In this authors’ reply, we point out that the discrepancy of the cycle slip rates obtained in our paper(1) and [1] is not due to a misconception in our paper,(1) but rather to a different modeling of the loop noise. In order to obtain cycle slip rates by means of Fokker-Planck techniques, the authors of [1] were forced to use an oversimplified model, yielding essentially flat loop noise, In our paper,(1) cycle slip rates were obtained by means of level crossing techniques, while preserving the smooth narrowband nature of the loop noise.