IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 12 November 2024 14:32 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: irtf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: irtf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF229C14F6F3 for <irtf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 06:32:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.103
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.103 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_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=unavailable 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 84fKbR-fSQSl for <irtf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 06:32:32 -0800 (PST)
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 ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A0C4C14F706 for <irtf-discuss@irtf.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 06:32:32 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: relay.sandelman.ca; dkim=permerror header.d=sandelman.ca header.i=@sandelman.ca header.a=rsa-sha1 header.s=dyas header.b=HDffRIHS; dkim-atps=neutral
Received: from dyas.sandelman.ca (unknown [5.148.108.163]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 857981F4A4; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 14:27:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E2117A1439; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 14:32:29 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=sandelman.ca; s=dyas; t=1731421949; bh=AKruwViVhY3GY9KvMyjRy7sTluxQppB3D+htJJmIWk4=; h=From:To:Subject:In-reply-to:References:Date:From; b=HDffRIHSSLNWK2PN2+GtT1CiWFdODSZfFdQj+lpm3rhnrLwtd09Su3NdGOhC7dohM 1RRc7DuFYCP+YlrIlg7iNLRHs7nj9AMJKEnpRXlM+gSwwNsjwe1ulzVW2+07+8eeBk c4W4rbbAoY5HmywY/n4sNAENPjv55WN6HrjMoTjjUr1MfI+bRccfIyD1ZO8xFyAOmH QzYVpYqgJegW/qEUCjLGvhe3rTwZlxy4yi9gbuwscEsoOA8ktyvRoaHnx0Aks5gEBj O105l+SPKAi4R0ghvk9LeVqONL4WZ+/Wd8EUlvRcTUVus+XVMZ9V/mhJ1t4jGMgjKc IjxnvipZWPcSg==
Received: from dyas (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF19DA1438; Tue, 12 Nov 2024 14:32:29 +0000 (GMT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: green@ietf.org, E-Impact IETF <e-impact@ietf.org>, irtf-discuss@irtf.org
In-reply-to: <CAFvDQ9ruuSkrxU4wQz21Ldfp4T4s2MnojJ3H9TFBHdBsQdZm5w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFvDQ9ruuSkrxU4wQz21Ldfp4T4s2MnojJ3H9TFBHdBsQdZm5w@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Hesham ElBakoury <helbakoury@gmail.com> message dated "Mon, 11 Nov 2024 12:13:53 -0800."
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: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 14:32:29 -0000
Message-ID: <361466.1731421949@dyas>
Message-ID-Hash: RZY2J5CHSSLEOGVZXDIBS3TITKSJSPAI
X-Message-ID-Hash: RZY2J5CHSSLEOGVZXDIBS3TITKSJSPAI
X-MailFrom: mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-irtf-discuss.irtf.org-0; header-match-irtf-discuss.irtf.org-1; header-match-irtf-discuss.irtf.org-2; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [irtf-discuss] Re: [E-impact] Network Equipment Energy Efficiency Metric
List-Id: IRTF general and new-work discussion list <irtf-discuss.irtf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/irtf-discuss/5CsGXegVlB-hk3qmbzX0kYKjXww>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/irtf-discuss>
List-Help: <mailto:irtf-discuss-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:irtf-discuss-owner@irtf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:irtf-discuss@irtf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:irtf-discuss-join@irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:irtf-discuss-leave@irtf.org>

Is is useful for network planners to know kWh/peak-GB for an entire infrastructure?

This doesn't try to model reaction of network equipment to increased flows,
but rather to model how infrastructure grows to accomodate higher peak loads?

There is also an induced demand issue.  Networks grow when they fill,
assuming there is revenue to support it.  This is akin to transportation:
      https://www.vtpi.org/gentraf.pdf

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

v2.43.4 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status