This one is a toughy. Even if you use NTP, you still have a signifficant amount of drift to deal with. The system clock is not sample-accurate. Multicast NTP still requires unicast connectivity to the multicast servers, so I really don't understand the point.
_J In the new year, Steve Harris wrote: > On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 03:11:11 -0800, Dan Hollis wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, stef wrote: > > > Anyway, which software/protocol/service do you use for > > > your clock synchronisation? _very_ interesting! > > > > Probably ntp. Works well, multicast mode should be excellent for this. > > It's not reasonable to compare ntp to word clock, ntp resyncs every few > minuites and works by using some incredible maths. > > However, on raw ethernet, the arrival of the packets + a timestamp should > be enough synchronisation. > > >From what I remeber of magic, it ensures the packets are sent > synchronosly. > > - Steve > > _______________________________________________ > Alsa-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel > _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
