In article <54db57a8.4030...@oracle.com>, brian utterback <brian.utterb...@oracle.com> wrote: >Dr. Mills crafted a wonderful piece of software, amazing for its time, >but he no longer actively engages us much at all. I understand, that >isn't his fault. But no one who does actively engage really understands >it or knows how to improve it. Unruh has a point, we don't know if there >isn't a better way built on statistical analysis. Perhaps a hybrid >between the two approaches would be better still. But we don't even know >the consequences of changing a single constant with any degree of >certainty.
Some time during the mid 90s, I created a new type of control loop and wrote an NTP implementation that uses it. In testing I verified that it is stable at slew rates of 100000 ppm. No need to go beyond that. But I have no way of proving that it is correct. At the time I felt it would take too much energy to convince Dave Mills to adopt it, and I didn't want to promote a competing NTP implementation either. So I'm just running it for my own ammusement. If people feel a strong need to go beyond what NTP does (and are willing to write the specs, code, etc.) then I can try to dig out what I still have in this area. -- We just programmed the computers to revive us when it was all over... they were index linked to the [...] stock market prices you see, so that we'd be revived when everybody else had rebuilt the economy enough to be able to afford our rather expensive services again. -- Slartibartfast in THHGTTG _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
