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

Hi, (other than avoiding RA time issues) do the real benefits come when apps are changed, less session keepalives in a nat-free environment?
It is all about the apps opportunity. They need to behave differently when IPv6-only.
Nick

From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Sent: 02 June 2016 11:22
To: Nabil Benamar; Alexandre Petrescu
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Interest in energy consumption of IPv6 smartphones (vs. IPv4)

Hello all,

it is also worth noting that 3G & 4G in particular appears to drain battery more than 2G. Results could be flawed because due to novelty, in most places 4G signal strength is not yet at the level of 2G or 3G signal strength. A study under controlled environment would be somehow interesting indeed although I fail to see the end goal for performing such a study? Do we want to prove that longer addresses mean more power requirements? I would have thought the end point really relates to chipset architecture, not bits transmitted.
Kindest regards,

Olivier
On 02/06/2016 11:37, Nabil Benamar wrote:
Hi All,

Since there is no dual stack on 3g/4g in my side, I can only test with wifi. Create a tunnel with HE.net for example and then connect a smartphone on IPv6 only..make the measurements and then switch to IPv4 only repeat the steps.....energy measurements are application specific!

I would like to ask the members of the list which is the best application to use for energy consumption on Android ?

It would also be interesting to measure with different mobile OS !

Best regards
Nabil Benamar
-------------------
نبيل بنعمرو

http://nabilbenamar.ipv6-lab.net/

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com<mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>> wrote:
Le 01/06/2016 à 18:13, Fred Baker (fred) a écrit :
I personally would find that interesting. As you note, we recently
posted an RFC about managing power by managing activity. Andrew
Yourtchenko has been interested in the chattiness of IPv6
implementations in WiFi, the issue being that it is a shared medium
(not unlike an Ancient yellow Ethernet cable, and very unlike a
switched network), so every hiccup reverberates throughout the
network. I would expect that the issue affects mobile wireless in
interesting ways. How chatty are we, and what needs to be adjusted?

It would be interesting to look at how IPv6 link and network protocol
behaviour may consume more or less energy.  ND efficiency,
energy-efficient IP paths in access and core networks, path-energy
discovery: are topics very interesting to explore.

Other operational question may be whether the full use of IPv6 on a
smartphone (disable IPv4) draws its battery more, less, or just as when
only IPv4 is used.  It may need some measurement of application
behaviour.  Recently energy-specific APIs became available on smartphone
OSs, supposing they're working ok on IPv6.
Do you have something to share?

Well not at this time.  We are currently exploring the
application-specific measurement part with a few people.  Maybe that can
lead to an Internet Draft.

Alex

On Jun 1, 2016, at 5:40 AM, Alexandre Petrescu
<alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com<mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi v6ops,

I wonder whether there may be interest in evaluating the energy
consumption of an IPv6 application on smartphones, compared to its
IPv4 counterpart.

I suspect the difference may be negligible but I am not sure.

It would be good to avoid a situation in which the end user
prefers IPv4 on the smartphone because IPv6 empties the battery.

Alex

Le 11/02/2016 à 20:12, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org<mailto:rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> a écrit :
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC
libraries.

BCP 202 RFC 7772

Title:      Reducing Energy Consumption of Router Advertisements
 Author:     A. Yourtchenko, L. Colitti Status:     Best Current
Practice Stream:     IETF Date:       February 2016 Mailbox:
ayourtch@cisco.com<mailto:ayourtch@cisco.com>, lorenzo@google.com<mailto:lorenzo@google.com> Pages:      6 Characters:
12555 See Also:   BCP 202

I-D Tag: draft-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-03.txt

URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7772

DOI:        http://dx.doi.org/10.17487/RFC7772

Frequent Router Advertisement messages can severely impact host
power consumption.  This document recommends operational
practices to avoid such impact.

This document is a product of the IPv6 Operations Working Group
of the IETF.

BCP: This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices
for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and
suggestions for improvements. Distribution of this memo is
unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist
lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/search For downloading RFCs, see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either
the author of the RFC in question, or to
rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org<mailto:rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>.  Unless specifically noted otherwise
on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution.

The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC

_______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list
 v6ops@ietf.org<mailto:v6ops@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org<mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

_______________________________________________

v6ops mailing list

v6ops@ietf.org<mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

--

Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD

http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
This email contains BT information, which may be privileged or confidential. It's meant only for the individual(s) or entity named above. 
If you're not the intended recipient, note that disclosing, copying, distributing or using this information is prohibited. 
If you've received this email in error, please let me know immediately on the email address above. Thank you.

We monitor our email system, and may record your emails.

EE Limited 
Registered office:Trident Place, Mosquito Way, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL10 9BW
Registered in England no: 02382161

EE Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of:

British Telecommunications plc
Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
Registered in England no: 1800000