[EERG] Minutes EERG IRTF 84 meeting
Rolf Winter
Rolf.Winter at neclab.eu
Thu Aug 9 20:27:05 CEST 2012
Thanks a lot!
NEC Europe Limited | Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL | Registered in England 2832014
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Damien Saucez [mailto:damien.saucez at gmail.com]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 9. August 2012 16:32
> To: eerg at listserv.netlab.nec.de
> Cc: Rolf Winter; Florin Coras; Thierry Turletti; Luigi Iannone;
> Mehdi.Mani at itron.com
> Subject: Minutes EERG IRTF 84 meeting
>
> Here are the polished minutes.
>
> Q? mean a question, R! means an answer to that question. The name in
> parenthesis is the name of the talker.
>
> [DSA=xxx] means that xxx are personal
> notes/appreciation/missunderstanding
>
> Regards,
>
> Damien Saucez
>
> --
>
> [DSA=approximatively 30 people in the room, to be confirmed by blue
> sheets, among them, a dozen is active]
>
> Welcome (Rolf Winter)
> =======
>
>
> link to mailing list:
> https://listserv.netlab.nec.de/mailman/listinfo/eerg
>
> note well
>
> We proceed today with 5 minutes pitches.
>
> Q? how many people want to pitch?
>
> R! no body ask for a pitch
>
> One year ago a meeting, more attendants than today, we gave a
>
> general description of the idea. Conclusion: people was positive
>
> and said that yes, we have to work, but nothing happened on the
>
> list. Many changes since then, now a lot of paper have been published
>
> with energy efficiency in mind. The conclusion is that this is only the
> mailing list that is not active.
>
>
> Agenda for today:
>
> - structure the problem a bit better
>
> - scoping and figure out what people want to work on
>
> - if interest, how to organize and what with the next month
>
> As a reminder, the new idea of Lars is to let people to act as a RG for
> a year, then
>
> Pitches
> ======
>
> For energy efficient network (Samsung)
> energy optimized operation
> -------------------------------------
>
> Look to keep QoS but while reducing energy efficiency
>
> switch off or slow down interfaces when not necessary. Unfortunately,
> this is an optimisation problem that is known to be NP hard.
>
> Expectation:
>
> - a community or forum where to exchange ideas to tackle problem
>
> - share real network data (power, traffic, topology profiles)
>
> Q? (Russ Verisign?):
> - do you think there is enough return on investment on
> shutting down interfaces, do you measure it really is worth?
>
> R! (Samsung)
> only 20W are necessary to send but up to now we consume up
> to 1,000W, so there is room for improvement
>
> [DSA= 1,000W or 100W?]
> [DSA= not understood the name of who is we]
>
>
> Issue on power saving cloud system (Toshiaki Hitachi)
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> background: increase of power consumption with cloud use increase. In
> other words, the more we are using the cloud, the more we consume.
>
>
> Policies for power saving:
> 1. power saving by optimising VM allocation in DC 2. power saving by
> optimising VM allocation and path 3. power saving by optimising vm over
> DCs
>
>
> issues:
> interface between an inter-DC network manager and a DC manager is
> needed
>
> [DSA= no question or remark after the speech]
>
>
> [DSA= no time to write title] (Huawei)
> -------------------------------------
> Idea: aggregate traffic on the whole network to idle some devices
>
> Challenge: tradoff between enery efficiency and resiliency
>
> problems:
> - what if traffic is suddenly partitionned?
> - how to deal with traffic peaks?
>
> explain the difference between PRR [DSA=?] and ... [DSA= don't understand
> what he means there...]
>
> [DSA= no question or remark after the speech]
>
> RG Open Discussion (Rolf leads)
> ===============
>
> Routing and traffic engineering
>
> Q (Rolf)? How many people to routing working group?
>
> R! [DSA=5-6 people raised their hand]
>
> Much of energy budget is put on end hosts, can we go further?
>
> Q (Rolf)? Is there anything we can exclude already? Can we exclude some
> devices?
>
> Q? (Manuel Paul)
> - think about applicability and area, not only theory but
> reality. where actually safe energy
> - not possible right now to say where to cut
> - access link is obvious but core router can also,
> - can we do EE on per-flow/per-session, would be interesting
> to look at
> - mobile backhaul there is still the connection to the
> mobile
> network, more consideration there? Extend to shutting down
> the access point?
> - so all this just to say that it is very hard to exclude
> one
> part right now. It is not that easy to just switch off one
> part and not considering the whole. It's an area of
> control
> - how the network can make the difference between
> intentional
> switch off for EE and failure?
> - good use case for SDN
>
> R! (Rolf): what people want to work in general and where?
>
> Q? (Russ)
> - homenet would be a good point to look at, we would thus
> understand homenet requirements
> - applicability: DC is a big area, but not solution oriented,
> and what is the return on investment there?
>
> Q? (Dimitri)
> - what is the difference between energy efficiency and
> power
> saving?
> - in energy efficiency, you have a budget you want to use
> the
> best. While in power saving you just minimize the power
> you
> use
>
> R! (Rolf)
> - for me energy efficiency point encompass reduction
>
>
> Q? (Dimitri)
> - a fundamental question: will we use current routing or
> create new routing?
>
> R? (Rolf)
> - if people are interested why not changing routing, however,
> then we need to find people that will work on.
>
>
> Q? (Dimitri)
>
> - difficult to have a global mean of accounting where you
> spend energy, maybe you save here but move there
> - how to know the solution is globally effective then?
>
> Q? (Kalargianis)
> - homenet is an important area, we work on a system with
> radio
> + optic, but very hard to control all the access point
> - we can use some technique to reduce. How can we use
> network
> for beamforming and beamsetting? Should be worked on
> (currently worked on at AM)
>
> Q? (Choi Samsung)
> - Jarri consumes a lot of energy in homenet, so yes, homenet
> is a good place to start
>
> Q? (Brian)
> - reduce scope: look at motivation. Is it to increase
> functionality? reduce consumtion? reduce the total power
> consumption for the Internet? For the latter, the best
> then is to focus
> on homenet
>
> R? ([DSA= unknown]) maybe you want to add devices without increase
> cost
>
> Q? (Steward)
> - look at new network protocols, but for deployments it will
> be difficult, so if we want to see it one day, it needs to
> be something we are use to, at least from an operational
> viewpoint.
>
> Q? ([DSA= unknown])
> - the major places: service provider (packets per energy),
> access and DC (PUI [dsa= ?]). To be valuable, we should
> convert this into an intelligible and common metric like
> cost in $ or
> carbon equivalent.
>
> Q? (Dimitri)
> - management: control or knowledge
> - metric of where?
>
> [dsa= do not really understand what Dimitri means]
>
> R! (Rolf)
> - metric will depend our place. So what would we focused to?
>
> Q? (Kostas)
> - kind of survey document? There are mechanisms now
> implemented in devices, but you lose info when you are
> high
> in the stack how can you use power efficiency feature
> (skype go silence so does
> your nic too???). Can we ignore what is about in the stack
> (how)? So how to
> make protos there to take this into account. So instead of
> just looking at the
> net level, we should look at the whole stack ([DSA= API
> for applications])
>
> Q? (Dan)
> - we have such in Israel, at peek hours, we have to shut off
> features to avoid blackout
> - we need to defined precisely what energy efficiency means,
> - interested to participate
>
> Q? (Brian)
> - yes, different for different usage, sure, but how to get
> one
> common metric such that we have common ground
>
> Q? (Choi)
> - one device is easy: joule/bit; W/bps
> - not yet consensus for complex systems neither efficiency
> definition
> - I want to know the One metric!
>
> R! (Kostas)
> - well this is physics, not applications
>
> Q? (Kostas)
> - in some case, you can have burst of use (when the iDevice
> switches off, it burstly sends a lot of trafic)
>
> Q? (Steward)
> - realistic approach with the application? What can we
> really
> do in the application place to have good in the routing
> place
>
> Q? (Benoit)
> - yes we want to reduce but what are we ready to lose? We
> have
> to lose something, somewhere!
>
> R! (Kostas)
> - maybe we can come up with something with zero loss
>
> Q? (Steward)
> - what you are ready to lose depends probably where you are
> on
> the network and the number of people behind
>
> R! (Benoit)
> - yes, but you have TE, and now add an additional metric,
> the
> EE
>
> Q? (Choi)
> - we have to use little to gain more
>
> R! (Benoit)
> - IP phone is something you can do (EMAN) it is a little,
> but
> you have many of them so at the end you win a lot
>
> Q? ([DSA= unknown])
> - proliferation of endpoints, so good point reducing a bit
> there (x many)
> - service provider: cost per port is higher (SDN the cure
> for
> everything :-) ) cannot live with routing along we will
> have
> to go to application
>
> Q? (Dimitri)
> - what minimum functionality we can have a fair comparison
> (common measurement) (e.g., in routing it is path length)
> - question about functionalities we are looking at. Yes but
> what features are we commonly accepting to be used now?
>
> Q? (Bruce)
> - we should look at small network equipment instead of
> building/big infrastructure (because small networks are
> repeated everywhere while building/big infrastructure is
> specific)
> - I have not seen useful information in the field about EE
> - we work on the metrics since many years, but we do not
> manage to get anything very significant
> - where is it reasonable/feasible to add sleep state (e.g.,
> TCP, BGP...)?
> - all what we do and deploy for security consumes a lot of
> energy, would be nice to quantify the total energy cost
> related to security
>
> R! (Steward)
> - we have problem because we think punctual metrics, but
> this
> is multidimensional discontinuous metrics. Maybe change
> the
> term "metric" because it has too much background in our
> community
> - we can do scheduling so we know how long we can sleep!
>
> Q? (Kalargianis)
> [DSA= not understood]
>
> Q? ([DSA= unknown])
> - optimisation is not so easy, how to avoid people doing the
> same decision at the same time, how to avoid
> self-synchronisation? (saw that with thermostats)
>
> R! (Dimitri)
> - cooperative behavior vs selfish behavior
>
> Q? (Steward)
> - anyway, at the end the question is "how much money!"
>
> Q? (Manuel)
> - at the end looking at the SLA impact is not bad idea...
> - we want to make sure what we introduce doesn't cost the
> SLA,
> or what does it cost, such that we can have a way to
> tackle
> them.
> - maybe the user themself can see so he can contribute to
> that, the system does not act really, only tells the
> footprint (e.g., one google research = one coffee)
>
> Q? (Alexendru (partner in greentouch))
> - are we really ready to communicate slower to google (wait
> a
> bit)???
> - we are looking how much it takes to send a packet, but
> hard
> to define the procedure, we have many methods, some
> metrics
> measure the NIC CPU, others how much energy is put in the
> air.
> - is dijkstra still working with energy metric instead of
> hops? In this case, probably good result if network is
> large
> in term of IP hops.... but how many hops do we have in
> houses?
>
> Q? (Rolf)
> - there exists a small usb stick to make just networking,
> when
> PC goes to sleep, move the process to key a lot of energy
> is
> lost because computers stay up just for networking, the
> proxy
> key is used to keep the networking stack even if pc sleeps
>
> Q? (Kostas)
> - use google instead of driving to go to the library... kind
> of metric :-)
> - can we have an energy star for applications? e.g, Skype
> better than XYZ VoIP, Cost of a call with an
> application,...
>
> Q? (Benoit)
> - IETF = protocol design. Can we do provide guidelines to
> how
> to design protocols such that the protocol is EE
>
> R! (Rolf)
> - impose a "Energy Efficiency" section in every draft?
>
> Q? (Rolf)
> - The EE must be crypto agile, when crypto go to sleep, they
> often have to renegotiate their timers
>
> Q? (Brian)
> - measurement of energy use: it is inactivity that consumes
> a
> lot, not activity and this is very fundamental difference
> with what we are used to in real life
>
> R! (Kostas)
> - then the more we will be able to go in sleep mode, the
> highest saving we will have.
>
> Q? ([DSA= unknown])
> - do we really need, e.g., 5, protocols running at the same
> time? could be merge the protocols?
>
> Q? (Didier)
> - do we want to avoid inactivity, or do we want to sleep.
> For
> example, we can use home wifi to offload, so we use this
> energy that was lost before and then we can use less
> energy in
> GSM networks
>
> Q? (Manuel)
> - sleep state vs slow down, and how come sleep state can be
> integrated with the protocol?
>
> Conclusion (Rolf)
> ========
>
> Where do we go from here?
>
> Q? (Rolf)
> - How many people plan to do something, really do
> something?
>
> R! [DSA=10-15 people raised their hand]
>
> Drafting an agenda, hopping to see some documents
>
> Remember that the new procedure to become RG is to behave like one, so
> we have to be active :-)
>
> Do we need to propose to have virtual meetings (less energy), talk to
> these virtual meetings on the mailing list to figure out the time Let's
> try once to see how it goes. It of course does not limit side meetings,
> Video conferencing is possible
>
> Maybe we can try to construct IEEE conference to have a forum with the
> academics
>
> Thank you, enjoy the fireworks, be active on the mailing list, do
> documents.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the Eerg
mailing list