On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 3:20 PM, Jan Hoevers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No way you can maintain that kind of accuracy with "a good crystal", > even an oven controlled one would not do the job. And the average pool > member will not sell his home to buy a cesium osc.
they're not that expensive. as i write this, there's one on ebay under $2.5k. rubidiums are easily had under a thousand; the bare physics package can be had for a couple hundred. > What problem are you trying to solve anyway? We serve time over the > internet, typically with an accuracy of 5 - 50 ms. That is > milliseconds, not nanoseconds, not even microseconds. "because i can" note that i was the one who observed (twice) that there's ethernet (and possibly ADSL) between any of my clients thereby seriously impacting my accuracy. > We have no need for a 30 ns reference, as it would be a million times as > accurate as the service we can offer to the pool users. but that doesn't stop me from wanting a 30ns reference. > I do believe the pool will need more accuracy in the future, but right > now the network is the bottleneck, not the time reference. yes, i think this morning we all saw that the network sucks. -- GDB has a 'break' feature; why doesn't it have 'fix' too? _______________________________________________ timekeepers mailing list [email protected] https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
