On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 01:22:33PM -0500, Vincent Cheng wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 05:58:24AM -0800, Vadim Fedorenko via Linuxptp-devel > wrote: > > In case of broken network there is a possibility of having management > > packets with proper data but absolute absence of sync packets. In such > > case the selected best master will stuck in HAVE_SYDY state without > > actually synchronising and will never fail because sync rx timeout timer > > is armed just after first receive of both SYNC and FOLLOW-UP packets. > > > > The patch arms sync rx timeout timer once sync grant is received. > > I agree the current sync rx timeout timer does not catch the case where > a SYNC packet is never received. However the original intent of > the syncReceiptTimeout was for 802.1AS-2011.
802.1AS and unicast mode are mutually exclusive, and so I don't see any harm in re-using the "syncReceiptTimeout" for unicast, but with slightly different semantics. Thanks, Richard _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
