On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 04:26:53PM -0700, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 09:41:06AM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > It seems you are set on this terminology. I think it would work for
> > me, although in my head I mostly see the packets on the network
> > instead of a time signal. Have you considered adopting a server/client
> > terminology like NTP is using? I know some people that use it with PTP
> > and maybe it would be easier for a wider adoption.
> 
> I considered that, but ...
> 
> How would you feel about client/server terminology in the context of
> phc2sys?

That wouldn't work well, but as phc2sys doesn't use PTP to synchronize
the clocks, I think it can use a different terminology than ptp4l. It
might actually be less confusing. In the current code the same clock
is master and slave at the same time in different contexts.

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar



_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-devel mailing list
Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel

Reply via email to