Glenn wrote:
>>>Is PPS kernel discipline compiled into the default FreeBSD kernel?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>No, but it's a pretty easy thing to turn on -- you add a line to the
>>config file and tell it to go. Pretty straightforward, *once* you find
>>the instructions.
>>
>>
>
>
> Where would I find th
John Ackermann N8UR wrote:
>Geoff Powell said the following on 04/23/2006 05:42 PM:
>
>
>
>>Is PPS kernel discipline compiled into the default FreeBSD kernel?
>>
>>
>
>No, but it's a pretty easy thing to turn on -- you add a line to the
>config file and tell it to go. Pretty straightforward
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Geoff Powell writes:
>Meanwhile, FreeBSD with your patches on a NET4501 will give units of
>microseconds?
It's all in stock FreeBSD, no patches needed.
The major problem you will have is that NTPD isn't very good once
you get down into microseconds.
>Yes, I am aw
On Apr 24, 2006, at 3:05 PM, Geoff Powell wrote:
>> I wrote a hack called "Remote RRD" which sends updates in UDP packets
>> to another host which hosts the RRD file and web-pages and all that
>> to get around this problem.
>
> Aha! A cure. Would you post a URL? Pretty please?
http://phk.freebsd
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Poul-Henning Kamp
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Geoff Powell writes:
>
>>So you'd recommend a 4501, with FreeBSD in Compact Flash? I wanted to
>>use CF anyway, since a box running 24/7 is not the best environment in
>>which to have movin
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Geoff Powell writes:
>So you'd recommend a 4501, with FreeBSD in Compact Flash? I wanted to
>use CF anyway, since a box running 24/7 is not the best environment in
>which to have moving parts. The box will have no more that NTP and MRTG
>on it.
There isn't much I c
Geoff Powell said the following on 04/23/2006 05:42 PM:
> Is PPS kernel discipline compiled into the default FreeBSD kernel?
No, but it's a pretty easy thing to turn on -- you add a line to the
config file and tell it to go. Pretty straightforward, *once* you find
the instructions.
>
>
>>I am
Geoff Powell wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Pettitt
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>> I'll second the soekris box - my box time.no-such-agency.net is a 4801
>> running FreeBSD with a GPS18LVC.You can expect offsets in the +/-
>> 5us range except when the box is stressed - the
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Pettitt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>I'll second the soekris box - my box time.no-such-agency.net is a 4801
>running FreeBSD with a GPS18LVC.You can expect offsets in the +/-
>5us range except when the box is stressed - the standard xtal in the box
>is not te
Geoff Powell wrote:
>
>
>> And - most OSes should do the trick. FreeBSD has a really nice
>> precision timekeeping interface, though -- and it makes a marvelously
>> solid time server. I'm running it on a few Net4801s and recommend
>> it. You can very easily build an image for it using
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David
Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>You'll get more than you expect -- the offset you're observing on
>ADSL is very likely wrong, because the delays your packets experience
>on adsl aren't symmetric. NTP assumes symmetry. So I wouldn't
>actually believ
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Ackermann N8UR
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>FreeBSD is definitely the best tuned OS for NTP timekeeping, but Linux
>can do OK. The biggest problem is that there's no kernel support for
>PPS signals in the 2.6 series of kernels. There is a patch available
>for a
David Andersen wrote:
> You'll get more than you expect -- the offset you're observing on ADSL
> is very likely wrong, because the delays your packets experience on
> adsl aren't symmetric. NTP assumes symmetry. So I wouldn't actually
> believe that a 1ms offset is really 1ms off, depending on th
You'll get more than you expect -- the offset you're observing on
ADSL is very likely wrong, because the delays your packets experience
on adsl aren't symmetric. NTP assumes symmetry. So I wouldn't
actually believe that a 1ms offset is really 1ms off, depending on
the RTT to your ISP.
B
Geoff Powell said the following on 04/23/2006 05:00 PM:
> So my question is - should I continue with Debian Stable, or would
> OpenBSD be better for sub-microsecond accuracy? Indeed, is sub-
> microsecond offset achievable with this hardware? GPSDOs and Rb or Cs
> standards are not yet practical p
I've just started getting interested in precision timekeeping - if you
can call an offset from UTC that is measured in units of milliseconds
"precision".
My current timeserver is a Buffalo Linkstation, patched to run Debian
Stable, and slaved via 2MBit ADSL to my ISPs Stratum 2 timeserver, using
16 matches
Mail list logo
