Re: [tcpdump-workers] Hardware Timestamping Problem

2016-06-08 Thread Guenter Ebermann
> Am 08.06.2016 um 23:10 schrieb Michael Richardson : > > Christian Rupp wrote: >> The Timestamp when tcpdump grabs the package off of the receiver is 36 >> seconds( +/- innaccuracy, here roughly +/- 5-10 µs) after the timestamp when >> tcpdump grabs the package of the sender. resulting in an a

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Hardware Timestamping Problem

2016-06-08 Thread Michael Richardson
Christian Rupp wrote: > The Timestamp when tcpdump grabs the package off of the receiver is 36 > seconds( +/- innaccuracy, here roughly +/- 5-10 µs) after the timestamp when > tcpdump grabs the package of the sender. resulting in an alleged One > Way > Delay of 36 seconds wh

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Hardware Timestamping Problem

2016-06-08 Thread Guy Harris
On Jun 8, 2016, at 1:29 PM, Christian Rupp wrote: > The Timestamp when tcpdump grabs the package off of the receiver is 36 > seconds( +/- innaccuracy, here roughly +/- 5-10 µs) after the timestamp when > tcpdump grabs the package of the sender. "The" packet in the sense that you have two tcp

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Hardware Timestamping Problem

2016-06-08 Thread Christian Rupp
The Timestamp when tcpdump grabs the package off of the receiver is 36 seconds( +/- innaccuracy, here roughly +/- 5-10 µs) after the timestamp when tcpdump grabs the package of the sender. resulting in an alleged One Way Delay of 36 seconds which wouldn't make any sense in that scenario, giv

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Hardware Timestamping Problem

2016-06-08 Thread Guy Harris
On Jun 8, 2016, at 5:53 AM, Christian wrote: > Now, my results in itself make sense and would give me the desired results, > but they have a big offset to them. 36 seconds to be exact. So you're saying there's a 36-second offset between which two times?

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Hardware Timestamping Problem

2016-06-08 Thread Christian Rupp
Yes, one tcpdump entity per server, after Both are started I start a Package Generator which sends a 900kbs Trace. There shouldn't be a big buffering effect, if I'm not using the hardware timestamp options the one way delay is at a few 100 µs, or am I misunderstanding something? The 36 seconds

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Hardware Timestamping Problem

2016-06-08 Thread Michael Richardson
{please keep it on the list for archival purposes} Christian wrote: > between sender and receiver > so from the point when tcpdump grabs the time off of the Sender and to the > point where tcpdump grabs the time off of the receiver. So you are running a tcpdump on sender, using the t

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Hardware Timestamping Problem

2016-06-08 Thread Michael Richardson
Christian wrote: > My Setup: > 2 directly connected identical Servers. > Linux: Debian 3.16.7 > Network Interface: Intel i350-T4 > Used tcpdump command: > sudo /usr/sbin/tcpdump -i eth4 -s 59 port 3 -x -n -tt -v -j > adapter_unsynced --time-stamp-precision=nano -w

[tcpdump-workers] Hardware Timestamping Problem

2016-06-08 Thread Christian
Hello, (Sorry if this shows up twice, I wasn't registered for the List, when I first sent my request. And sorry if this is the wrong place for this kind of question.) I'm currently working on my Bachelors Thesis. The aim of my project is to accuratly and precisely timestamp Packages(it has to