Hannes, That's the dream of line-card hardware manufactures. If the hardware is 100% power proportional, then PANET will become useless.
However, the practice is that only 10%-15% power proportional is possible, which means a high 85%-90% of baseline power is being wasted when there is few traffic. Thanks, Mingui >-----Original Message----- >From: Hannes Gredler [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 5:17 PM >To: Mingui Zhang >Cc: Tony Li; Shankar Raman M J; [email protected] >Subject: Re: Power aware networks : Comments requested from routing >community > >mingui, > >wouldn't designing the hardware architecture such that there is >no high baseline rather than a more demand based >power draw curve be the better alternative then ? > >only box local changes needed, immediate returns, >no need to bother the network with the fact that the local >box cannot do the power housekeeping well ? > >/hannes > >On Feb 8, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Mingui Zhang wrote: > >> Hi Hannes, >> >> "Optimization" tries to empty all links on one line-card with priority, then >> this >line card can be shut off to save the high baseline power. >> >> Thanks, >> Mingui Zhang >> Huawei Technologies >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >Of >>> Hannes Gredler >>> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 4:25 PM >>> To: Tony Li >>> Cc: Shankar Raman M J; [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Power aware networks : Comments requested from routing >>> community >>> >>> tony, >>> >>> agree that saving power is a worthwhile goal; >>> >>> in fact existing hardware technology is making that happen today by >>> e.g. automatically shutting down unused lookup engines, CPU cores, memory >>> banks etc. >>> when there is low processing demand. >>> >>> the part where i am not yet convinced is that additional off-peak >"optimization" >>> of >>> infrastructure links by e.g. computing a routing mesh which only uses >>> 70% of the nominal links does actually give much power savings. >>> >>> note that line cards which are running at 70% have already throttled down >their >>> power consumption - so what is the point emptying the link and loading >>> another ? >>> appears to me a zero sum game. >>> >>> my concern about the core (and SP edge) is not about business or technology >- >>> it is more about if we try to optimize an already optimized (and solved) >problem. >>> >>> /hannes >>> >>> On Feb 7, 2013, at 5:09 PM, Tony Li wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Feb 7, 2013, at 5:07 AM, Hannes Gredler <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Do you think that optimizing a part of the network which gives only >>>>> limited >>>>> overall savings is a worthwhile goal ? >>>> >>>> >>>> Hannes, >>>> >>>> I'll just point out that this argument that you and Eric are espousing is >skirting >>> dangerously close to the quagmire of business. And we know from long >>> experience that the IETF does not do business models. >>>> >>>> I'd like to strongly suggest that we simply restrict ourselves to the goal >>>> of >>> saving power. I think that we can agree, in general, that saving power is a >>> worthwhile goal. As to whether or not it is significant or makes economic >>> sense is very much an issue that should be left to the operator community to >>> decide. Limited overall savings may be worthwhile in one context and >pointless >>> in another. >>>> >>>> I know of one country where they are purportedly mandating power >reductions. >>> In such situations, saving that last watt is the difference between a fine >>> and >not. >>> On the other hand, in a situation where power is very cheap, it's obviously >silly. >>>> >>>> Let's not argue about the marginal value of energy. That's a business >model >>> issue. Let's talk about how technology can actually save power. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Tony >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rtgwg mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg >> > _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
