Re: [E-impact] kWh/GB should be banned and the IETF should warn against its use

[Dom Robinson <[e-mail]>]

The trick is not to try to compare apples and lemons.

The trick is to compare your own progress over time. If your LAN provides your family more services, but by managing your own power consumption you can do more with less power then you are improving your family consumption. The same is true of Verizon: it is not how much they use compared to Orange. It is how much they can grow their business over a period of time while reducing thier kWH. 

That makes it so much less confusing and easy to obfuscate by every trying to equate your LAN to Verizon.
-- 
Dom Robinson
www.id3as.co.uk <http://www.id3as.co.uk/> 
www.greeningofstreaming.org <http://www.greeningofstreaming.org/> 
uk.linkedin.com/in/domrobinson <http://uk.linkedin.com/in/domrobinson>
Meet >> https://calendly.com/id3as <https://calendly.com/id3as> 

> On 26 May 2023, at 00:13, Alexander Clemm <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I really don't see the point of restricting ourselves to a single metric and, frankly, of why we are even having this discussion.  
> 
> Measuring the total energy consumption of an operator makes sense.  I don't think anybody is arguing against that. 
> 
> Where I think things go wrong is insisting that this is the only metric that matters, and implying that other metrics cannot be helpful as well.  We do need metrics to, for example, express efficiency.  Basically, relating the input (here: the amount of energy consumed) to the output (for example, the volume of data transmitted, or  perhaps the number of hours of video consumed, or whatever); the relationship of input to output does matter.   Yes, any single metric by itself may be subject to discussion, and will not convey the whole picture.  However, in combination, a clearer and more nuanced picture emerges.  Just going by absolute consumption by itself, without consideration for other factors, is not helpful.  Using your approach I can rightfully claim that I (personally) am a much cleaner service provider than, say, Verizon.  I feel really good about myself now!  Of course, the only service I provide is to my family through our home network.    
> 
> --- Alex
> 
> On 5/24/2023 7:31 AM, Dom Robinson wrote:
>> See in line
>> 
>> -- 
>> Dom Robinson
>> www.id3as.co.uk <http://www.id3as.co.uk/> 
>> www.greeningofstreaming.org <http://www.greeningofstreaming.org/> 
>> uk.linkedin.com/in/domrobinson <http://uk.linkedin.com/in/domrobinson>
>> Meet >> https://calendly.com/id3as <https://calendly.com/id3as> 
>> 
>>> On 16 May 2023, at 07:14, Toerless Eckert <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> As i said before a better metric would be clear kWh consumption by operator as measured by their energy / fuel bills / typically in kWh. That would give us a detail of environmental impact outright.
>>> 
>>> How would an operator select the most energy efficient equipment if thats
>>> the only metric available ?
>>> 
>> 
>> <image0.jpeg>
>> £15 and simple. 
>> 
>>> How would i compare two operators energy efficiency with this metric
>>> given that they will serve different number and type of subscribers
>>> and cover differently expensive to serve areas ?
>>> 
>> 
>> To the environment the starting point is the absolute volume of electricty. Trying to ‘normalise’ that by ‘activity’ is actually where it all goes wrong. You shouldn’t be comparing a rural broadband provider with a Metro zone broadband provider or a data centre. Its like comparing a food truck with a supermarket. 
>> 
>> You should be comparing the organisation with itself over time and focusing on reducing its energy consumption while maintaining its performance.
>> 
>>>> Then you *could* publish a measure of the integral of capacity over time of the same billing - to show efficiency of that energy consumption.
>>> 
>>> Don't get it. Try to come up with a simple explicit example please.
>> 
>> So if your kWh is reported monthly and you have a 10Gbps peak performance network that could be expressed as 10Gbps * 60 * 60 * 24 * 30 / 8 GB / month (3,200,000GB = 3.2PB / month) throughput capacity max. for your kWh.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> And finally an integral of data transfer GOODPUT (not throughput which includes signal setup overhead). Id personally work on a 99th %ile but i would imagine most billing will be 95th… consistency with capacity throughput is key.
>> 
>> Lets say you see a peak of 8Gbps traffic but a 95th%ile of 5Gbps then thats roughly half of the above capacity - ie 1.6PB / month
>>>> 
>>>> Subtracting the Goodput from the capacity would clearly indicate over provisioning. 
>> 
>> As a measure against that %ile you have roughly 50% underutilisation.
>> 
>> So then your kWh buys you 3,2PB of capacity but you only make use of 1.6PB.
>> 
>> Another network might have same kWh but be running a (eg 5Gbps network and be using 100% of its capacity with no difference between throughput and goodput). now we have some clearer ratios to compare their energy efficiency.
>> 
>> Hoepfully you get the idea. I am cautious to start talking about technical specifics because we’ll go down the rabbit hole whole of whether you can have a 5 Gb network or not (cards at obviously typically in magnitudes of 10 etc etc) but hopefully you get my point?
>> 
>>> 
>>> I don't think there is a ubiquitously accepted definition of goodput
>>> vs throughput. The ones i have heart are more applicable to
>>> analyzing transport protocols, but not to discussing energy:
>>> 
>>> If for example network equipment (like unfortunately most of it today)
>>> uses approximately the same amount of energy, however much load subscribers
>>> put on the quipment, that load is not called goodput, and the maximum
>>> possible load is not called throughput. But effectively, if you
>>> continuously run the network equipment at 10% of its maximum capacity,
>>> then it should be possible to build a network that would consume
>>> much less energy.  If this is what you are thinking of, then i agree.
>>> I would just question to use goodput as a term here, because it
>>> could raise confusion. 
>>> 
>>>> With that you would have a) the ’actual energy’ and source mix (vital for any CO2 emission expression) 
>>> 
>>> Yes. But how do we capture/account for "green energy" (and these are very big quotes).
>>> My electricity supplier in Germany for example claims to sell me
>>> "green electricity" by passing on some percentages of the money i pay
>>> to some CO2 compensation projects.
>>> 
>>> Personally, i have sever doubts that most CO2 compensation schemes
>>> actually are helpful. If anything, i think CO2 compensation
>>> would make sense and should be accounted for if it helps to 
>>> reduce the problems networks create by producing more CO2
>>> neutral energy production for actual networks and/or more
>>> energy efficient networking gear (aka: Same idea as the CO2
>>> trading within the car producing economy).
>>> 
>>>> b) how much capacity is ‘over provisioned’ (‘unneccesary’) and that over capacity could be then reviewed for the quantas of reduction (ie can we save energy dropping from 1Tbps to 100Mbps and if we do can we still tolerate peaks?)
>>> 
>>> This is where we currently hit road blocks in our technology, and
>>> where the whole goal of the metrics effort IMHO is to create
>>> incentives for subscribers, vendors and operators to build
>>> better equipment and solutions:
>>> 
>>> a) Equipment whose power consumption is more linear with the load put onto it.
>>> b) Solutions that reduce peak to average consumption so networks can be
>>>   built against lower peaks.
>>> 
>>> I explicitly would not include the aspect of lower maximum speed overall,
>>> because i think a lot of energy reduction will still redult from more
>>> aggregation. Aka: A single 400Gbps link will consume less energy than
>>> 4 * 100 Gbps links. And likewise the switching capacity in a router
>>> once you replace 4 routers with one 4 x fast router. Instead, we
>>> might strive to just ensure that the total consumption of non CO2
>>> neutral energy does not increase. Aka: Any increase in energy you want
>>> for growth has to come from CO2 neutral energy.
>>> 
>>>> That would be how i would do it if provisioning a CDN and want transparency.
>>>> 
>>>> However until the energy bills are reported with corp returns and audited every other model is subject to greenwashing games.
>>> 
>>> Yes. See above. 
>>> 
>>>> Fortunately all this would involve is the CFO agreeing to break out energy billing. All the other data is abundantly available because it is how Ops plan and customers get billed…
>>> 
>>> The difficult parts are capturing investments into production of
>>> green energy. In the car manufacturing world, the CO2 compensation
>>> trades enabled startups like Tesla to survive and produce cars.
>>> So how would we best create incentives so that Network Operators
>>> would invest into the production of reneable energy, that is then
>>> guaranteed to be consumed by their networking gear. Aka: Greenwashing
>>> to me would be if the network operator paid for production of
>>> renewable energy somewhere else in the world, continues to consume
>>> coal energy and then the renewable energy is used to produce
>>> more alluminum (which is what happens today). Aka: If renewable
>>> energy investments are accounted for, they need to be used for
>>> networking - if we want to really ensure networking becomes greener.
>>> (IMHO).
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>>   Toerless
>>> 
>>> P.S.: Any chance to set the config on your email system to generate text emails instead of HTML ?
>>> 
>>> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 03:13:54PM -0500, Dom Robinson wrote:
>>>> <html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto">As i said before a better metric would be clear kWh consumption by operator as measured by their energy / fuel bills / typically in kWh. That would give us a detail of environmental impact outright.<div><br></div><div>Then you *could* publish a measure of the integral of capacity over time of the same billing - to show efficiency of that energy consumption.</div><div><br></div><div>And finally an integral of data transfer GOODPUT (not throughput which includes signal setup overhead). Id personally work on a 99th %ile but i would imagine most billing will be 95th… consistency with capacity throughput is key.</div><div><br></div><div>Subtracting the Goodput from the capacity would clearly indicate over provisioning.&nbsp;</div><div><br></div><div>With that you would have a) the ’actual energy’ and source mix (vital for any CO2 emission expression) b) how much capacity is ‘over provisioned’ (‘unneccesary’) and that over capacity could be then reviewed for the quantas of reduction (ie can we save energy dropping from 1Tbps to 100Mbps and if we do can we still tolerate peaks?)</div><div><br></div><div>That would be how i would do it if provisioning a CDN and want transparency.</div><div><br></div><div>However until the energy bills are reported with corp returns and audited every other model is subject to greenwashing games.</div><div><br></div><div>Fortunately all this would involve is the CFO agreeing to break out energy billing. All the other data is abundantly available because it is how Ops plan and customers get billed…</div><div><br></div><div>My 10c</div><div><div dir="ltr"><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;"><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;"><div><span style="orphans: 2; widows: 2; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><font>--&nbsp;</font></span></div><div><span style="orphans: 2; widows: 2; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Dom Robinson</span></div><span class="" style="orphans: 2; widows: 2; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"></span><div class=""><font color="#ffffff"><span style="caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><a href="http://www.id3as.co.uk/ <http://www.id3as.co.uk/>" class="">www.id3as.co.uk <http://www.id3as.co.uk/></a>&nbsp;</span></font></div><div class=""><font color="#ffffff"><span style="caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><a href="http://www.greeningofstreaming.org/ <http://www.greeningofstreaming.org/>" class="">www.greeningofstreaming.org <http://www.greeningofstreaming.org/></a>&nbsp;</span></font></div><div class=""><a href="http://uk.linkedin.com/in/domrobinson <http://uk.linkedin.com/in/domrobinson>" class="" style="caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><font color="#ffffff">uk.linkedin.com/in/domrobinson <http://uk.linkedin.com/in/domrobinson></font></a></div><div class=""><font style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Meet &gt;&gt;&nbsp;<a href="https://calendly.com/id3as <https://calendly.com/id3as>" class="">https://calendly.com/id3as</a>&nbsp <https://calendly.com/id3as%3C/a%3E&nbsp>;</font></div></div></div></div><div dir="ltr"><br><blockquote                   type="cite">On 15 May 2023, at 14:43, Toerless Eckert &lt;[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>&gt; wrote:<br><br></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><span>Several years back i worked with a customer in selecting equipment for</span><br><span>video streaming. The metrics that had to be compared was on the box level</span><br><span></span><br><span>- GB/USD (how expensive the box is)</span><br><span>- kWh/GB (how much power draw -&gt; how much electrical opex)</span><br><span>- GB/RU (how dense) - RU = Rack Unit</span><br><span></span><br><span>Where the GB of course where measured for the function in question (not</span><br><span>just IPv6 data packet forwarding).</span><br><span></span><br><span>It didn't help to be smaller than a competitor because your location</span><br><span>can afford only some certain amount of cooling per RU. Which differs based</span><br><span>on deployment.</span><br><span></span><br><span>Of course, the more expensive power becomes the more relevant the factor is</span><br><span>beyond the mere cost of cooling.</span><br><span></span><br><span>This type of calculation goes on everywhere where you start stuffing electrical</span><br><span>equipment into rooms and optimize cost. Whether its servers or network equipment.</span><br><span></span><br><span>Even when you compare networks, and they are generally very different in services/scope</span><br><span>or other factors, you can on a per-equipment basis compare the equipments energy</span><br><span>efficiencies. And many operators seem to be waking up and start doing this</span><br><span>renewed after the huge increase in energy costs due to the war in the Ukraine.</span><br><span></span><br><span>So, obviously, kWh/GB is a core factor required in any deployment of electrical </span><br><span>equipment when you do have choices. &nbsp;So an ask to eliminate the metric is just hilarious.</span><br><span></span><br><span>And when operators do not want to publish the numbers, it can simply be because</span><br><span>they know how bad they may loook on them.</span><br><span></span><br><span></span><br><span>Cheers</span><br><span> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Toerless</span><br><span></span><br><span>On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 09:26:44PM +0200, Rudolf van der Berg wrote:</span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>Alexander,</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>The reason I call for an absolute ban on the metric is because it is</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>meaningless and misleading. It is not just that it shouldn't be the sole</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>metric, it shouldn't be a metric at all. You are right to point out that</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Telefonica uses it. If you read this thread carefully, I have pointed out</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>that the GSMA uses it too. The GSMA also shows that there can be a 10-20x</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>difference between different network providers on this metric.Several</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>telcos including Orange and KPN absolutely don't use it. Probably because</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>their staff realised it is a nonsense metric. KPN does report energy use</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>per network capacity. That already sounds more interesting.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> Furthermore it doesn't give actionable intelligence to anyone. What does</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>it say if VodafoneZiggo in the Netherlands reports that its energy use went</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>up from 160GWh to 180GWh while its energy use went down from 0.021kWh/GB to</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>0.013kWh/GB in its fixed Docsis based network after the Docsis 3.1 upgrade</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>took place? I know the number of customers didn't increase dramatically,</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>nor did its footprint change. Yet somehow with rising electricity use the</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>metric shows a decline.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>https://rudolfvanderberg.medium.com/zet-alle-netwerken-uit-om-stroom-te-besparen-geen-netflix-en-geen-5g-d40f61eef0f0 <https://rudolfvanderberg.medium.com/zet-alle-netwerken-uit-om-stroom-te-besparen-geen-netflix-en-geen-5g-d40f61eef0f0></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>As I explained there is no scientific basis for the metric. If you look at</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>the work by professor Manner, you will see that using the metric to make</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>prognosis about the Finnish mobile networks electricity use leads to</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>estimates 3 times higher than the official figures.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>the simple reality is that energy use and data traffic have no correlation</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>in fixed and mobile broadband networks. It is like measuring the efficiency</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>of cars based on wiper fluid use. Or traffic lights energy use based on the</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>number of cars that drive by.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>The IETF should do everything it can to develop RFCs that promote                   the</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>efficient use of resources, it can't do that if it doesn't have valid</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>metrics.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Sincerely,</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Rudolf</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Op ma 15 mei 2023 om 21:02 schreef Alexander Clemm &lt;[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>&gt;:</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>So, I am a little late to the thread. &nbsp;Couple of comments:</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>I do not agree with the premise of this thread that kWh/GB (or MWh/PB, as</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>used by Telefonica in their report) should be _banned_. &nbsp;The only arguments</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>that I have heard seem to boil down to that relying on this metric as the</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>sole thing to guide us would be a bad idea. &nbsp;I do agree with this; in fact,</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>any single metric can be gamed and will be misleading, and having a basket</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>of metrics will certainly paint a much more differentiated picture.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>However, as one (not the only one) of many metrics I don't see it would be</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>harmful as the title of the thread suggests. &nbsp;Telefonica uses this metric</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>in their report to track their progress over time - while comparing it</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>across different organizations with different contexts may result in</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>misleading apple-to-oranges comparisons, using it within the same</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>organization and presumably within the same context can be useful IMHO as</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>one way to indicate efficiency gains (and you can arguably see a measure of</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>their progress year-over-year (as indicated by the numbers they are</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>reporting pointing in the "right" direction) in their reports). &nbsp;&nbsp;I think</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>it is fair for them to do so; my question to Rudolf would be, what is your</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>counter proposal as to what metrics service providers should use instead?</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>The use of this particular metric is related to the overall energy</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>consumption of a service provider (the overall kWh/mWh/gWh) and putting</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>this into some kind of relation to an overall volume of service provided.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Of course, multiple questions: what is counted as part of the overall</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>energy consumption - e.g. just the power drawn by equipment, or the power</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>from their entire energy bill? &nbsp;And, how is "volume" measured - why not</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>distance, etc? &nbsp;Traffic volume in bytes also does not give a precise</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>indication of the user experience which may be better defined perhaps as</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>"hours of HD video streaming" or such (with actual traffic volume also</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>influenced by codecs, resolution etc), but it is still an indicator. &nbsp;So,</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>yes, it is imperfect, and since it is a derived metric, it makes sense to</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>provide also the first-order metrics (in that case, overall energy</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>consumption &amp; overall volume). &nbsp;IMHO, clearly isn't a "one size fits all"</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>metric. &nbsp;On a related note, metrics to assess the network-at-large need to</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>be arguably different metrics from those that are used to evaluate</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>individual transmission equipment.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>--- Alex</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>On 5/12/2023 12:05 PM, Rudolf van der Berg wrote:</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Hesham,</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Look at the title of the thread. The kWh/GB metic is nonsense. It doesn't</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>convey any comparable and actionable meaning. The numbers are incomparable</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>because traffic and energy use are in no way and have never been related.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>How is it possible that with the exact same network and equipment the</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>energy use is stable when traffic goes up? Simple it is a useless</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>unscientific metric.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Op vr 12 mei 2023 20:48 schreef Hesham ElBakoury &lt;[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>&gt;:</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>The DT CR 2022 reports 91 kwh/terabyte. This is higher than 60</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>kwh/terabyte. Is this because the 60kwh is for the mobile network and the</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>remaining 31kwh is for the DT wired network?</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>If DT uses .06 kwh/GB for mobile network, &nbsp;that is better than the</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>0.1-0.6 kwh/GB range reported by GSMA. Does that mean that DT network</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>energy efficiency is high or ... ?</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Thanks,</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Hesham</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>On Fri, May 12, 2023, 8:22 AM Rudolf van der Berg &lt;</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>&gt; wrote:</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>GSMA is mobile only..</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Op vr 12 mei 2023 17:18 schreef Hesham ElBakoury &lt;[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>&gt;:</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Thanks Rudolf!</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>For DT the numbers are getting smaller every year. I would expect that</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>the numbers in 2023 to be smaller than 2022.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>In a different email you mentioned that Deutsche Telekom reports that</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>it uses 60kWh per Terabyte. &nbsp;This is different from the numbers reported in</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>2022 CR report.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>You mentioned that of the participating operators, in this year GSMA</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>report &nbsp;"66% performed in the 0.1–0.6 kWh/GB range &nbsp;meaning that most of</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>the included networks used 0.1–0.6 kWh to transfer 1 GB of data. Values</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>outside of this range can be explained by inefficient networks, consumer</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>habits or low data traffic per connection". DT 2022 CR report numbers are</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>smaller than 0.1 kwh/GB. How to explain this low value?</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Hesham</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>On Fri, May 12, 2023, 7:32 AM Rudolf van der Berg &lt;</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>&gt; wrote:</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Here is annual report 2022</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>https://report.telekom.com/annual-report-2022/services/downloads.html <http://report.telekom.com/annual-report-2022/services/downloads.html></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>https://www.cr-report.telekom.com/2022/management-facts/environment/energy-consumption-efficiency#atn-19726-19728,atn-19726-19729,atn-19726-19730 <http://www.cr-report.telekom.com/2022/management-facts/environment/energy-consumption-efficiency#atn-19726-19728,atn-19726-19729,atn-19726-19730></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Op vr 12 mei 2023 16:19 schreef Hesham ElBakoury &lt;[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>:</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>The DT CR-2021 report describes the value for kwh/terabyte [</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>https://www.cr-report.telekom.com/2021/management-facts/environment/energy-consumption-efficiency#atn-19726-19729,atn-19726-19730,atn-19726-19733,atn-19726-19728 <https://www.cr-report.telekom.com/2021/management-facts/environment/energy-consumption-efficiency#atn-19726-19729,atn-19726-19730,atn-19726-19733,atn-19726-19728>]</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Note that the total energy consumption increases by 4% year over year</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>while the kwh/terabit decreases year over year.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>I am not sure how the numbers in kwh/GB which are reported in this</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>email thread are calculated?</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Hesham</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>On Fri, May 12, 2023, 2:20 AM Romain Jacob &lt;[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>&gt; wrote:</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>So no DT is not overprovisioned and utilisation is actively</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>obstructed. Or do you have other data and sources that support your</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>assessment?</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Not at all. It was not an assessment, only a suspicion. I only</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>mentioned DT because I understood your previous email as suggesting that DT</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>was maybe not to blame for their poor kWh/GB numbers -- it seems I</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>understood wrong and DT is indeed to blame. I have no issues with that.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>--</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Romain JACOB</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Postdoctoral Researcher</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>ETH Zurich</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Networked Systems Group (NSG)</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Lead: Prof. Laurent Vanbever</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>www.romainjacob.net <http://www.romainjacob.net/></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>@RJacobPartner &lt;https://twitter.com/RJacobPartner&gt <https://twitter.com/RJacobPartner&gt>;</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>@[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>&lt;https://discuss.systems/@jacobr&gt <https://discuss.systems/@jacobr&gt>;</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Gloriastrasse 35, ETZ G81</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>8092 Zurich</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>[phone]</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>--</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>E-impact mailing list</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>--</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>E-impact mailing list</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>-- </span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>E-impact mailing list</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact</span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span></span><br><span>-- <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact%3C/span%3E%3Cbr%3E%3C/blockquote%3E%3Cspan%3E%3C/span%3E%3Cbr%3E%3Cspan%3E%3C/span%3E%3Cbr%3E%3Cspan%3E--> </span><br><span>---</span><br><span>[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]></span><br><span></span><br><span>-- </span><br><span>E-impact mailing list</span><br><span>[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]></span><br><span>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact</span><br></div></blockquote></div></body></html> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact%3C/span%3E%3Cbr%3E%3C/div%3E%3C/blockquote%3E%3C/div%3E%3C/body%3E%3C/html%3E>
>>> -- 
>>> ---
>>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> 
> -- 
> E-impact mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact