Re: [E-impact] [OPSAWG] [IVY] side meeting #119: Power Metrics: concrete usage example

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 27 March 2024 04:28 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: e-impact@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: e-impact@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 980DBC151527; Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:28:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ou34GAtJKRQV; Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3621CC14CE38; Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dyas.sandelman.ca (60-240-91-174.static.tpgi.com.au [60.240.91.174]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 035AA1F448; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 04:28:32 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: relay.sandelman.ca; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; secure) header.d=sandelman.ca header.i=@sandelman.ca header.b="RjqIV906"; dkim-atps=neutral
Received: by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 27558A1914; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:28:27 +1100 (AEDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=sandelman.ca; s=dyas; t=1711513707; bh=T56pYuncBxQK5GVX5PQqaoB7iV97/lfJgqPebPFTrWU=; h=From:To:Subject:In-reply-to:References:Date:From; b=RjqIV906CmxaHPFOuJzWefVHRHGXdImxY9TdVDPTi28ClHwLHuVRNUmU2QTtFnvRt /nJ1YvewUaUP62U8isWHGcBncj6Bm/Rii8FWjmWRBp5IVtFMe3jZiUdrl3SIc36LwA fFz962037kcXeqacqyB5OLbsyc89u8fpqdWQRsJIb480u0z7CUoNrU08Lxsc+hu4XY T8x4cWfVbXZFEZBzQAlhG2kEIOI5QFgpHs1gfIgsdZ2CEqBeWvmemmarp0geex1v6Q y7vT2E0mM2QQKDV6Z3qppEaRcWOTORFhaRxMRVz+leNZHNc3gsgWI5JRnupu7CUyYn DzMkSK+OEjqQQ==
Received: from dyas (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25160A190E; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:28:27 +1100 (AEDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: opsawg@ietf.org, e-impact@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <lzv859ks90.fsf@switch.ch>
References: <DM4PR11MB52778685A92225856D21BB16C5282@DM4PR11MB5277.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CACe62Mnii4FMwkYAtvDHPEriy_BmEx4MtLtte1s1KKxFShJHZg@mail.gmail.com> <B949745F-B8AC-4BCB-ADF8-3AC669F2F326@cisco.com> <lzv859ks90.fsf@switch.ch>
Comments: In-reply-to Simon Leinen <simon.leinen=40switch.ch@dmarc.ietf.org> message dated "Tue, 26 Mar 2024 15:00:27 +0100."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:28:27 +1100
Message-ID: <489607.1711513707@dyas>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/e-impact/VMDe1yqqV95SwPJ5gINq-3B4y-Q>
Subject: Re: [E-impact] [OPSAWG] [IVY] side meeting #119: Power Metrics: concrete usage example
X-BeenThere: e-impact@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Environmental impacts of the Internet <e-impact.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/e-impact>, <mailto:e-impact-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/e-impact/>
List-Post: <mailto:e-impact@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:e-impact-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e-impact>, <mailto:e-impact-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 04:28:38 -0000

{not sure where this discussion should be, but the 22 CC's probably don't
need it}

Simon Leinen <simon.leinen=40switch.ch@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    > We are adding continuous and consistent power consumption monitoring
    > across our fleet of routers.  Most of them expose their overall energy
    > consumption (as well as that of some components) via the wonderful
    > ENTITY-MIB/ENTITY-SENSOR-MIB or close vendor-specific cousins of those.

    > But (even within one vendor) the representation of these sensors varies
    > widely, which makes it complicated to (a) locate the relevant/best
    > sensors and (b) deal with the different representations - some devices
    > have separate volt/ampere sensors, others have watts, some measure
    > performance into the PSU, some out of, some both.  Not to mention funny
    > bugs, e.g. claiming the power sensor is in "dBm" units where the values
    > clearly indicate Watts (280 dBm aren't really plausible :-).

Sounds like an XKCD 927 problem.
(Should I be concerned to have memorized that number?)

    > It's painful and already cost me a lot of time, which leads me to
    > suspect that router power consumption is not widely monitored in the
    > industry (I could be wrong though, maybe people use other methods).

I'd sure like to monitor it more for my limited set of equipment, if only to
see if there are unexpected spikes.
Like, do gbps L2 broadcast loops (no STP on that device) consume more power?


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-                      *I*LIKE*TRAINS*