Re: [Linuxptp-users] (no subject)

[Baya O. <bay...@gm...>]

Hallo Richard,

Once again, I thank you very much for your help, you saved me a lot of
time. Indeed our architecture is Intel 82574 (driver e1000e) so I will have
to think of an other solution.

My part work of work is a small part of an existing architecture and I will
have to find a solution avoiding to make others making any change.

in fact it is a complicated architecture , we have redundancy and also
duplication.
For example we could be in a situation where two connected trains share a
same part of the tract during a journey and than get split out somewhere.
so each part of the two connected train has two engines (front and rear),
and each engine has redundancy for safety reasons .. all computers Boards
may be switched on but only on computer Board is active at a time..

well, I will go through the step you already mentioned and see how I can
gain any advance from it.

Once again thank, thank very much,

Best regards,
Baya


2016-07-13 8:12 GMT+02:00 Richard Cochran <ric...@gm...>:

> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:35:18PM +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> > - Another idea is to run Layer-2 and isolate using VLANs.
>
> Also:
>
> - You can try running UDP over two different VLAN interfaces.
>
> - VLAN will only work if your HW correctly identifies PTP frames with
>   a VLAN header.
>
> - Regarding the HW: Some MAC HW can only time stamp one transmit frame
>   at a time, like the Intel 82574 (driver e1000e) for example.  If you
>   have such HW, then running two ptp4l instances will *not* work.
>
> HTH,
> Richard
>