Re: fractional nanoseconds

[<Peter.AshwoodSmith@xxxxxxxxxx>]

where woukd the other 16 bits come from?


Sent from HUAWEI AnyOffice

From: jouni.korhonen

To: marek.hajduczenia;

Cc: STDS-1904-3-TF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;

Subject: Re: fractional nanoseconds

time: 2015-05-02 15:14:23Hi,

I was thinking the same as 1588 can do i.e. 1/65536 ns.

Jouni

Sent from a smart phone.. Mind the typos..

\> Marek Hajduczenia \

kirjoitti 2.5.2015 kello 9.32:
\>
\> Jouni,
\>
\> What would be the resolution of these fractional nanoseconds?
\>
\> Marek
\>
\> -----Original Message-----
\> From: stds-1904-3-tf@xxxxxxxx [mailto:stds-1904-3-tf@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
\> Jouni Korhonen
\> Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 6:30 PM
\> To: STDS-1904-3-TF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
\> Subject: fractional nanoseconds
\>
\> Folks,
\>
\> We have already had some discussion on this topic earlier but.. what is your
\> opinion on having fractional nanosecond accuracy in the time stamping (e.g.
\> when sending a timestamp in the RoE header)? If we follow what 1588 did for
\> the correction field that would mean 16 additional bits, which may or may
\> not be significant overhead wise.
\>
\> Comments & opinions?
\>
\> - Jouni
\>
\> --
\> Jouni Korhonen, CTO Office, Networking, Broadcom Corporation
\> O: +1-408-922-8135, M: +1-408-391-7160
\>