1 / 60

Energy Efficient Digital Networks Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory September 22, 2009

Energy Efficient Digital Networks Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory September 22, 2009 efficientnetworks.LBL.gov. EEDN PAC Meeting. Agenda. Electronics as an End Use. Electronics are an end use of electricity

sarah
Download Presentation

Energy Efficient Digital Networks Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory September 22, 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Energy Efficient Digital Networks Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory September 22, 2009 efficientnetworks.LBL.gov EEDN PAC Meeting

  2. Agenda

  3. 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

  4. Network Structure Edge devices: PCs, servers - Displays, storage, phones, … • Network equipment: switches, and routers

  5. Networks and Energy Network equipment …. Routers, switches, modems, wireless APs, … … vs networked equipment PCs, printers, set-top boxes, … 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 Link

  6. Network electricity use in context All Electricity: ~3,700 TWh Buildings Electricity: ~2,700 TWh Residential Commercial NOT to scale Electronics: ~290 TWh Networked: ~150 TWh ? Network Eqt.: ~ 20 TWh One central baseload power plant (about 7 TWh/year) Telecom • U.S. only • Annual figures circa 2008 • All approximate

  7. Network electricity use in context, cont. Buildings Electricity: ~2,700 TWh This time to scale Residential Commercial Electronics Networked ~150 TWh ? Net. Eqt. ~ 20 TWh Tel. ~290 TWh One central baseload power plant (about 7 TWh/year) • U.S. only • Annual figures circa 2008 • All approximate

  8. 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?

  9. Efficiency Approaches Product Focus Network Product Focus Interface Focus Protocol / Application Focus Examples: Proxying Energy Star CE Need all approaches

  10. 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

  11. 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%)

  12. Project Partners(named in proposal) • U.S. EPA Energy Star • Cisco Systems • Broadcom • Force 10 Networks • EFI • University of South Florida

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. IT-focused EEDN projects Energy Efficient Ethernet (EEE) Reducing power consumption of network links Network Connectivity “Proxying” Reducing induced consumption of networked devices Efficiency Specifications for Network Equipment (Specs) Providing market pull for more efficient network products

  16. Agenda

  17. 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 • Upper: file server link (Bennett, 2006) • Lower: Snapshot of a typical 100 Mb/s Ethernet link (Singh)

  18. EEE: Observations (2) Data networks are lightly utilized, and will stay that way, A. M. Odlyzko, Review of Network Economics, 2003 Network Utilization AT&T switched voice 33% Internet backbones 15% Private line networks 3~5% LANs 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

  19. EEE: Observations (3) Source: METI, 2006 Routers 100000 10000 Power consumption (W) 1000 100 10 1 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 10000000 Maximum throughput (Mbit/s) • Throughput capacity is a function of links: • Measured power of various • computer NICs (averaged) • Source: Christensen, 2005 Energy cost is a function of capacity, not throughput

  20. 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)

  21. 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

  22. 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

  23. EEE: IEEE Timeline Source: Mike Bennett, 802.3az TF Chair

  24. EEE: Savings Opportunity (2) August 2009, Infineon announces first Gigabit EEE PHY Power drops 90% when littledata traffic

  25. EEE: Technical Approach Active Low-Power Active Active Refresh Refresh Wake Sleep Active Quiet Quiet Quiet Td Ts Tq Tr Tw • Original proposal: Switch speeds quickly: << 2 seconds • This became: “Rapid PHY Selection” - switching inmilliseconds • Later, proposal for “Low Power Idle” (LPI): promised • Easier implementation • Greater power savings • Quicker transitions (switching inmicroseconds) • 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

  26. EEE: LBNL Roles Chair of IEEE 802.3az Task Force (and EnergyEfficient 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

  27. 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

  28. 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

  29. Agenda

  30. Proxying: Observations (1) This is not a new topic: • LBNL Report: 1997 • USF paper: 1998 • Wake-on-LAN • introduced: 1994

  31. 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, …

  32. 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

  33. 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)

  34. 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: Savings

  35. Proxying: Operation Proxy operation Proxy 1 3 PC awake; becomes idle PC transfers network presence to proxy on going to sleep Proxy responds to routine network traffic for sleeping PC Proxy wakes up PC as needed 2 2 4 LAN or Internet 1 3 PC 4 Proxy can be internal (NIC), immediately adjacentswitch, or “third-party” device elsewhere on network Proxy does: ARP, DHCP, TCP, ICMP, SNMP, SIP, ….

  36. 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

  37. Proxying: Functionality Components of the standard Basic Architecture Basic Frameworks (IPv4, IPv6, 802.3, 802.11) SNMP Teredo Remote wake UPnP mDNS/Bonjour Keepalives

  38. 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

  39. 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

  40. 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 …)

  41. 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

  42. Agenda

  43. Equipment energy use changes little with load Utilization is very low Exaggerated estimates of network energy use Specs: Observations on Energy and Network Equipment 376 W 367 W

  44. 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

  45. 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 Specs: Scope of Study Residential Network Equipment Gig Switches Enterprise Switches 10/100 Switches Annual Energy Use (2008)

  46. 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

  47. Specs: Plan

  48. 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

  49. 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

More Related