Thanks Richard.

The TimeProvider 5000 doesn't have a configuration option to select delay 
mechanism. It works with E2E only. I did check that out. Also I just got 
Symmetricom (now Microsemi) technical support's confirmation that the 
TimeProvider 5000 only supports the end-to-end delay mechanism.

Daniel
________________________________________
From: Richard Cochran [[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2015 2:05 AM
To: Daniel Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-users] PTP grandmaster and P2P delay mechanism

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:39:17PM +0000, Daniel Le wrote:
> Hello,
>
> By IEEE 1588-2008 standard, can a grandmaster clock support peer-to-peer 
> delay mechanism, in addition to the request-response delay mechanism?

Yes, a GM can and should support both the P2P and E2E mechanisms.  You
cannot mix the two in one network.  However, in ptp4l the delay
mechanism is a per-port option.  That means you can configure your BC
to ask as a bridge between different networks.

> I did an experiment where I ran ptp4l on one device as grandmaster and on 
> other device as slave. The two devices were connected back-to-back, 
> configured to do peer-to-peer delay measurement, and the protocol handshaking 
> was fine.
>
> I then tested the Symmetricom TimeProvider 5000 grandmaster and realized it 
> only worked with request-response delay measurement protocol.

Maybe they have a configuration option?

HTH,
Richard

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users

Reply via email to