[E-impact] Re: [irtf-discuss] [Green] Re: Network Equipment Energy Efficiency Metric

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Tue, 12 November 2024 20:36 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 2BDE3C1D874F for <e-impact@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 12:36:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.653
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.653 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, 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=no autolearn_force=no
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 HWS4QZ-BLF02 for <e-impact@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 12:36:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0EF5C20C8FE for <e-impact@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 12:36:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.51]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Xnyqp2S34z1R70y; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 21:36:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: by faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 4Xnyqp1llhzkxqp; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 21:36:22 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 21:36:22 +0100
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
Message-ID: <ZzO8RnaxafkI835u@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <CAFvDQ9ruuSkrxU4wQz21Ldfp4T4s2MnojJ3H9TFBHdBsQdZm5w@mail.gmail.com> <361466.1731421949@dyas> <ZzOBaQSBNHxdugoV@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <C2C1832C-26A8-4880-ADB7-85E685741C16@tony.li>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <C2C1832C-26A8-4880-ADB7-85E685741C16@tony.li>
Message-ID-Hash: VZTA3NKZ7RLEHPZLRNNBNNGRXAIRSHNX
X-Message-ID-Hash: VZTA3NKZ7RLEHPZLRNNBNNGRXAIRSHNX
X-MailFrom: eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, E-Impact IETF <e-impact@ietf.org>, irtf-discuss@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [E-impact] Re: [irtf-discuss] [Green] Re: Network Equipment Energy Efficiency Metric
List-Id: Environmental impacts of the Internet <e-impact.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/e-impact/xiryCsc4B-2jrgahY-YRaMtLO3o>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/e-impact>
List-Help: <mailto:e-impact-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:e-impact-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:e-impact@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:e-impact-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:e-impact-leave@ietf.org>

Thanks, Tony, inline

On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 10:40:11AM -0800, Tony Li wrote:
> [-green, as this is inappropriate]

? You don't think green WG members would find the explanation you provided
useful to the extend that they may wonder if/what of it they want to see
modelled in their work ?

> > On Nov 12, 2024, at 8:25 AM, Toerless Eckert - tte at cs.fau.de <mailforwards@cloudmails.net> wrote:
> > 
> > I was primarily thnking of provisioning powr for peak use. Or as necessary do
> > peak shaving. For example, if there atually is a significant peak after e.g.
> > a power failure, as there is in traditional servers with spinning disks, then
> > this can typically be shaved through software/control mechanisms. I am not aware
> > of anything like this for traditional network devices, but always good to
> > know upfront that there is no such situation where power use is higher than
> > power use during e.g.: 100% utilization, for which one does plan the power supply
> > of the room/
> 
> Conventional high-end routing equipment already does a staged power-on sequence in order to reduce surge current at power-on. This is isolated to the system itself and does not span across systems. At cold boot, fans are necessarily spun up to full power to avoid worst-case situations. Once the ambient temperature can be ascertained and enough software is running to ensure that the system is not in thermal distress, fan power is reduced to maintenance levels.

Right. Some of this is common to other type of devices like PC.

> Data sheet power usage for networking gear is typically peak, worst-case power utilization, as this is necessary for provisioning purposes.

I've also not always found this being broken apart into the modular components, so
you may only know what the maximum config (e.g.: all-fastest-linecards) would
consume. I guess/hope green-WG would have that info though.

In addition, i think we do currently do not have significant higher power during e.g.
cold-boot than during "normal/peak" operations, but if future network devices would ever
have this, then its good to know in case one wants/needs to do location wide
staging for peak power shaving.

Cheers
   Toerless