From Virtual Clock Discipline to Physical Synchronization: White Rabbit Lessons for PToB and Future Tunable Targets

Preprint10 pages · PDF

What can White Rabbit teach PToB about physical clock control?

Overview

The study compares PToB’s virtual clock discipline with the demands of physical synchronization. It examines calibration gaps and a White Rabbit-inspired path toward tunable oscillators and physical clock control on future hardware targets.

What this paper covers

  • How a disciplined software time map differs from controlling a physical oscillator.
  • Why calibration and the chosen measurement point matter to synchronization claims.
  • What future tunable targets would need beyond the current implementation.

Research scope

This is a comparison and future-hardware roadmap. It does not establish White Rabbit equivalence, calibrated absolute UTC or physical-output accuracy for existing PToB devices. A software-clock statistic must retain its own reference.

Read it in context

Read this when deciding whether an application needs timestamps, a shared software time base or a physical clock output. The present hardware guide and dated evidence describe current capabilities; the roadmap does not qualify future hardware.

Cite this edition

Jonathan Yantis. From Virtual Clock Discipline to Physical Synchronization: White Rabbit Lessons for PToB and Future Tunable Targets. 15 October 2026. Preprint. Original PDF.

Summary permalink: https://ptob.dev/research/white-rabbit-physical-synchronization/

Jonathan Yantis leads protocol design, hardware development and research. GPT 6.1 contributes implementation, analysis and documentation. This page summarizes the linked edition; retain its original evidence dates and measurement references.