrote:
>Hello!
>I've got the following configuration:
>
>tos mindist 0.128
>tinker panic 0 stepout 60
>
># TSIP,PPS reference clock
>
>server 127.127.8.0 mode 10 prefer maxpoll 3 true
>fudge 127.127.8.0 refid TSIP time1 0.08
>
>server 127.127.22.0
On 2013-04-05, Nickolay Orekhov wrote:
> Hello!
> I've got the following configuration:
>
> tos mindist 0.128
> tinker panic 0 stepout 60
>
> # TSIP,PPS reference clock
>
> server 127.127.8.0 mode 10 prefer maxpoll 3 true
> fudge 127.127.8.0 refid TSIP time1 0.08
>
> server 127.127.22.0 maxpoll 3
tt
> Sent: Friday, April 5, 2013 10:02 AM
> To: questions@lists.ntp.org
> Subject: Re: [ntp:questions] high jitter on serial gps causes big time
> offsets
>
> On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 11:09:29 GMT, Nickolay Orekhov
> wrote:
>
> >Hello!
> >I've got the following
No I'm not a gps developer.
Imagine that I've got very precise time according to GPS+PPS for a long
period.
After that GPS and PPS quality goes low and than quality of GPS serial high
jitter clock will appear before low jitter PPS.
Before selecting PPS, ntpd will do some adjustments according to
On 04/08/13 07:50, Nickolay Orekhov wrote:
No I'm not a gps developer.
Imagine that I've got very precise time according to GPS+PPS for a long
period.
After that GPS and PPS quality goes low and than quality of GPS serial high
jitter clock will appear before low jitter PPS.
Before selecting PPS
On Saturday, April 6, 2013 4:18:33 AM UTC-7, Charles Elliott wrote:
> I would test the local clock before relying on it for time. In the bad old
> days, around year 2000, when I first started processing SETI@Home (S@H) work
> units (WUs), I could actually see that WUs were being processed faster i
website.read...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, April 6, 2013 4:18:33 AM UTC-7, Charles Elliott wrote:
I would test the local clock before relying on it for time. In the bad old
days, around year
2000, when I first started processing SETI@Home (S@H) work units (WUs), I could
actually see
that
website.read...@gmail.com wrote:
I can obtain some precision crystals (+/- 2ppm) for about $8 to $10,
+ so why aren't they being added to the mid-level and up motherboards?
$8-10 for the crystal would imply a total motherboard price of $2,000+.
I think the big market for high end motherboards
On 2013-04-13, website.read...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, April 6, 2013 4:18:33 AM UTC-7, Charles Elliott wrote:
>> I would test the local clock before relying on it for time. In the bad old
>> days, around year 2000, when I first started processing SETI@Home (S@H) work
>> units (WUs), I cou
$8-10 for the crystal would imply a total motherboard price of $2,000+???
Wouldn't that imply $210 vs. $200 price? Why $2,000+?
>
> website.read...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I can obtain some precision crystals (+/- 2ppm) for about $8 to $10,
> + so why aren't they being added to the mid-level and
On 13/04/2013 20:47, website.read...@gmail.com wrote:
[]
It is disgusting to buy a motherboard, load it with graphics processors, and
memory and then find that the whole thing cannot keep time. I consider time
keeping THE most neglected component in computer motherboards today.
For most peop
On 4/13/2013 5:09 PM, David Woolley wrote:
website.read...@gmail.com wrote:
I can obtain some precision crystals (+/- 2ppm) for about $8 to $10,
+ so why aren't they being added to the mid-level and up motherboards?
$8-10 for the crystal would imply a total motherboard price of $2,000+.
I th
13 matches
Mail list logo
