Re: [eman] energy-specific efforts at IETF?

[joel jaeggli <[e-mail]>]

On 6/28/16 8:10 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> Sure. But your two statements (in the first paragraph) use each of
> the conditional 'may'. What is the reason to use YANG on the devices?
> The SDN paradigm does not AFAIK make assumptions about using a
> specific protocol or DML at the device management level. YANG comes
> at a certain cost (bits on wire, memory). Maybe this is affordable,
> or maybe YANG is needed for other reasons, but this needs to be shown
> explicitely.

Signaling presumes in some utility is derived from coordination.

If I have a ten year primary battery or I'm a space probe headed to
alpha centuri I'm not going to devote a lot of electrons to expressing
my power consumption or battery condition.

More active or particularly coordinated groups of devices such as the
elements of a BST or a datacenter might well have information to share.

> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: Alexandre Petrescu
>> [mailto:[e-mail]] Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016
>> 5:55 PM To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Rolf Winter; Nadeau Thomas Cc:
>> [e-mail] Subject: Re: [eman] energy-specific efforts at IETF?
>> 
>> The SDN paradigm may be applied not just to switches but to
>> smartphones. Further, a tool like CoMI (CoAP Management Interface)
>> may make use of YANG models on IoT devices which are typically
>> constrained on battery.
>> 
>> Yesterday I read about an NB-IoT LPWA device from u-blox which runs
>> on a battery for 10 years.
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>> Le 02/06/2016 à 11:20, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) a écrit :
>>> No, RFC 7577 defines an SMIv2 MIB.
>>> 
>>> Before engaging in a discussion about 'let us do EMAN data
>>> modelling in YANG' I would like to see a use case - i.e. an
>>> example of an energy monitoring system that uses YANG for
>>> reporting energy information.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Dan
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message----- From: eman
>>>> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu 
>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 11:22 AM To: Rolf Winter; Nadeau
>>>> Thomas Cc: [e-mail] Subject: Re: [eman] energy-specific
>>>> efforts at IETF?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Le 02/06/2016 à 10:18, Rolf Winter a écrit :
>>>>> Is there anything that the EMAN work is not addressing or
>>>>> that requires new protocol work?
>>>> 
>>>> For my clarification - is the battery monitoring MIB RFC7577
>>>> using YANG?
>>>> 
>>>> Alex
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Nadeau Thomas
>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Not that I know of in the form of an official working
>>>>>> group. EMAN was
>>>> shut down something like a year ago.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --Tom
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Jun 1, 2016:8:34 AM, at 8:34 AM, Alexandre Petrescu
>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Is there any other effort focusing on energy consumption
>>>>>>> happening at
>>>> IETF currently?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am interested in aspects related to energy consumption
>>>>>>> of IP networks
>>>> used to deliver video streams.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Yours,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Alex Petrescu
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Le 09/06/2015 à 05:01, Mouli Chandramouli (moulchan) a
>>>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>>>> Thanks to all the WG chairs for shepherding the IETF
>>>>>>>> drafts and taking them to a conclusion. I may not be
>>>>>>>> able to travel to Prague.  So, enjoy.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Cheers Mouli
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> From: Nadeau Thomas <[e-mail] 
>>>>>>>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> Date: Saturday, 6
>>>>>>>> June 2015 2:22 AM To: "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" 
>>>>>>>> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> Cc: eman
>>>>>>>> mailing list <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, 
>>>>>>>> "[e-mail]
>>>>>>>> <mailto:[e-mail]>" 
>>>>>>>> <[e-mail] 
>>>>>>>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> Subject: Re:
>>>>>>>> [eman] Status of the EMAN W.G. effort.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Beers are on you! 8)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 5, 2015:4:46 PM, at 4:46 PM, Benoit Claise 
>>>>>>>>> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Yes, thanks to the contributors, document editors, WG
>>>>>>>>> chairs, previous ADs :-), basically the entire EMAN
>>>>>>>>> community. Celebration in Prague? Fine with me.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards, Benoit
>>>>>>>>>> Greetings,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Now that we've crossed the milstone of having 
>>>>>>>>>> draft-ietf-eman-applicability-statement-11 move to
>>>>>>>>>> the RFC editor
>>>> queue,
>>>>>>>>>> I think we can pause and reflect on the effort that
>>>>>>>>>> has completed.
>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>> took a while to get here and the consensus that we
>>>>>>>>>> built was hard
>>>> won
>>>>>>>>>> but I hope durable.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> It's my intention to close down the working group,
>>>>>>>>>> maintaining the mailing list for a time. The
>>>>>>>>>> mailing list archive as with other IETF mailing
>>>>>>>>>> lists will be preserved. in the immediate sense if
>>>>>>>>>> there is
>>>> work
>>>>>>>>>> around the edges of this space we have the opsawg
>>>>>>>>>> working
>> group
>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> support such activities.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Thank you again for your diligent efforts,
>>>>>>>>>> especially the present and former chairs who
>>>>>>>>>> shepherded this work to the point that it is at
>>>> now.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Regards Joel
>>> 
> _______________________________________________ eman mailing list 
> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman
>