Re: Network Energy Management - research paper

Joel Halpern <jmh.direct@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> · Sat, 6 Aug 2022 09:48:54 -0400



    As a research paper, I can not argue with that.  But as an
      engineering paper, trying to adjust routing based on instantaneous
      load is a known non-starter.  But that is what the paper says it
      does.  Which strongly suggests that this problem space is still
      not ready for engineering.  (I am reminded of the wonderfully
      elegant work on  compact routing which could have reduced our
      routing table size.  If only the topology would stay put.  But it
      doesn't.)  

    
    I am not saying folks shouldn't do research.  they should. 
      Whether such research is even ready for the IRTF is a different
      question I leave to researchers and the IRSG.  Whether we even
      know what questions to be asking to try to improve the situation
      in ways that are relevant to the IETF is also a reasonable
      question.  But not one for engineering.  If the IAB thinks it can
      get a good discussion among people at different layers of protocol
      design and people who actually deal with energy and resource
      tradeoffs, ,to start working on finding the right questions is up
      to them.  

    
    Yours,
    Joel

    
    On 8/6/2022 1:51 AM, Hesham ElBakoury
      wrote:

    
      Hi Joel,
        Why IETF does not have the skill set to define
          extensions to OSPF to be more energy efficient ? Example of
          such extensions is described in this recent paper https://arxiv.org/pdf/2207.00035.
        

        Thanks
        Hesham
      
      
        On Fri, Aug 5, 2022, 4:22 PM
          Joel Halpern <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
          wrote:

        
            I can't speak for Fred, but I don't think we as a
              community even know what "energy efficient protocol"
              means.  Much less how that trades off against all the
              other aspects of protocol design.
            We do consider message size and frequency when we design
              protocols.  We consider those aspects along with lots of
              others.  if that is "designing energy efficient protocols"
              then we already do so.  On the other hand, design for
              issues such as to to partially wake up a sleeping device
              is generally outside our remit and skill set.  And is
              meaningless for many of our devices.
            Yours,
            Joel

            
            On 8/5/2022 7:18 PM, Hesham ElBakoury wrote:

            
              Hi Fred,
                Do you think  IETF engineers have the
                  skill sets to design energy efficient protocols or
                  enhance existing ones to be more energy efficient ?
                

                Thanks,
                  Hesham
                
              
                On Fri, Aug 5, 2022,
                  1:22 PM Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>
                  wrote:

                
                Echoing
                  a previous post, I’m not sure sustainability is part
                  of our skill set. If we were to try to forcibly add
                  it, I suspect we’d get the same level of response
                  security originally got: “sustainability is not
                  specified in this document”.

                  
                  Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting
                  ways...

                  
                  > On Aug 5, 2022, at 2:26 AM, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx>
                  wrote:

                  > 

                  > Perhaps it is time for a new mandatory section in
                  RFCs: sustainability?