Re: [ntp:questions] Has anyone thought about this?

2014-04-10 Thread Terje Mathisen
Dowd, Greg wrote: However, t1 and t4 are not really in seconds if the client clock is slewing. That is, the difference t4 - t1 will be shorter than seconds if the clock is being slowed down and larger if the clock is being sped up. Hence the clock slew may be a source of variation that is not

Re: [ntp:questions] Handle ntp conf modification when ntp is already running

2014-04-10 Thread Terje Mathisen
Rob wrote: For Arthur: you need to modify the ntp.conf in case the system is rebooted outside your control (it will then use the values from ntp.conf) and at the same time use the above method to add the new server immediately. Then you do not need to restart ntpd and you can still change the

Re: [ntp:questions] Reasons of NTP not to use GPS source

2014-04-10 Thread David Woolley
On 10/04/14 01:20, E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the Yes, I have several hundreds (if not thousands) that use a TI chip, that will not change the logic level, if the input does not go negative. How do they meet the requirement for unpowered control lines to appear to be

Re: [ntp:questions] Handle ntp conf modification when ntp is already running

2014-04-10 Thread Harlan Stenn
Amongst the many reasons why we did not let SIGHUP restart the daemon was that back in the old days we used modem drivers a lot more often. The HUP signal was generic - it was not really associated with any specific device. It looks like that code is now gone from the distribution, but there are

Re: [ntp:questions] Reasons of NTP not to use GPS source

2014-04-10 Thread John Hasler
David Woolley writes: How do they meet the requirement for unpowered control lines to appear to be off? If they are unpowered they will never exceed the positive threshold and therefor will never appear to be on. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA

Re: [ntp:questions] Reasons of NTP not to use GPS source

2014-04-10 Thread Paul
A remarkable amount of traffic for a question posted last September. Particularly considering voltage matching wasn't mentioned. However it doesn't matter if William Unruh has never seen level matching problems or if Null@blacklist has always seen it. If the device under test works it works and

[ntp:questions] WinXP no DCD interupts unless RTS/CTS handshaking enabled

2014-04-10 Thread James Gibb
I'm not sure if this is a generic problem or something weird has happened to the UARTs on my box, but I find I only see DCD events if RTS/CTS handshaking is on. This is true for David Taylor's SerialPort LEDs viewer, RealTerm (a Windows terminal/debugging program) and NTPd. I've hacked

[ntp:questions] Simulate PPS devices

2014-04-10 Thread Maximilian Brehm
Hey, so, I wrote a program to communicate with NTP via the shared memory driver. It currently uses CLOCK_REALTIME and CLOCK_MONOTONIC to simulate an offset and NTP wanders there correctly. Now I would like to include support for PPS. I found gpsd (http://gpsd.berlios.de/) and shmpps (thanks

Re: [ntp:questions] Has anyone thought about this?

2014-04-10 Thread Brian Utterback
On 4/10/2014 3:22 AM, Terje Mathisen wrote: The maximum ntpd slew is ± 500 ppm, which means that the absolute maximum possible slew between UTC and the local clock would be 1000 ppm (i.e. the clock is maximally bad, at +500 ppm, and we are currently slewing at -500 ppm), in which case the

[ntp:questions] Fwd: Simulate PPS devices

2014-04-10 Thread Maximilian Brehm
I wrote the message before I actually checked out shmpps. It seems that it does not use the Kernel-PPS interface but simply transmits a timestamp via the shared memory interface each second. The reason I want to use the Kernel-PPS interface (RFC 2783 mentions that it supports asynchronous

Re: [ntp:questions] Has anyone thought about this?

2014-04-10 Thread Terje Mathisen
Brian Utterback wrote: On 4/10/2014 3:22 AM, Terje Mathisen wrote: The maximum ntpd slew is � 500 ppm, which means that the absolute maximum possible slew between UTC and the local clock would be 1000 ppm (i.e. the clock is maximally bad, at +500 ppm, and we are currently slewing at -500 ppm),

Re: [ntp:questions] WinXP no DCD interupts unless RTS/CTS handshaking enabled

2014-04-10 Thread David Taylor
On 10/04/2014 09:49, James Gibb wrote: I'm not sure if this is a generic problem or something weird has happened to the UARTs on my box, but I find I only see DCD events if RTS/CTS handshaking is on. This is true for David Taylor's SerialPort LEDs viewer, RealTerm (a Windows

Re: [ntp:questions] Handle ntp conf modification when ntp is already running

2014-04-10 Thread Rob
Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org wrote: Amongst the many reasons why we did not let SIGHUP restart the daemon was that back in the old days we used modem drivers a lot more often. The HUP signal was generic - it was not really associated with any specific device. I think you are confusing two

Re: [ntp:questions] Handle ntp conf modification when ntp is already running

2014-04-10 Thread Jochen Bern
On 10.04.2014 14:00, questions-requ...@lists.ntp.org digested: From: Terje Mathisen terje.mathi...@tmsw.no Rob wrote: OF COURSE ntpd should simply listen for SIGHUP and when it is received re-read the config file. Like almost all Unix daemons do. Here's the crux of the matter: ntpd is

Re: [ntp:questions] Handle ntp conf modification when ntp is already running

2014-04-10 Thread Harlan Stenn
Rob writes: Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org wrote: Amongst the many reasons why we did not let SIGHUP restart the daemon was that back in the old days we used modem drivers a lot more often. The HUP signal was generic - it was not really associated with any specific device. I think you are

[ntp:questions] How does NTP configure serial port parameters?

2014-04-10 Thread Jason Rabel
I've seen in the reflock driver sources where they hard-code in the serial port speed (i.e. 9600), but what about the parameter settings? i.e. the data bits, parity bit, and stop bit? Specifically I'm using the palisade driver, but have selected 'mode 1' because I'm using an Endrun Technologies

Re: [ntp:questions] Handle ntp conf modification when ntp is already running

2014-04-10 Thread David Woolley
On 10/04/14 17:51, Rob wrote: A modemline attached to a process does not send SIGHUP when the modem drops carrier unless the process has that modemline as a controlling TTY. A daemon is generally a session leader. The first TTY it opens will become its controlling terminal.

Re: [ntp:questions] Handle ntp conf modification when ntp is already running

2014-04-10 Thread John Hasler
David Woolley writes: A daemon is generally a session leader. The first TTY it opens will become its controlling terminal. Not if the terminal is opened with O_NOCTTY. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA ___

Re: [ntp:questions] Reasons of NTP not to use GPS source

2014-04-10 Thread E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists
Paul wrote: However it doesn't matter if William Unruh has never seen level matching problems or if Null@blacklist has always seen it. I don't know about always, still is probably a more accurate word. I do have dozens (if not hundreds) that mostly use max232 chips, which won't drive as hard