"David L. Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Guys,
>Sure, I'm stubborn as a bull. The laws of physics make me so. I happen to be a physicist. >I am dismissing any comparisons between ntpd and crony or any other >vehicle unless the comparison includes substantially all the scenarios >that ntpd is designed to work with. The protocol is specifically That is fair enough. As I have said, these are one set of experiments. >designed to work over a wide spectrum including lightly loaded LANs and >highly congested WANs. The choice of parameters, specifically the time >constant and operating range, was chosen as a compromise to maximize >accuracy and minimize network loads under typical and extreme conditions. >As for the SNTP restrictsions, please, please read the draft >specification, which explains exactly what SNTP should and should not >do. At the crux of the matter is the impulse response of a cascade of >intervening servers each with its own idiosyncratic impulse response. >The NTP impulse response has a controlled risetime and overshoot over a >wide range of time constants. Each server in the cascade must have the >same impulse response to avoid instabilities and possible whip effects. ???? If there were a feedback effect-- A synced to B synced to C synced to A I could see this. I have no idea what these instabilities would be otherwise unless you did not really want to use the term instability. >We could have simply specified the transfer function in polynomial form >(it's in RFC 1305 and das Buch) and told the implementor to use that. A >student of digital signal processing would know how to use that >directly. But, we thought there would be folks like you that would not >believe the principles and do something evil like bring up a pool server >running openntp or crony and synchronized via a flaky circuit to Indonesia. Like me? Do you really want to start ad hominem attacks? What evidence do you have that I wanted to do anything like that? Or is libel and slander part of your tools of argument? It would also be useful if you actually gave a reference as to where in the article you are refering to. >It is easy to detect that a particular server has or has not the current >reference implementation. There are a number of features intrinsic to >the protocol design and others fiendishly crafted to do that, but I'm >not going to reveal them here. Ooooooo. And do they include sacrificing goats on some altar at midnight on Midsummer's day? >Dave _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
