On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 00:59 -0500, Matt Price wrote: > hi folks, > > ok... this is way OT. but I thought I'd put this question to the > most knowledgable group of people I know... > > I have to give a lecture on the history of timekeeping technologies. > I want to end with late c.20/ early c21 technologies of synchronized > timekeeping. GPS is one obvious example, NTP is another. But > puttingthe lecture together I realized I don'trelaly understand why > it's important for computer networks to have fine-grain > synchronization. So I thought I'd ask some geeks (as my sig says, I'm > only a hemi-geek): why does a network need careful clock > synchronization? Are packets like railroad cars -- in the sense that > it's VERY important to know which got sent first, and which is ocming > next -- and if you screw up the timeable, you get a catastrophe? Or > is there more flexibility in the system? > > anyway, it's just a question. I'd love to hear some answers.
"The network" doesn't need careful clock synchronization. As evidence, note that *most* IP nodes do not run any sort of time sync app. TCP packets are ordered at the end point using sequence numbers. It's applications & humans that need/want clock sync. A quick, simple example is forensic analysis of log files. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. No matter how hard women work, train, excersize (and some of the woment in the Olympics were *muscular*), lose body fat, or get Title IX money, (the population of athletic) women will *never* be faster, stronger or better at sports(*) than (the population of athletic) men. (*Excluding "small sports" like darts.) It's just how men and women have evolved. Deal with it.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
