"David L. Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>Bill,

>Who, me? Paper reviewers are supposed to anonymous. Let's just say I 
>agree with your assessment.

Ah. OK. the anonymity is a consideration. Of course you could have come up
with your objections to the paper entirely independently of that anonymous
referee, and your agreement was just that any true thinkers would have
agreed!


>I've seen a number of papers like this; some I have reviewed. They are 
>written by folks with computer science backgrounds and are not well 
>trained in physics and engineering principles and even less in the 
>physical properties of real oscillators. You (and others) might not like 
>the NTP mitigation and discipline algorithms, but each one is based on 
>thorough analysis with respect to sound physics and engineering 
>principles as confirmed by measurement over a wide body of scenarios.

>Unruh wrote:

>> "David L. Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 
>> 
>>>Gene,
>> 
>> 
>>>I've seen and reviewed the paper; however, reviews are private to the 
>> 
>> 
>> Their paper is public. It is posted on the web. 
>> 
>> 
>>>authors. Someone else should take a close look at what they are actually 
>>>measuring and assess the dynmaics of the discipline loop.
>> 
>> 
>> Did you do so? If so, your analysis would be of interest. And I cannot see
>> why the analysis of a public paper should be kept private. 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>Dave
>> 
>> 
>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
>>>>Developers at the University of Melbourne have produced a time-sync
>>>>client called "TSCclock" which exchanges standard NTP packets with a
>>>>NTP server.  They assert that TSCclock, which runs on FreeBSD and at
>>>>least two flavors of Linux (Ubuntu and Fedora), provides substantially
>>>>better synchronization than ntpd both on a LAN and over the Internet.
>>>>
>>>>The following info is some of what is available:
>>>>
>>>>1. The TSCclock page at the University of Melbourne:
>>>>http://www.cubinlab.ee.unimelb.edu.au/tscclock/
>>>>
>>>>2. A paper titled "Ten Microseconds Over LAN, for Free", originally
>>>>presented at the 2007 International IEEE Symposium on Precision Clock
>>>>Synchronization for Measurement, Control and Communication.  This is
>>>>available at
>>>>http://www.cubinlab.ee.unimelb.edu.au/~darryl/Publications/ISPCS07_camera.pdf
>>>>It includes a general description of their approach and results for
>>>>both ntpd and TSCclock obtained in their testbed.
>>>>
>>>>3. A one-hour Google Tech Talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3nXgeh7v_U
>>>>
>>>>All of the info on TSCclock that I have run across has originated with
>>>>the group at the University of Melbourne.  Does anyone know of an
>>>>independent comparison between ntpd and TSCclock?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Gene

_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions

Reply via email to