In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Not even "offset is tolerable", but "ok". > > What is the standard?
If I recall correctly, when the pool was being run by Adrian von Bidder, the goal was for pool clients to have get time accurate to within a second or so. The goal is not to give ms accuracy. I don't think this goal has changed now that Ask Bjørn Hansen is running the pool. One of the problems was that Adrian did not have the ability to test the pool servers from several places around the world. So, if a given ntp server happened to have bad connectivity to Switzerland, but good connectivity from the rest of the world, Adrian's scripts could give your server a bad score. As a result, the tolerances are very large. IIRC, anything under 250ms is considered "good". > If I were pulling numbers out of the air, I'd call under 10-15 ms "good", > and under 30-50 ms "tolerable", and beyond that "bad". Personally, I would like to see the tolerances increased, but probably not quite as tight as you are asking for. However, I would much rather see the problem with the growth rate of clients per server fixed first. (And, Ask seems to be doing just that, so no complaints from here about priorities.) -wayne _______________________________________________ timekeepers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
