| Re: [chrony-dev] PPS reference clock rejected because of high dispersion |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More chrony.tuxfamily.org/chrony-dev Archives
]
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 02:52:03PM +0200, Hattink, Tjalling [FINT] wrote:
> What I understand is that you have a slightly different meaning for the
> lock directive, maybe my scenario should be a different setting than
> "lock"? Maybe call it "relate"?
>
> So "relate" will mean the PPS is only accepted when the related refclock
> is accepted, but timestamps are still derived from the local clock, and
> "lock" will mean the PPS timestamp are derived from the related
> refclock. What do you think of this?
Yes, that could be a new feature, but wouldn't that be just a
workaround for the problem with PPS getting stuck? We need to fix that
anyway.
--
Miroslav Lichvar
--
To unsubscribe email chrony-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the subject.
For help email chrony-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "help" in the subject.
Trouble? Email listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.