Unruh wrote:
As in my previous post, my ntp (4.2.4p4) running with a local shm refclock
which gives it the PPS from my Garmin 18LVC, a remote level 1 source, and
a remote level 2 sever, has tai=0 but has the leap flag set ( certainly
not from my Garmin receiver).
Of course I did NOT have the
Hi,
alkope...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi
I have 2 ntp servers running Linux with LinuxPPS patch. Number one
uses a Meinberg PCI511 v1.00 as time source, number two uses a
Meinberg GPS170PCI v1.10.
On both machines ntp is configured to use the Meinberg refclock
(127.127.8.0) and furthermore
Unruh wrote:
David Woolley da...@ex.djwhome.demon.co.uk.invalid writes:
David L. Mills wrote:
mitigation algorithms, generally three candidates. If a reference clock
is among them, only its leap bits are used. If not, a vote is taken
Surely that needs to be limited to reference clocks
Antonio M. Moreiras wrote:
So, if I understand, I have to:
1 - download ftp://time.nist.gov/pub/leap-seconds.3427142400
2 - rename the file to ntp.leapseconds and put it in /etc
3 - stop and start ntpd
4 - verify the warning bits
As Unruh has already mentioned, only if you use the dev
On Dec 18, 10:08 am, Martin Burnicki martin.burni...@meinberg.de
wrote:
Hi,
The PCI511 card decodes the AM signal from DCF77 only. Due to the
characteristics of the AM signal the accuracy of the PCI511 card is only in
the range of a few milliseconds, while the GPS card provides an accuracy
On Dec 18, 12:47 pm, alkope...@googlemail.com
alkope...@googlemail.com wrote:
I did not wonder about the offset between gps
and pps
Should be:
I did not wonder about the offset between gps and dcf :-)
___
questions mailing list
On Dec 17, 6:57 pm, ober...@es.net (Kevin Oberman) wrote:
The time to process the time string from the clock is long and fairly
slow. The PPS is short and fast. As the documentation states, the PPS
signal trains the clock.
OK, my first example has an error. Of course I need the same fudge at
Hi
One of my ntp servers (moni0) uses another ntp server (gps) as time
source. The gps server gets it's time by gps ;-)
As you can see in this graph the offset is quite constant:
http://img-up.net/img/gps-jitter0PsFiy.png
But I wonder why it shows such big jitter values? I thought jitter is
only
Hi there
Antonio M. Moreiras wrote:
Cut
1 - download ftp://time.nist.gov/pub/leap-seconds.3427142400
Is there an other source?
This site appears to be down.
Cut
Regards,
Rob
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
Hello,
Harlan Stenn schrieb:
In article 4948f81b$0$29004$9b622...@news.freenet.de, Juergen Kosel
juergen.ko...@freenet.de writes:
And I also don't understand what you mean by computing time is a concern.
Is the overhead of a subroutine call that significant in your application?
it would
vasanth,
Configure a server with local clock driver. Download the NIST
leapseconds file. Set the server time shortly before the leap.
Synchronize the client to the server. Watch what happens.
Dave
vasanth raonaik wrote:
Hello Hackers,
I am doing research on leap second adjustments in NTP. I
Maybe. I'm not too familiar with NMEA since the Meinberg GPS clocks mostly
use a different time string format which is compatible with our DCF77
receivers, which have already been existing before the first GPS clocks
became available.
I haven't been able to find any NMEA documentation that
1 - download ftp://time.nist.gov/pub/leap-seconds.3427142400
Is there an other source?
This site appears to be down.
That site is unlikely to be down for long.
Are you behind a NAT box? I need to use the passive mode for ftp.
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate
Martin,
The current version sends a message to the system log, protostats log
and trap (if configured) when the leap is armed, disarmged or executed.
Dave
Martin Burnicki wrote:
Unruh wrote:
As in my previous post, my ntp (4.2.4p4) running with a local shm refclock
which gives it the PPS
Rob,
I am told the file is on all NTP servers operated by NIST. See the list
of public servers at NIST or www.ntp.org.
Dave
Rob van der Putten wrote:
Hi there
Antonio M. Moreiras wrote:
Cut
1 - download ftp://time.nist.gov/pub/leap-seconds.3427142400
Is there an other source?
alkope...@googlemail.com alkope...@googlemail.com writes:
On Dec 18, 10:08=A0am, Martin Burnicki martin.burni...@meinberg.de
wrote:
Hi,
The PCI511 card decodes the AM signal from DCF77 only. Due to the
characteristics of the AM signal the accuracy of the PCI511 card is only =
in
the range of
Juergen Kosel juergen.ko...@freenet.de writes:
Hello,
Harlan Stenn schrieb:
In article 4948f81b$0$29004$9b622...@news.freenet.de, Juergen Kosel
juergen.ko...@freenet.de writes:
And I also don't understand what you mean by computing time is a concern.
Is the overhead of a subroutine call
On Dec 17, 11:03 pm, David Woolley
da...@ex.djwhome.demon.co.uk.invalid wrote:
Hal Murray wrote:
In article
0ea640c4-6e30-457a-8b80-6274ea367...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com,
dhavey dha...@gmail.com writes:
and it segfaults. Any clues?
Does /dev/gps0 exist? Often, it's a symlink to
I have a question about the leap seconds indicator. Based on my
understanding of ntp, and the html page on your site dealing with leap
seconds, http://www.cis.udel.edu/~mills/leap.html, I have been telling
my team that the leap second indicator was the only true arbiter of
whether a mode 4 reply
On Dec 17, 11:03 pm, David Woolley
da...@ex.djwhome.demon.co.uk.invalid wrote:
Hal Murray wrote:
In article
0ea640c4-6e30-457a-8b80-6274ea367...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com,
dhavey dha...@gmail.com writes:
and it segfaults. Any clues?
Does /dev/gps0 exist? Often, it's a symlink to
On Dec 17, 11:03 pm, David Woolley
da...@ex.djwhome.demon.co.uk.invalid wrote:
Hal Murray wrote:
In article
0ea640c4-6e30-457a-8b80-6274ea367...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com,
dhavey dha...@gmail.com writes:
and it segfaults. Any clues?
Does /dev/gps0 exist? Often, it's a symlink to
On Dec 18, 11:47 am, dhavey dha...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 17, 11:03 pm, David Woolley
da...@ex.djwhome.demon.co.uk.invalid wrote:
Hal Murray wrote:
In article
0ea640c4-6e30-457a-8b80-6274ea367...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com,
dhavey dha...@gmail.com writes:
and it segfaults.
Okay here it is ;)
What does all of that mean?
I'll try to get it out of daemon mode and then post the output from
gdb ;)
[r...@user4 ntp-4.2.4p5]# /usr/local/bin/ntpd -d -d -d -d -d -d -d -d -
d -d -l /var/log/ntpd.log -c /etc/ntp.gps
ntpd 4.2@1.1541-o Thu Dec 18 21:21:02 UTC 2008 (2)
dhavey wrote:
What full debug?
Depends on your development toolset, but for gcc, it means including the
-g flag and not doing anything that would strip the binary.
For gcc, unoptimised means something like -O0
___
questions mailing list
On Dec 18, 1:49 pm, David Woolley
da...@ex.djwhome.demon.co.uk.invalid wrote:
dhavey wrote:
What full debug?
Depends on your development toolset, but for gcc, it means including the
-g flag and not doing anything that would strip the binary.
For gcc, unoptimised means something like -O0
On Dec 18, 1:49 pm, David Woolley
da...@ex.djwhome.demon.co.uk.invalid wrote:
dhavey wrote:
What full debug?
Depends on your development toolset, but for gcc, it means including the
-g flag and not doing anything that would strip the binary.
For gcc, unoptimised means something like -O0
dhavey wrote:
gdb looks like this:
(gdb) run -l /var/log/ntpd.log -c /etc/ntp.gps
Starting program: /usr/local/bin/ntpd -l /var/log/ntpd.log -c /etc/
ntp.gps
[Detaching after fork from child process 11958. (Try `set detach-on-
fork off'.)]
Program exited normally.
(gdb)
You've run gdb
Okay here it is ;)
What does all of that mean?
I'll try to get it out of daemon mode and then post the output from
gdb ;)
[r...@user4 ntp-4.2.4p5]# /usr/local/bin/ntpd -d -d -d -d -d -d -d -d -
d -d -l /var/log/ntpd.log -c /etc/ntp.gps
ntpd 4.2@1.1541-o Thu Dec 18 21:21:02 UTC 2008 (2)
I ran the code in gdb and this is the stack trace. At refclock_nmea.c:
178 this code causes the crash
nmea_port = atoi(strtok(NULL,:));
I am not really sure of why strtok is used on a NULL string. I assume
strtok return a NULL based on the trace, and then atoi calls strtool
which leads to a
In article 0273857b-9ab1-4aaf-9529-c9b7eb932...@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com,
dhavey dha...@gmail.com writes:
I ran the code in gdb and this is the stack trace. At refclock_nmea.c:
178 this code causes the crash
nmea_port = atoi(strtok(NULL,:));
I am not really sure of why strtok is used on a
On Dec 18, 3:27 pm, hal-use...@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal
Murray) wrote:
/dev/gps0 - /dev/pps0
exists.
That looks fishy.
I'd expect something like:
/dev/gps0 - /dev/ttyS0
and
/dev/pps0 - /dev/ttyS0
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
18 Dec 13:11:16 ntpd[11838]: configure: keyword ning unknown, line
ignored
That looks fishy, but I don't know if it has anything
to do with the segfault.
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
___
questions mailing
One thing I thought I knew about the standard NTP distribution, was that
it uses the mlockall() call, when available, to prevent swapping and thus
gain more repeatable latencies.
However, recently I had cause to run nm on ntpd, and was surprised to
note no references to mlockall(). A check with
Greg,
Not true. The leap warning bit has to go away only before the end of the
next day. Note the upstream leap bits have at least one day to go away
as well, since they are disregarded less than 28 days before the end of
the month..
Dave
Greg Dowd wrote:
I have a question about the leap
I'm glad it is working for you and I'd be even happier if we could figure
out why the NULL string got where it did earlier, as ntpd should never drop
core like that.
--
Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org
http://ntpforum.isc.org - be a member!
___
questions
In article ywn94p108yb7@ntp1.isc.org,
Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org writes:
I'm glad it is working for you and I'd be even happier if we could figure
out why the NULL string got where it did earlier, as ntpd should never drop
core like that.
It might be just a simple bug. The code in that area
36 matches
Mail list logo
