tcpdump mailing list archives
Re: nanosecond timestamp
From: Darren Reed <darrenr () reed wattle id au>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:23:53 +1100 (EST)
In some email I received from Guy Harris, sie wrote:
On Dec 9, 2004, at 2:08 PM, Darren Reed wrote:In some email I received from Guy Harris, sie wrote:BTW, where are you getting the nanosecond-resolution time stamps in Solaris?gethrtimeThat says what the high-resolution time counter's value is now, not what the value was when bufmod saw the packet (which raises another issue, namely that the time stamps you get out of libpcap might have nanosecond *precision* but they might not have nanosecond *accuracy*) - or are the packets in question not being captured by libpcap, so that you can use "gethrtime()" to time stamp packets reasonably close to the time t which they arrived?
I think that whether it is bufmod or a program that generates a time stamp, it is still a software timestamp and sometime after the actual packet "arrived". So what am I trying to say here? Unless you have hardware timestamps in captured packets, one software timestamp is as good as the next in a well written application. Darren - This is the tcpdump-workers list. Visit https://lists.sandelman.ca/ to unsubscribe.
Current thread:
- nanosecond timestamp Dumas Hwang (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp Guy Harris (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp Guy Harris (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp Darren Reed (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp rick jones (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp Darren Reed (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp rick jones (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp Darren Reed (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp Guy Harris (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp Darren Reed (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp Guy Harris (Dec 09)
- Re: nanosecond timestamp Alexander Dupuy (Dec 09)