[Green] Re: [Lsr] Re: Next steps for draft-many-lsr-power-group-02

[Carlos Pignataro <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for the dialogue. 

Imagine you want to buy a $10 t shirt. You can also buy a $5 discount, which costs you $2. Would you be saving $5 or $3? And if you buy the discount but do not buy the t-shirt are you net $0?

The essence of my question is whether the costs are being accounted for for in the baseline. 

Thanks,

Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro.
Excuze typofraphicak errows

> On May 6, 2026, at 19:24, Bonica, Ron <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Carlos,
> 
> I think that you have a good point that is relevant to a different part of the design.
> 
> Operators will deploy this technology only if the Return on Investment (ROI) is high. To calculate the return on investment, the operator needs to know how much power (aka, money) they saved.
> 
> This draft advertises power information in IS-IS so that CSPF can optimize path computation for power savings. Rerouting traffic doesn't save money. However, it facilitates another system that monitors power-save-capable hardware and powers it down when it is not needed. It also powers it up when it is needed again. That component saves energy and money.
> 
> It would be great if there were a yang model that reflected the following information for each power-save-capable hardware component:
> 
> How much energy does it consume when awake
> What is its sleeping/waking history
> 
> If such a yang model existed, it would provide a history of power savings.
> 
> Interested?
> 
>                                                  Ron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Carlos Pignataro <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2026 2:08 PM
> To: Tony Li <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Christian Hopps <[e-mail]>; lsr <[e-mail]>; "“[e-mail]”" <[e-mail]>; ops-ads <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> Subject: [Lsr] Re: [Green] Next steps for draft-many-lsr-power-group-02
> 
> Hi, Tony,
> 
> > On May 5, 2026, at 2:10 AM, Tony Li <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> >
> >> One additional suggestion: it would be valuable for draft-many-lsr-power-group to include some consideration of how its mechanisms can be evaluated from an energy perspective. For example, guidance on measuring impact, comparing against a baseline, or reporting observed energy savings (and any managed decreases and/or unintended increases) in deployments.
> >>
> >> Even lightweight guidance here could help ensure that experimental results are actionable and can inform the broader work in green or elsewhere.
> >
> >
> > I’m not understanding what you’re requesting.  draft-many-lsr-power-group provides a basis for path computation that allows PCE implementations to consolidate traffic, thereby idling components that can be put into power-sleep.  Without a specific analysis of a network, traffic demand matrix, and detailed hardware information, (all of which are operator confidential), I’m not sure what we can provide that is helpful.
> 
> Thanks — I was too open-ended and broad, so let me clarify. This is not about the particulars of any specific network or requiring confidential inputs.
> 
> The intent is simply to ensure that the evaluation captures the net system-level impact (i.e., whether the mechanisms enable sufficient consolidation to reduce overall energy consumption relative to a baseline.) In other words, the considering both sides: the additional overhead introduced, and the potential energy savings from traffic consolidation and resource idling. How is the simulation / premise / framework evaluating net >0 or <0?
> 
> >
> > We’ve already presented simulation results to substantiate the underlying premise.
> >
> > I ask that we please proceed.
> 
> Yes — and not mutually exclusive with ^^^
> 
> Best,
> 
> Carlos.
> 
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tony
> >
> >
>