On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 5:57 PM Maxime Lemonnier <maxime.lemonn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm trying to do something similar but slightly different than Vadim on this > thread https://sourceforge.net/p/linuxptp/mailman/message/35980617/ > > I too have PTP ethernet cameras that need the full bandwidth of the nic. The > difference is that I also have a PTP timeserver (timemachine's TM2000A). The > host PC uses linuxptp with hardware timestamping. > > When I put the cameras on the same gig-e switch, it all plays nice and I get > satisfying offsets (sub us). > > To put the cameras on their own nic, I must also put them on their own > subnets, so I would need to route ptp traffic back'n'forth. Is that possible? > > Should I rather synch the cameras with my (synched) PC clock with, e.g. > ptp4l -i if_cam0 -i if_cam1 -m -S > > (I noticed you can't use hardware timestamping with multiple interface for > reasons that are probably obvious to you guys) > > If so, I may have not tried hard enough, but I could not get satisfying > results with that methods (I have a litle setup that trigs cameras, and the > returned timestamps were 10-100 ms appart) >
I presume when you say "cameras on their own nic" I presume you mean "cameras on their own switch" ? To go between subnet, there are two options, routing, or a boundary clock. Determining which is most appropriate depends on the budget and level of synchronisation required Unless you have a different requirement to have the cameras on a different subnet to your grandmaster, why not simply link the switches at L2 ? Cheers _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-users mailing list Linuxptp-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users
