Re: [Manycouches] Daniel presentation @ 113 - "carbon emissions considerations"

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 12/04/2022 à 18:04, John Scudder a écrit :
> To date, efforts I’ve seen that have the explicit goal of “we’re
> going to minimize carbon impact of <networking thing X>” run up
> against the fact that the industry has long had financial incentives
> to minimize power consumption and heat removal requirements, because
> those represent significant costs for anyone doing computing at
> scale.
> 
> Never say never, but I’m not expecting to find any low-hanging fruit
> that hasn’t been harvested already.

This is the low hanging fruit: an Energy Considerations section in RFCs 
telling that the protocol is energivore or not (it eats a lot of 
electrical energy, or not).

The other low hanging fruit: report at IETF plenary how many carbon 
emissions were generated by the plane, bus, train, car or walk travels 
to that IETF meeting.  These numbers are available in many(?) travel 
plans at the air companies.

Alex

> 
> —John
> 
>> On Apr 12, 2022, at 10:30 AM, Joel M. Halpern <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> While it would be nice to think we can redesign our protocols to be
>> more cooperative with the environment, it seems clear that we do
>> not have a clue how to do so.  Putting that on the table even as a
>> future seems to be misleading.  One of the other SDOs I work with
>> puts an "energy considerations" section in all their documents.
>> There are a few where that may make sense (when they deal with
>> laser power levels, etc).  But in general it is a meaningless
>> section serving to pretend to address an issue.
>> 
>> Yours, Joel
>> 
>> On 4/12/2022 5:56 AM, Jay Daley wrote: ...
>>> Finally, I have a strong suspicion that we are only talking about
>>> doing our part by reducing flying because it’s so visible a
>>> contributor not because it has the most potential.  Like Martin,
>>> it seems obvious to me that the biggest potential is in the
>>> protocols themselves, but that of course is hard to measure, hard
>>> to understand how design affects emissions, and hard to get
>>> people to look at.  Having said that, I can certainly see a point
>>> when RFCs have an "Carbon emissions considerations" section or
>>> something broader.
>>> 
>>> Jay
>> 
> _______________________________________________ Manycouches mailing
> list [e-mail] 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manycouches