IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bmwg] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-16: (with COMMENT)

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com> Thu, 22 June 2017 12:13 UTC

Return-Path: <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 928261293EB; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 05:13:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b941dY_KVmUv; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 05:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22a.google.com (mail-qt0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11C8D1293D8; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 05:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id v20so9953079qtg.1; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 05:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=86RmWRaJMq9l8u0iHH6TR6YZ4UBXmoD4eUzuLq5mfEQ=; b=NRBhCtUtkR6LwDfsNHT2fe+0q3+1neUw71j4ZV/eNYh69FZ+Meo+RKlE0AfdxkQpzT FGHo8L5p9S9583Tfi23xn5nO4eUJG9AFvcJv4b4E1yn0C6JSKdpoXA+mDM3/puzvAVSL OWLZJQ13nqv1Ek/vSbGELaW0o7rjaOr/81Z+RMhjbACZp/xgqmRDRCsiiWE6fagv2bpr fxpK95H/ejLEl7IyKRUhfMfrktPGabc1OmWTSdSn/F0UZYJI2EVScgWn7qDcdhMu/euk i9tum1JhThWpAtGuh4wzGc8p9xz4qzEnd6lKecrMvijVDIz79eP413mA0dUVjMOzLibc IhDg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=86RmWRaJMq9l8u0iHH6TR6YZ4UBXmoD4eUzuLq5mfEQ=; b=X2Tze8L3EPnoAIvJTGY3q+zm4GGO0+Q8i2Om9uyXgYRc48/hWQp0jDWB0RBJmZ95vq dNDaQhznMgMMN8KVZIg1QgfFhparFS8UqilvYIPRIMx7hGx2Axr7yEKqCZy0wTqsm7Ec FOk08QT6zlRwOvqZgkZlc/ByysUguhGw3sDkXVkFNX/+ZkK9kSQ9GNySV2ZItP1mpSAy qgFt6jC6UPSjwfP7+QjPAiakbTw/YQ92sSHmc4Y+CmMrnAq6DUmqF+sgEL8zGhV3qO/3 VI+GDH+g6/Vl/CtS1b4TJA+ePDaRC5ENXnR+5sw2xRiSsK7wZINGESrFW1ACmBVoom1C WTNw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOyb5hQL3UZ8adYobQ7ZwJA/ojaba/ay7JPUfTOwMOSYcpzNSK4+ naeAZRlSOKfx6wBn4jpnZywpRdY0rg==
X-Received: by 10.237.45.196 with SMTP id i62mr2478045qtd.194.1498133625200; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 05:13:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.55.159.211 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 05:13:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAArZqeVNE9pnva8xf9XoOEUHAWBn60+xvgCDbzHvQD55EmN+FQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <149806880921.15906.12225670606905404415.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAArZqeX9vVNS0iawMeV9-U5ZD5c1OA-eLjHCzPz0kKrRDsBRUg@mail.gmail.com> <CAArZqeVNE9pnva8xf9XoOEUHAWBn60+xvgCDbzHvQD55EmN+FQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 17:43:44 +0530
Message-ID: <CA+MHpBpeHvw02VgmBVN+5rXvTQpLZdN_F5f6a8Ez_xcaTgrq2g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lucien <lucien.avramov@gmail.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-methodology@ietf.org, Sarah Banks <sbanks@encrypted.net>, bmwg-chairs@ietf.org, bmwg@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/6d5yQ2zMzt3rWtQsmEJIVZIEKak>
Subject: Re: [bmwg] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-16: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bmwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 12:13:48 -0000

Hi Lucien,

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Lucien <lucien.avramov@gmail.com> wrote:
> I meant to say the delta of power when the data center switch is iddle and
> at 100% of capacity is marginal.

Right, but that was not exactly what I was looking for. I was looking
for performance benchmarking of the switches in based on throughput
per unit of energy (e.g. Gbps/W). Some switches might be more
efficient in this metric than others. e.g. an Ethernet switch ASIC
will most likely be more efficient in this metric than an x86 based
softswitch (at the cost of flexibility).

Thanks
Suresh

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email