On Jun 17, 2012, at 12:44, Dave Hart wrote: > http://www.pool.ntp.org/user/davehart provides a contrarian view. The > timescales are different but the two addresses represent the same > host, located at ISC.
I think those graphs are mostly a victim of a few "bad" measurements on the IPv4 server and how the X-axis on the graph scales. I didn't really optimize them for showing sub 5ms accuracy (not realizing that the system actually works that well; with the old graphs it always looked much worse). Looking at the CSV logs the numbers at a glance are quite similar: http://www.pool.ntp.org/scores/149.20.68.17 http://www.pool.ntp.org/scores/149.20.68.17/log?limit=50 http://www.pool.ntp.org/scores/2001:4f8:fff7:1::17 http://www.pool.ntp.org/scores/2001:4f8:fff7:1::17/log?limit=50 I'll add an option to fix the X-axis on the graphs to my todo list. :-) Ask _______________________________________________ pool mailing list pool@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool
