[time-nuts] New (refurbished) LPRO-101 GPSDO

[David McClain]

I just received my LPRO-101 with a GPSDO control on it, from  
TenMhz.com. After fiddling with getting a good placement for the GPS  
antenna, so that it doesn't keep losing the satellites, I have been  
attempting to discipline the oscillator for more than 24 hours.

At this point, the LED has been toggling red / green for the past 24  
hours which indicates solid GPS acquisition and < 5e-8. But it isn't  
locked to NIST until it turns solid green which indicates < 5e-11.

Since this is a first deployment at my location, is it reasonable  
behavior for it to take longer than 24 hours to lock to NIST through  
GPS? Or do you think something may be wrong with the device.

I already know by comparison to WWV that I'm within a few mHz of  
being aligned, but noise in the measurements, human impatience, and  
wander in the soundcard clock, prevents me knowing any better than  
this. So already I'm < 5e-10. But that's about all I know until I see  
it lock. (If it ever does...)

eh?

Dr. David McClain
Chief Technical Officer
Refined Audiometrics Laboratory
4391 N. Camino Ferreo
Tucson, AZ  85750

email: dbm at refined-audiometrics.com
phone: 1.520.390.3995
web: http://refined-audiometrics.com



On Oct 15, 2010, at 16:00, Magnus Danielson wrote:

> On 10/16/2010 12:08 AM, Bob Camp wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> It's a crazy world when it comes to self signed certs.
>>
>> You have at least 5 OS's you need to consider (MS, Linux/FBSD, OS- 
>> X, I-OS, Android). You need to think about both browsers and mail  
>> clients. Each of those come from a half dozen sources on each  
>> platform. Then you have configuration options on each. That's a  
>> lot of combinations.
>>
>> Each combo seems to have a different idea of what not to do when  
>> they see a self signed cert. If you want to be able to handle all  
>> of them, even "real" certs may have issues. There are indeed  
>> several common combo's that are a major pain with a self signed cert.
>>
>> No, I didn't write any of the code with the problems in it. I also  
>> don't want to get into the details of what and where. This really  
>> isn't the forum for that sort of thing. I'm not out to bash any  
>> particular solution, only to point out that there are indeed issues.
>
> Do handle part of the mess, we have setup our local root cert at  
> the computer club, and then sign our server certs to that. I did a  
> major overhaul on the infrastructure for that. It is still not  
> "real" safety routines, but ah well. We provide a cert download  
> which quickly solves the cert issue with most browser.
>
> Seems to work for our myriad of server and client OSes and clients.
>
> There is various ways to get "real" root certs, but depending on  
> degree of uhm... safety... it may be argued of their capabilities.  
> There is efforts to build a chain of trust for a stable free root  
> cert, but it is so far nog included in any major browsers.
>
> Essentially it's a mess. I'm only scratched the surface here.
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ 
> time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>