E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists <n...@blacklist.anitech-systems.invalid> wrote in news:h6cc8a$q9...@news.eternal-september.org:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >> I think "Das Buch" a/k/a "Computer Network Time >> Synchronization: The Network Time Protocol" by David >> L. Mills might help you understand the design and >> how it was derived. > > Computer network time synchronization: the network time protocol > By David L. Mills > Library of Congress Number 2005056889 > Page 73, Clock Discipline Algorithm, 4th paragraph > <http://snipurl.com/qe92m> <http://tinyurl.com/pkt26h> > <http://books.google.com/books?id=pdTcJBfnbq8C&lpg=PR4&ots=e5F27gdu0E&d > q=Library%20of%20Congress%20Number%202005056889&pg=PA73#v=onepage&q=&f= > false> You should reread the paragraph carefully. It is, as I pointed out in an earlier post, no more than "argument by repeated assertion." In fact, it is even weaker than that - there is an explicit admission that the 500 ppm is a *assumption* ("The NTPv4 implementation assumes that the slew limit is 500 ppm...)" It is hardly surprising that if you build in the arbitrary "magic number" of 500 ppm as an assertion that exceeding it will violate the "formal correctness assumptions" (a grand title indeed for an arbitrary number!). Tautologies tend to work that way. No, right from the outset (section 1.5), Mills makes clear that 500 ppm is arbitrary (To be fair, he further suggests it is reasonable but he adduces little in support of the number). Moreover, he explicitly admits that values larger than 500 ppm are "not a show-stopper." His own section 4.6 casts considerable doubt on the validity of the assumption. Regards, _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
