>> OTOH, if the OS is time stamping packets, and PPS, for the ntpd daemon >> then the daemon can tolerate 'some' jitter.
> In normal operation we can expect lots of pairs of small allocations at UDP > datagram sizes with deallocation fairly rapidly thereafter. So the heap will > have lots of churn, which is bad... We don't care about the timing in most of the code. The only critical section is the chunk between grabbing the time and sending the packet. That chunk is likely to involve crypto. We could fix that with another packet. The idea is that you get a time stamp from the kernel on the transmit side. Then you have to send another packet to get that time stamp to the other end. Maybe we should add that to the NTPv5 list. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
