[ntp:questions] Any chance of getting bugs 2164 and 1577 moving?

[E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists]

unruh wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Others have reported precisions better than -19,
>>  and also have a need for greater reporting precision.
> That is a valid issue.

I checked two typical desktops here: ntpq -c "rv &0"
processor="x86", system="Windows", leap=00, stratum=3, precision=-21,

~477ns ?

>> There seems to be an impression out there that I'm trying
>>  to show something is wrong - I'm not.
>> I suggested an enhancement so that the precision of ntpq
>>  matched that of the loopstats.  That's all.

loopstats' clock offset and RMS jitter are to the nano-second ?

 That should be good for up to maybe precision=-30 ?

> precision is not accuracy.
> In science we teach students not to report unwarranted
>  precision-- the precision should reflect the accuracy
>  of the measurements.
>  I am not averse to reporting with a precision maybe up
>  to a factor of 10 better than the accuracy

precision=-19 is ~001.907us ?
 Would not a factor of 10 be hundreds of nano-seconds?

-- 
E-Mail Sent to this address <BlackList at Anitech-Systems.com>
  will be added to the BlackLists.