On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 11:14:00PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Toerless, > > This thread is not about meetings. Eliots tread starter certainly was. > It's about protocol design and operational recommendations. After all, the Internet is directly responsible for several % of world energy consumption. The exact value is still debatable: https://digital-me-up.com/2019/05/17/invisible-pollution-of-internet/ The Internet is not responsible for the humunguous amount of energy burn in DC , bitcoin proof of work or end-user equipment. Thats like saying that streets are responsible for Hummer and Trucks gasoline consumption and waste of human time in commute traffic. Sure, the Internet is the enabler, but its in the nature of the economy that enablers never only enable good things. How about we get rid of money first, because thats responsible for financing all wars, much more so than the Internet. Protocol design and operational recommendations too would have little impact to reducing power consumption compared to HW-design level improvements. Cheers Toerless > > Regards > Brian > > On 26-Jul-19 16:10, Toerless Eckert wrote: > > This threads mails on CO2 and climate change are somewhat pythonesque to me... > > > > The IETF trying to shame itself about 3 meetings of 1000 people a year > > while its product, the Internet has been the biggest reducer of energy > > that i could think of in comparison of equivalent alternatives. > > For the whole planet for the last few decades. > > > > Email/online-group-communications vs. transporting physical equivalents, > > video conferencing, Home office, Telecommuning vs. train, plane automobiles > > and ships ? Telemedicine, digitalization as opposed to all the paper economy > > overhead, remote telemetry, industrial operations instead of shipping people, ... ??? > > > > Do we like all the excesses (IP) networks are used for ? Of couse not. > > Should we continue to improve ? Sure! Should we eat more of our own dog food > > (e.g.: virtual meetings) ? absolutely. But should we feel ashamed about the > > limited transportation required to create the Internet standardization ? > > Try to come up with any metric in which that would make sense. Show me any > > other standards body where an equal or larger part of work gets done with > > such a low-power mechanism as ASCII emails. > > > > IETF travel is not part of this problem. Its been a key part of developing and applying > > the solution for a long time. > > > > -- --- tte@xxxxxxxxx
