I mean it's not so important what the ping is, what matters is that the relays match for the users. 

 Agree, but there's no way to do that right now.   

 Great insight!  In fact many of the relays that I pinged didnt work at all. 

 id be curious to see everyones round trip timez (or their endorsed monitors) using nip66.

github.com/relaytools/monitorlizard 

 yeah, it's a useless metric because it is noisy

what would be useful would be an average ping over a minimum 24 hour period

i could write a simple thing that would log the ping delays and make a EWMA graph that shows you its performance over time

the thing is that it's not just one thing... how much bandwidth this thing has, how many threads, which relay it's running, how many clients it gets, at what time, really a 24 hour sample is minimal to really evaluate... and measuring that against the bandwidth delivery as well, like, when you make big requests randomly across that 24 hour period, to count the time from request until the complete delivery... and probably you also want to in parallel have another evaluation of the quality of your connection to act as a baseline zero 

 well, the clients are all displaying these round trips now.. but they color stuff wrong, 400+ is red. whereas i consider 400ms round trip to be responsive from time connection initiated, to receiving a small req result.  400ms/4 == 100.  a typical 'ping' from west coast us to east coast. 

 Productivity soars when a computer and its users interact at a pace (<400ms) that ensures that neither has to wait on the other.

https://lawsofux.com/doherty-threshold/ 

 yes, and clients can account for this by showing really cool graphics about the connection status 😎 

 IMO if it's under 200ms it's laggy, but i'm an FPS gamer :)