IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Interest in energy consumption of IPv6 smartphones (vs. IPv4)

otroan@employees.org Thu, 22 September 2016 03:34 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0344A12B963 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 20:34:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.317
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.317 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.316, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=employees.org; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=otroan@employees.org header.d=employees.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dH90rqsotrQl for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 20:34:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (cowbell.employees.org [IPv6:2001:1868:a000:17::142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA10812BEA2 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 20:34:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACBDA9CE03; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 05:36:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=employees.org; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s= selector1; bh=OIVxb6+j8/nMmApC/EePK7T324M=; b=enBGUl16Wlkrui2iJu ars20bmnrOrfksqOGkuKBlwvwhD/9APfc2beot7bahMVEgaXFcZkysDJPoQAlqHc 2w4VMQk/1ktNBzB8Pf0dapcjhvTe6F5zj+ED2NfMcj72Ae9aKSnsu5Bo+mBEb93V nmMxbkd0Ryr9DiTVE5zXeGQ8w=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=employees.org; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; q=dns; s= selector1; b=EwvvbtQmDBl77z/5ohZhT/PVI82Gwoip1SlWv+vT0Zy2G6CFc0N E77CGfngOmCiZpoQjvsEKvlHAZHRQdtHPe2jhyhohx+HkcJDuZLphEhCDIEg31k6 LZbJ4MGA/M0pN4zB+BDu6sqGJNQ4DvbgLObZx/5PqF310KgdNEdY3WCQ=
Received: from h.hanazo.no (unknown [173.38.220.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 678EC9CC85; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 05:36:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE434461FE43; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 14:36:09 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.0 \(3226\))
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <c3b57005-7197-97fd-747d-5429ad319c98@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 14:36:09 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <ED80A621-D68D-4B21-9BB9-4A240EF6BB64@employees.org>
References: <20160211191203.4120F180472@rfc-editor.org> <5099e169-696d-54ec-a4a7-8cc773e358c5@gmail.com> <4B8679AA-6FA4-4D9F-A7DD-C8DD6F525EC6@cisco.com> <5fcbf830-fc25-7394-5c8a-55dc9189b462@gmail.com> <CAMugd_V-=2woJZPQUSzDYacxZVSW-9H5S8x5Qx=VxNc5_iGerQ@mail.gmail.com> <093d3a00-a2cc-c6d9-8939-56114eb4a461@gih.com> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B2131714501A@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <20160603021720.15D9E4AA4453@rock.dv.isc.org> <c3b57005-7197-97fd-747d-5429ad319c98@gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3226)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/BXeqVLf6W4sMyqRWUBLAzB97XKc>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Interest in energy consumption of IPv6 smartphones (vs. IPv4)
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 03:34:12 -0000

Alex,

>> While reducing power consumtion is a good thing, we will be wasting
>> peoples time to compare IPv6 vs IPv4 power consumption.  Don't we
>> have better things to do than to waste peoples time on the academic
>> exercise which will produce nothing useful.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Independently of qualifying academic exercises, I think this data can be
> useful, among others: (1) when short on battery know what to turn off
> and (2) protocol design like 6lo limit to how much the improvements
> should try to save compared to vanilla IPv6.
> 
> Preliminary measurements on an Android smartphone running live video,
> pre-recorded video, web browsing and ftp on 3G seem to exhibit slightly
> higher platform uA/h discharge on IPv6 than on IPv4.
> 
> Is there any published data along similar lines: IPv4-vs-IPv6 energy
> consumption on smartphone apps on cellular?

https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-desmouceaux-ipv6-mcast-wifi-power-usage-01.txt

Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email