RE: Energy saving as an IETF goal

[<mohamed.boucadair@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Alvaro, all,

 

Agree.

 

We used to have a problem statement for what we called at that time PANET (Power-Aware NETworking):

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zhang-panet-problem-statement-03

 

The questions raised in Section 4 of that draft are still interesting ones (including the potential implications on network operations).

 

FWIW, other I-Ds were edited at that time. I can cite for example:

 

* draft-zhang-panet-use-cases: Use Cases for Power-Aware Networks

* draft-dong-panet-requirement: Requirements for Power Aware Network

* draft-mjsraman-panet-bgp-power-path: Reducing Power Consumption using BGP path selection

* draft-mjsraman-panet-intra-as-psp-te-leak: Building power shortest inter-Area TE LSPs using pre-computed paths

 

Some of the documents were already presented in rtgwg and eman wgs. The outcome of these discussion at that time is that this is more a research area.

 

Cheers,

Med

 

De : ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] De la part de Alvaro Retana
Envoyé : jeudi 25 juillet 2019 20:02
À : Kent Watsen; Jari Arkko
Cc : IETF discussion list
Objet : Re: Energy saving as an IETF goal

 

I also think this could be an interesting topic for the IETF.

 

A few years ago we wrote a "Framework and Requirements for Energy Aware Control Planes” [1].  There wasn’t a lot of interest at the time and we intended to publish it somehow, but got busy on other things…

 

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-retana-rtgwg-eacp 

 

Alvaro.

 

On July 25, 2019 at 11:52:35 AM, Kent Watsen (kent+ietf@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:

 

Along these lines, roughly a decade ago I filed a patent for selective routing to data centers for purposes of power control and environmental impact [1].  While I've left Juniper since, if there were interest, they may be willing to assign the IPR to IETF if asked nicely.

 

That said, this patent somewhat missed the claim.  What's really needed is power-based routing in general (not just to data centers), whereby how green the power is matters.  Of course, getting routers to accurately testify the greeness of their power source could be difficult...

 

[1] http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=2&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=8,798,071&OS=8,798,071&RS=8,798,071

 

Kent

 

On Jul 24, 2019, at 2:54 PM, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

I think it is an interesting topic and very much on topic for us to think about. And a topic where potential savings could be significant. IT is a huge energy consumer (as well as a producer of short-lived gadgets). IT also has the potential to help optimise many non-IT processes, and therefore directly reduce energy consumption and waste.

But of course this is also complex topic and not one where only IETF or only standards help. And a topic where continuous improvements in compute and comms are often offset by more high res videos and ever growing software packages (as well as auto-play and zillions of adverts, placed on my screen after way too much ML analysis).

I’d be eager to work on this, assuming we can come up with proposals that can have an impact.

Jari