IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Chris Adams <chris@thegreenwebfoundation.org> Tue, 16 May 2023 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <chris@thegreenwebfoundation.org>
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 A5BE9C151988 for <e-impact@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 May 2023 08:55:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=thegreenwebfoundation.org
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 0cAq0YKeb2i0 for <e-impact@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 May 2023 08:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1.smtp.34sp.com (1.smtp.34sp.com [46.183.9.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C575CC159A1D for <e-impact@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 May 2023 08:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpauth3.mailarray.34sp.com (lvs5.34sp.com [46.183.13.73]) by 1.smtp.34sp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C051614904F7 for <e-impact@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 May 2023 16:55:38 +0100 (BST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=thegreenwebfoundation.org; s=dkim; t=1684252538; bh=v7q/TYPufDcrHbXRIcUQOYRkEVe8sWAJwk0skCgCaaM=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=IFMvPyTbVZkbpVcQUmpZiGGcOzsejYXND/DQLt5rxJnHubEW34yVMRyS+L1772qtK +gLIyVaYMqMQo7EPxmOFz0tJQcTEl3t2iEwXDd/cTlm+yJ2/Zs4lICAW41bfspoLVI wlHYaTB/HVWoFFjt/Le64Mg8bVU+hOg4MQps+3iQ=
Received: from [2001:4090:a242:8042:9c9:d3d0:b124:c324] (port=39023 helo=smtpclient.apple) by smtpauth3.mailarray.34sp.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <chris@thegreenwebfoundation.org>) id 1pyx1W-0002BM-HA; Tue, 16 May 2023 16:55:38 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.500.231\))
From: Chris Adams <chris@thegreenwebfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZGOYHn/W1lQNcK98@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 17:55:26 +0200
Cc: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@gmail.com>, Manner Jukka <jukka.manner@aalto.fi>, "e-impact@ietf.org" <e-impact@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <40B1A44A-D98F-45D7-B021-B71F3E934674@thegreenwebfoundation.org>
References: <SN4PR13MB5811CD23BE7774D406DC2DADFF789@SN4PR13MB5811.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <316EB934-ED4E-4C4E-AB38-C74BA1FC96B7@id3as.co.uk> <SN4PR13MB5811177EF67962C62DB45710FF789@SN4PR13MB5811.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <f762863f-6177-a865-b5cd-37ed03cadf5f@gmail.com> <4E6A89C6-8345-4E52-B35A-D421CF3AF680@aalto.fi> <F8BDEB53-6DFD-4297-B81B-D68655F65462@gmail.com> <ZGOYHn/W1lQNcK98@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.500.231)
X-Authenticated-As: 2de73273b625ca0007baefbadf5a0ab8a433b10092c98f8690fcd5bcf1dec6c4
X-OriginalSMTPIP: 2001:4090:a242:8042:9c9:d3d0:b124:c324
X-34spcom-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-34spcom-MailScanner-ID: C051614904F7.AE4F2
X-34spcom-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-34spcom-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-0.111, required 6.5, autolearn=disabled, DKIM_SIGNED 0.10, DKIM_VALID -0.10, DKIM_VALID_AU -0.10, SPF_PASS -0.00, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01)
X-34spcom-MailScanner-From: chris@thegreenwebfoundation.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/e-impact/kXAxL52pVJI5kr90_xYLFNfF38c>
Subject: Re: [E-impact] kWh/GB should be banned and the IETF should warn against its use
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: Tue, 16 May 2023 15:55:47 -0000

Hi folks, 

Would it be possible to make this a separate thread?

I think the earlier discussion was really useful, and it’s something I’d like to refer to in other discussions when people are talking about kWh / GB in other contexts.

I’m quoting this bit below here, as sounds like it might be the start of a really interesting and rich, but different topic to the email subject refers to, and I’d quite like to explore it personally, as it feels like a helpful, concrete direction.

 
> On 16. May 2023, at 16:50, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> 
> So, maybe the question would be if we could reduce the amount of
> duplicated work by requiring future non-constraineed protocol work to also
> be built to support constrained environments from day 1. Which alas
> today means that we need to bring communities within the IETF together
> that so far haveworked often in separate silos. And that may have different
> goals anyhow.
> 
> Aka: This is certainly something that looks for an IETF strategy and/or
> at least experiments.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status