Hello Terje! Terje Mathisen wrote:
This is well within the expected precision for such an experiment, the final ntp.drift value (23.2 or 268.3) probably reflects the current drift rate, not the average. These two values are different because the environmental temperature varies, often diurnally, so if you log the changes in ntp.drift then you'll probably notice that the average corresponds closely to the 23.7/23.8 numbers.
Did I understand you correctly: You are insinuating that least-squares fitting the time offset is getting an average value whereas the frequency error (ntp.drift value) represents a "live" value.
I expected it to be the other way round: I thought the frequency error is a "slow" value that takes hours or days to converge as a result of the control loop phasing in and as such can only slowly react to environmental changes (e.g. change in temperature). This contrasts to measuring the time offset over a short periode which gives a "snapshot" of the current clock drift and as such represents current environmental effects.
What am I getting wrong here? Cheers Daniel _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
