Talk:Precision Time Protocol

message: The second paragraph of the intro appears to be inexplicably enclosed in quotes.  What's that all about? Snottywong (talk) 11:32, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume the quotes indicate that the text is quoted from the suppled reference. Not great encyclopedic form. Feel free to rework it --Kvng (talk) 16:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  intro quote 

message: This section is a potential WP:EL violation and magnet for spam links. On the other hand, I think it is important to show that it is a well-supported protocol. Suggestions are welcomed. --Kvng (talk) 14:17, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with you but PTP stack is supported by a number is companies , i think it is better to mention only the open source implementation , hence request you to revert --User talk:R.srinivaas  04:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What is your justification for retaining only the open-source implementations? IXXAT is an implementation I am personally familiar with so I included it. I would like expand this section, not shrink it. If it gets unreasonable, it could be turned into a separate "List of..." article. Is it just the external links that bother you or does it go deeper? --Kvng (talk) 15:40, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: there is nothing personal, if at all you wanna include justify, even Cisco, Symmetricomm etc have PTP implementation--User talk:R.srinivaas  19:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm having a hard time understanding what you are suggesting. I've added Cisco and Symmetricom to the section. --Kvng (talk) 20:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Go ahead with you edits, i am not here to fight with any one--User talk:R.srinivaas  04:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: To me It seems like the whole implementations section of links is commercial per Kvng's original June 2010 post (" spam magnet"). The encyclopedic content is about PTP ;  In my opinion the implementations available are changing quickly and best served by browser searches rather than the encyclopedic article. GWS EE (talk) 01:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As someone not knowledgable about PTP, I came here to learn more about it, and besides the details of the protocol and algorithms, two things I wanted to know were "how widely supported is it?" and "where is it used?". The list of implementations is very useful in answering those questions; it tells me that quite a few vendors support it, most prominently in Ethernet switch hardware. jeremyleader (talk) 23:04, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Implementations 

message: I think its a little too technical for B class, and a couple more references wouldn't go amiss, but if someone else wants to change it go ahead. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brief Review 

message: Sorry if this is the wrong place to say this, but it seems that the combined equation is incorrect. Please check my math, but it should be o = (T1' - T1 - T2' + T2) / 2. The primes are swapped on the T2s.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.166.187.228 (talk) 15:23, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted the edit that changed the signs. Glrx (talk) 22:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo in combined equation 

message: a decade later, & as an engineer working for a massive multinational broadcaster relying on PTP messages that travel half way round the world, I'd like to see something in the article along the lines of case-studies, so that visiting readers understand the context for all this. 
why, for example, is it important to my employer to have PTP synchronisation between an outside-broadcast in china & a production infrastructure in london? how does the sync benefit the various streams of data going back & forth, & what use is any of this to the viewer? 
without breaking this down into a practical implementation & supporting it with reasons, the article currently doesn't help anyone who asks "why don't you just use GPS?" & that's a fair question, because there are GPS receivers everywhere where we have a PTP clock, so this is about "which one of these clocks is right?" at any given moment. & then you've got variable latency & asymmetry across a WAN that might not always take the same physical route from one moment to the next either.
in short, it's a fascinating topic but the article doesn't do much to explain why it's important or what sorts of things can frustrate it.
duncanrmi (talk) 12:27, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like you're looking for a Broadcast synchronization article. I think Clock synchronization is the closest we have. ~Kvng (talk) 14:45, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Broadcast synchronization