On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 06:12:22PM +1100, David Mirabito via Linuxptp-devel wrote: > I'm assuming that Responses (and Acknowledge) messages are whitelisted since > it > could be user of the UDS which made the original request, an example being > using > pmc to poll every clock reachable within some number of hops. > > Is this a safe assumption? And if so, is there any reason to forward-to-UDS > Responses > whose targetClockId is *not8 the local ptp4l instance?
Yes, I think so. The monitoring software running on the UDS port wants to know everything it can about the PTP network. It makes little difference WHO placed the original request. In fact, it is more efficient if the monitoring software tracks the replies. Those replies are for free, meaning it saves the client the trouble of sending requests in the first place. > I have a case where ptp4l is overhearing another OC's response to some 3rd > party > request, and because it's a RESPONSE with boundaryHops > 0 is being forwarded > down the UDS. Worse if those responses are errors due to propritary > TLVs. You can and should filter the responses that are of interest to your application. However, in general, we cannot say that every monitoring software wants this behavior, and so we should not let the ptp4l program take such possibilities away. Thanks, Richard _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
