On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:02:14PM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > But I'm wondering how difficult it would be to implement a BC from > separate PHCs more cleanly. How about adding a new virtual transport > that uses clock_gettime() to timestamp the messages, create a clock > instance in ptp4l for each PHC with a port to the virtual transport? > Instead of one BC handling multiple PHCs there are multiple BCs in a > virtual network. > > What do you think?
This similar to what Patrick Ohly (inventor of so_timestamping) suggested in his paper, with "two-layer ptp" or something like that. It would add a bunch of protocol overhead, messages back and forth, and so on. Also it would change the BMC network topology. This impacts the hops for managment message forwarding. I like the idea of "automatic" phc2sys, if it would only work right. Thanks, Richard ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
