From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E5283CB37 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 12:08:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 422H8rkK041124 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 18:08:53 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 2B4F820D8FC for ; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 18:08:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23D8020D8EC for ; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 18:08:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.11.240.6] ([10.11.240.6]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 422H8rJO044880 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 18:08:53 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2024 18:08:52 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: fr To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net References: From: Alexandre Petrescu In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CEA-Virus: SOPHOS_SAVI_ERROR_OLD_VIRUS_DATA Subject: Re: [Starlink] Time Synchronization in Satellite Networks X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2024 17:08:54 -0000 This is a 2nd time I do this here, but let me this time put it bluntly, and please excuse me if I am too direct.  This is not a reproach to anybody or anything, and I know this is current practice.  It is just that for me the practice is destabilizing.  Probably I am myself a little bit na3ive and I should probably upgrade to up to date practice. That said, here it is:     I run this text on a detector called GPTZero.  There are probably other detectors. The detector says that the text has a probability of 97% of being AI-generated. For my part, I had a doubt like that, and the tool seems to confirm my doubt. I think the proper way (AI netiquette?) to answer generated text is to generate text.  But I will not do that.  I will reply separately with my human-typed text. Sorry if I disturb anyone or anything(?) Alex Le 02/03/2024 à 16:03, Hesham ElBakoury via Starlink a écrit : > Time synchronization, for satellite networks, faces several challenges: > > 1. Signal Propagation Delays: Unlike terrestrial networks where > signals travel through cables at the speed of light, satellite > communication involves signals traveling vast distances through space. > This creates significant delays. > > 2. Clock Drift: Even highly precise atomic clocks, used in satellites, > are susceptible to "drift" - gradually losing or gaining time. This > drift, caused by factors like temperature variations, radiation > exposure, and power fluctuations, can lead to inconsistencies in > timekeeping across the network. > > 3. Signal Degradation: As signals travel through space, they can > degrade due to factors like atmospheric interference, ionospheric > disturbances, and solar activity. This degradation can introduce noise > and errors, impacting the accuracy of time synchronization messages. >