Transcript EEDN_PAC_morning.ppt
EEDN PAC Meeting
Energy Efficient Digital Networks
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory September 22, 2009 efficientnetworks.LBL.gov
Agenda
10:30 11:15 11:35 12:15 12:45 1:00 1:15 1:45 2:00 2:10 2:20 3:00 3:30 Welcome, Introductions, Project Overview Energy Efficient Ethernet Network Connectivity Proxying Energy Efficiency Specs for Network Equipment Break / Pick up lunch Consumer Electronic Data/Network Links Consumer Electronic Inter-device Power Control Set-Top Boxes Builder-Installed Miscellaneous Energy Star Perspective General Discussion Next Steps (discuss Building Networks, if time) Adjourn
Electronics as an End Use
•
Electronics are an end use of electricity
“Devices whose primary function is Information (obtain, store, manage, present)”
–Includes both Information Technology (IT) and Consumer Electronics (CE) –Much of this digitally networked already •
Conventional end uses (HVAC, lighting, appliances, …) all based in physics
•
Electronics based in information
Network Structure
• Edge devices: PCs, servers - Displays, storage, phones, … • Network equipment: switches , and routers
Networks and Energy
Network
equipment ….
Routers, switches, modems, wireless APs, … … vs
network ed
equipment PCs, printers, set top boxes, … Link How networks drive energy use •
Direct
– Network interfaces (NICs) – Network products •
Induced
in Networked products – Increased power levels – Increased time in higher power modes (to maintain network presence) Product Network Int.
Network Product
Network electricity use in context
Residential
NOT to scale
All Electricity: ~3,700 TWh Buildings Electricity: ~2,700 TWh Electronics: ~290 TWh One central baseload power plant (about 7 TWh/year) Network
ed
: ~150 TWh ?
Network Eqt.: ~ 20 TWh Telecom
Commercial
• U.S. only • Annual figures circa 2008 • All approximate
Network electricity use in context,
cont.
Buildings Electricity: ~2,700 TWh
Residential
Electronics Network
ed
~150 TWh ?
Net. Eqt.
~ 20 TWh Tel.
~290 TWh One central baseload power plant (about 7 TWh/year)
This time to scale
Commercial
• U.S. only • Annual figures circa 2008 • All approximate
Some questions worth asking
• How much energy does all network equipment use?
… telecom equipment? … edge devices?
• How much energy does network connectivity induce in edge devices?
• [ How much energy does IT avoid ] • Where is all this headed?
• How much can we reasonably save in network eqt.?
… in edge devices?
• What are research and implementation priorities?
Product Focus
Efficiency Approaches
Network Product Focus Interface Focus Protocol / Application Focus
Examples:
Proxying Energy Star
Need all approaches
CE
Finding Energy Savings Opportunities
Sample approaches
• Relax assumptions commonly made about networks –when feasible (rarely in core); mine wireless technology –these assumptions drive systems to peak performance • average conditions require less energy • many assumptions tied to latency • Design for average condition, not just peak –rely on data about typical use • Use Network to gather info about savings opportunities • Use Network to enable edge device savings
Project Tasks - as proposed (% budget) -
•
Information Technology Networks
– Power-efficient Ethernet Links (13%) – Reducing Network-induced Consumption (17%) – Energy Efficiency Specs for Network Equipment (13%) •
Consumer Electronics Networks
– Power-efficient Firewire Links (9%) – Consumer Electronics Inter-device Power Control (17%) – The Energy-efficient Set-top Box (24%) – Reducing Energy User of Hard-wired and Builder installed Equipment in New Homes (9%)
Project Partners (named in proposal)
•
U.S. EPA Energy Star
•
Cisco Systems
•
Broadcom
•
Force 10 Networks
•
EFI
•
University of South Florida
Market Connection
•
Need pathway for widespread adoption of PIER developed technologies; for EEDN primarily:
– Industry standards – Energy Star specifications •
Many invited talks, including:
– Internet Engineering Task Force tutorial – IEEE 802.3 (Ethernet) Committee tutorial – 2008 ACEEE Summer Study on EE in Bldgs.
– Cisco Green Research Symposium – HP Labs Sustainability Innovation Workshop – CA Emerging Technologies Summit
Project Timeline and Status
•
Summer 2005 - Original proposal
•
January 2007 - Signed contract
•
March 2010 - Scheduled end date (plan to extend)
•
Work is about 2/3 complete
•
Seek input on mid-course corrections for remaining tasks
•
Considering follow-on projects to build on accomplishments of EEDN
IT-focused EEDN projects
•
Energy Efficient Ethernet (EEE)
– Reducing power consumption of network links •
Network Connectivity “Proxying”
– Reducing induced consumption of network
ed
devices •
Efficiency Specifications for Network Equipment (Specs)
– Providing market pull for more efficient network products
Agenda
10:30 11:15 11:35 12:15 12:45 1:00 1:15 1:45 2:00 2:10 2:20 3:00 3:30 Welcome, Introductions, Project Overview Energy Efficient Ethernet Network Connectivity Proxying Energy Efficiency Specs for Network Equipment Break / Pick up lunch Consumer Electronic Data/Network Links Consumer Electronic Inter-device Power Control Set-Top Boxes Builder-Installed Miscellaneous Energy Star Perspective General Discussion Next Steps (discuss Building Networks, if time) Adjourn
EEE: Observations (1)
• Most links are mostly idle most of the time • Actual traffic is bursty • Most of time, full link capacity not needed • Notebooks already dropped link rate in sleep 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Time (s) • Upper: file server link (Bennett, 2006) • Lower: Snapshot of a typical 100 Mb/s Ethernet link
(Singh)
EEE: Observations (2)
•
Data networks are lightly utilized, and will stay that way
, A. M. Odlyzko,
Review of Network Economics
, 2003 Network AT&T switched voice Internet backbones Private line networks LANs Utilization 33% 15% 3~5% 1% Low utilization is norm in life — e.g. cars • Average U.S. car ~12,000 miles/year = 1.5 miles/hour • If capacity is 75 mph, this is
2%
utilization
EEE: Observations (3)
100000 10000 1000 Routers
Throughput capacity is a function of links:
100 10 1 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 10000000
Measured power of various computer NICs (averaged)
Source: Christensen, 2005
Maximum throughput (Mbit/s)
Source: METI, 2006
Energy cost is a function of capacity, not throughput
EEE: Savings Opportunity (1)
•
1 Gbps (and lower) copper Ethernet links in the U.S. number in the 100s of millions - # increasing each year
– 2 NICs for each link – Each 1 Gbps NIC requires about 1 W •
Servers and many network links will migrate to 10 Gbps copper
– Each 10 Gbps NIC requires 5 W, maybe more •
With Audio/Video Bridging, Ethernet aims to penetrate the A/V market
(# of possible links very large) •
New devices getting Ethernet
(e.g. TVs)
EEE: Scope and Plan
•
Review power consumption of several Ethernet technologies, technical approaches to changing speeds, and energy savings of these approaches
•
Present these to IEEE, and if they take up the topic, work with them to create a standard
However….
•
Even before we started, things changed:
•
November, 2006 - IEEE 802.3 created the
Energy Efficient Ethernet Study Group
•
We adapted our role as project advanced
EEE: Overall Timeline
• Sometime, 2004: Bruce and Ken Christensen come up with ALR idea • July, 2005: Bruce and Ken propose ALR to IEEE 802 • November, 2006: 802.3 approves Call For Interest, renaming effort “Energy Efficient Ethernet” • January, 2007: First EEE Study Group Meeting • July, 2007: 802.3 approves move to Task Force status – Gets name IEEE 802.3az
• July, 2009: 802.3 approves first working draft • August, 2009: First EEE NIC announced (Infineon) • September, 2010: Anticipated FINAL approval
EEE: IEEE Timeline
Source: Mike Bennett, 802.3az TF Chair
EEE: Savings Opportunity (2)
• • August 2009, Infineon announces first Gigabit EEE PHY Power drops 90% when little data traffic
EEE: Technical Approach
• Original proposal: Switch speeds quickly: << 2 seconds • This became: “
Rapid PHY Selection
” • Later, proposal for “
Low Power Idle
” ( switching in LPI): promised
milliseconds
• Easier implementation • Greater power savings • Quicker transitions (switching in
microseconds
) • After
much
discussion, EEE SG adopted LPI • Also added use of LLDP (
Link Layer Discovery Protocol
) • Enables optimal timing of transitions to maximize potential savings of hardware beyond PHY
Active Low-Power Active
Td Ts Quiet Tq Tr Quiet Quiet Tw
EEE: LBNL Roles
•
Chair of IEEE 802.3az Task Force
(and Energy Efficient Ethernet Study Group):
Mike Bennett, LBNL Network Group
•
Helping to guide process through key transitions
•
Providing savings estimates
•
Providing guidance on policy interest in EEE
•
Educating energy community about EEE potential
•
Posting materials to EEE web site
EEE: Next Steps
EEDN Project
• Prepare deliverables
Beyond EEDN
• Continue existing roles • Monitor introduction of EEE components • Provide policy guidance (e.g. role of LLDP) • Help Energy Star incorporate as requirement
EEE: Summary
•
Ethernet link utilization very low
•
Energy can be made to track utilization
– Savings in PHY 90% •
Standards process on track to realize this
•
Products beginning to become available
•
Policy in U.S. ready to react
•
EEE could penetrate 100% of market
Agenda
10:30 11:15 11:35 12:15 12:45 1:00 1:15 1:45 2:00 2:10 2:20 3:00 3:30 Welcome, Introductions, Project Overview Energy Efficient Ethernet Network Connectivity Proxying Energy Efficiency Specs for Network Equipment Break / Pick up lunch Consumer Electronic Data/Network Links Consumer Electronic Inter-device Power Control Set-Top Boxes Builder-Installed Miscellaneous Energy Star Perspective General Discussion Next Steps (discuss Building Networks, if time) Adjourn
Proxying: Observations (1)
This is not a new topic: LBNL Report: 1997 USF paper: 1998 Wake-on-LAN introduced: 1994
Proxying: Observations (2)
Core Fact: Most PC energy use occurs when no one present All time for year sorted by power level Most of time when idle, could be asleep PC savings potential is
most
of current consumption Similar patterns apply to set-top boxes, printer, game consoles, …
Proxying: Observations (3)
•
Network connectivity a key reason for systems to be on continuously
– Enterprise: Backups, IT admin access, remote access – Home: Media sharing, communications, remote access •
Role of network connectivity in applications increasing
•
Game consoles and set-top boxes getting PC-like functionality
Proxying: Scope and Plan
• • • •
Review
–PC usages for network issues –Limitations of Wake-on-LAN (WOL) –Other relevant standards (e.g. DMTF, UPnP) –Savings potentials
Develop proxy specification
(in part from traces)
Collect comments and refine “Sell” idea to industry, standards orgs., utilities, Energy Star, CEE, etc.
(possibly including prototype)
Proxying: Savings
• • •
Desktop PC use nearly 70 TWh/year
(U.S. only)
Idle time when no one present easily half of this Goals
– – –
Enable large majority of PC users to use sleep without breaking their own or IT admin applications
• At least 80%. > 90% better. > 95% or > 98% even better.
Enable both current and emerging common applications Enable standard to be used directly in (or easily adapted for) printers, set-top boxes, game consoles, etc.
• Savings from these also significant
Proxying: Operation
Proxy operation 1 PC awake; becomes idle
Proxy
2 PC transfers network presence to proxy on going to sleep 3 4 Proxy responds to routine network traffic for sleeping PC
PC
Proxy wakes up PC as needed 2
Proxy can be internal (NIC), immediately adjacent switch , or “third-party” device elsewhere on network
Proxy does: ARP, DHCP, TCP, ICMP, SNMP, SIP, ….
4 1 3
LAN or Internet
Proxying: Process
Standard
• Ecma TC32-TG21
Trace Analysis
• Intel Research Berkeley •
Use Cases
In development
Prototypes
• Microsoft Research “Somniloquy” • ???
•
TG21 participants
Microsoft, Apple, Intel, AMD, Sony, Realtek, Oce, Hitachi, Lexmark, Terra Novum, LBNL
Proxying: Functionality
• • • • • • • •
Components of the standard
Basic Architecture Basic Frameworks (IPv4, IPv6, 802.3, 802.11) SNMP Teredo Remote wake UPnP mDNS/Bonjour Keepalives
Proxying: Timeline
(partial)
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
1998: Ken Christensen publishes Proxy Server paper
2001/2003: LBNL surveys find most desktop PCs on 24/7 in comm. bldgs.
2003: Bruce and Ken begin discussions September, 2004: Energy Star announces at IDF intention to address the “Network Problem” July, 2005: Bruce and Ken present proxying to IEEE 802
January, 2007: EEDN project officially commences
September, 2007: Ethernet Alliance publishes White Paper December, 2007: Bruce presents proxying to IETF January, 2008: Intel commits to helping May, 2008: Initial discussions with Ecma International
September, 2008: Ecma creates TC32-TG21 on proxying
October, 2008: First TG21 phone meeting January, 2009: First TG21 Face-to-Face meeting June, 2009: Apple announces external proxying for mDNS/Bonjour
July, 2009: Energy Star computer spec V5.0 includes proxying
September, 2009: Fifth TG21 Face-to-Face meeting November, 2009: Anticipated last F2F
November/09-March/10: Standard published
Shortly thereafter: Energy Star recognize Ecma standard
Proxying: LBNL’s role
• • • • • • • • • •
Pull idea from academic obscurity
(work of Ken Christensen)
Create interest in idea Work to put into Energy Star specification Work with Intel Research on trace analysis Identify best standards organization
(Ecma International)
Secure creation of Ecma TC32-TG21 “Encourage” industry participation in TG21 Define overall architecture of standard and several components Secretary for TG21 Subcontract to Terra Novum
(Tom Bolioli) – TG21 contributor, convenor, Energy Star advisor
Proxying: Next Steps
• •
EEDN project
Help finish standard Create deliverables • • • • • • •
Beyond EEDN
–
All working with industry and others
Test internal proxying at LBNL and elsewhere Test external proxying at LBNL and elsewhere Refine Ecma standard based on testing Widely deploying initial proxy implemenations Create standard for communication with external proxy Create standard for monitoring proxy success Help extend proxying to printers, game consoles, and set top boxes (and TVs and phones and …)
Proxying: Summary
• • • • • • Most PC energy use occurs when no one present Network connectivity a key barrier to using sleep Technology can enable network connectivity in sleep Ecma standard will define much of this Energy Star ready to respond Additional steps needed to fully launch proxying
Agenda
10:30 11:15 11:35
12:15
12:45 1:00 1:15 1:45 2:00 2:10 2:20 3:00 3:30 Welcome, Introductions, Project Overview Energy Efficient Ethernet Network Connectivity Proxying
Energy Efficiency Specs for Network Equipment
Break / Pick up lunch Consumer Electronic Data/Network Links Consumer Electronic Inter-device Power Control Set-Top Boxes Builder-Installed Miscellaneous Energy Star Perspective General Discussion Next Steps (discuss Building Networks, if time) Adjourn
Specs: Observations on Energy and Network Equipment
•
Equipment energy use changes little with load
•
Utilization is very low
376 W •
Exaggerated estimates of network energy use
367 W
Specs: Savings Opportunity
•
Market differentiation exists in switch energy use
•
Dialog with industry to better estimate savings
•
Power use is a new design parameter
–Previous design paradigm: reliability –Savings estimates vary from 25% to 75% –Achievable savings unknown
Specs: Scope of Study
•
Estimate the annual energy use of IP networks
•
Estimate how energy use may change
•
Focus specifications efforts on the products with the most potential impact
•
Develop procedures and specifications
–In collaboration with industry –In collaboration with Energy Star Residential Network Equipment Enterprise Switches Gig Switches 10/100 Switches 2007 2008 2009 Annual Energy Use (2008) 2010 2011 2012
Specs: Scope of Study
•
Focus on network equipment that primarily carries IP traffic
–
LAN switches, routers
–
Home modems, routers
–
WiFi access points
–
Service provider equipment
•
Lots of things not covered
–
POTS switching equipment
–
IP phones
–
Servers & desktop computer
–
Other end use and non-IP switching equipment
Product Network Int.
Network Equipment
Specs: Plan
Original
All equipment together
Revised
Focus on small equipment first Large equipment spread over time Identify market interest, opportunities and barriers Evaluate equipment power consumption and estimate typical power Develop test procedures & specifications Work with Energy Star on a program for network equipment
Specs: Small & Large Equipment
•
Small equipment
–Unmanaged switches < 9 ports –WiFi Access Points and Routers –Integrated home access devices –Optical network terminals •
Large equipment
–Managed & modular switches –Dedicated security appliances •
In support of Energy Star Specifications Process
–Small in late 2009 –Large in 2010
Specs: Rough Energy Use Estimates
•
Energy in USA: 19 TWh/yr (0.7% of US bldg total, 2008)
•
Grew 16% between 2007 and 2008
•
Forecast growth rate ~10% annually
Sources: Infonetics Market Data, 2003-2012 FCC Broadband Market Data 2007-08 Tolly Group Power Measurements LBNL Power Measurements AT&T Market Estimates Industry Data Sheets LBNL Market Research
Specs: Rough Energy Use Estimates
Customer Premises Equip (Small Equipment): 5.9 TWh 19 TWh Total Switching Products: 8.0 TWh
Specs: Products of Interest
•
Small Network Equipment (SNE)
–WiFi routers and access points –Cable modems –DSL integrated access devices –Cable integrated access devices –Unmanaged wired switches •
Large Network Equipment (LNE)
–Managed switches –Modular core switches • Line card vs box rating
Specs: SNE Market Interest and Barriers
•
SNE dominated by ISP provided hardware
•
Manufacturers of ISP provided SNE are not very interested
–“Only if the service providers tell us to do it.” –Cost and reliability reign supreme –Integrated access devices are a moving target •
Other SNE manufacturers are interested
–At least for marketing purposes –Some actual energy use reductions
Specs: LNE Market Interest and Barriers
•
The “large equipment” market is interested
–“But the real energy is in the data center (or PCs)” –Industry is addressing energy use • ATIS network equipment test procedures, metrics • Marketing flaunts green credentials • Companies considering power in current redesigns
Specs: What to Test
•
Utilization is very low (throughput / capacity)
–Need to test at realistic work loads Uplink utilization (10 days) % Capacity 1% 0.5% Modular switch with 144 GigE, 2x10GigE
Specs: What to Test
•
Most ports are inactive & unassigned
–Incentivize power reduction when ports unassigned N = 183 switches 0.25
0.5
Port Utilization 0.75
(ports assigned / total powers
Specs: What to Test
•
Throughput has small impact on power (<10% typical)
–Incentivize stronger throughput vs power relationship Startup Device under test: 6U modular switch with 96 GigE ports, 2x10 GigE (fiber), no PoE load, 320 Gbps fabric Tested at LBNL, August 2009
Specs: Spec Development Progress
•
Plan to use industry standard ATIS test procedures
–Some modifications may be required •
Attended ATIS meeting on network equipment test procedure development
–Procedures under development for most areas of interest –Working on a more formal relationship where we can contribute to the process directly •
Internal procedures for testing network equipment
–Provide a basis for our comments to ATIS
Specs: Next Steps
•
Revise energy use estimates
–Industry vetting –Values changing with time •
Complete market assessment
•
Specification development
–Relationship with ATIS –Work with Energy Star on modifications
Beyond EEDN:
•
Continue Energy Star process
•
Revisit procedures in light of data & technology
Specs: Summary
•
Current network energy consumption ~ 19TWh annually
•
Major consumers
–
Small network equipment
–
Enterprise switches
•
Test procedure development is underway
•
In a good position to assist Energy Star process