On May 24, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Mcmillan, Scott A wrote: > [My apologies if this double posts. The mail server didn't care for the > first submission.] > > This patch adds the capability to select the packet timestamp source.
Is there ever any reason *NOT* to use the hardware timestamp if it's available? > A new command line option was added to tcpdump, -j, to specify the source of > the packet timestamp. Valid options are 'raw' to use the raw NIC HW > timestamp and 'nic' to use the NIC HW timestamp transformed into the system > clock basis. Is the raw timestamp in the form of seconds since January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 UTC, plus fractions of a second? I assume "NIC HW timestamp transformed into the system clock basis" means that the time stamp in question *is* in the form of seconds since January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 UTC, plus fractions of a second? If "raw" is not in that form, and "nic" is in that form, is there any reason to use "raw"?- This is the tcpdump-workers list. Visit https://cod.sandelman.ca/ to unsubscribe.
