Subject: [eman] #7: Clarify power interfaces

From: "eman issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 03:14:43 -0000

#7: Clarify power interfaces

 Clarify power interfaces so as not to sound like those used
 between components [BC]

 Open : bclaise : addition of text or perhaps review all doc.

-- 
-------------------------------------+------------------------
 Reporter:  n.brownlee@…             |      Owner:  bclaise
     Type:  defect                   |     Status:  new
 Priority:  major                    |  Milestone:  milestone1
Component:  applicability-statement  |    Version:  1.0
 Severity:  -                        |   Keywords:
-------------------------------------+------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/7>
eman <http://tools.ietf.org/eman/>

---

From: "eman issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 03:44:36 -0000

Changes (by n.brownlee@…):

 * component:  applicability-statement => framework

-- 
--------------------------+-------------------------
 Reporter:  n.brownlee@…  |       Owner:  bclaise
     Type:  defect        |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major         |   Milestone:  milestone1
Component:  framework     |     Version:  1.0
 Severity:  -             |  Resolution:
 Keywords:                |
--------------------------+-------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/7#comment:1>
eman <http://tools.ietf.org/eman/>

---

From: "eman issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 19:44:35 -0000

Comment (by quittek@…):

 The discussion on power interfaces includes the questions
 whether or not to have them between components and the
 containing devices.  Below there is a list of different
 models for components and devices under discussion.  We
 should agree on one of these models.

 1. Ignore the concept of a component
 If you want to model components within a device, then model
 each component as a separate device outside of the containing
 device.
 In this case components are on the same level as any device.
 They can have power interfaces.  Devices can have power interfaces
 for supplying or receving power from their components.
 The relationship of containment is not modeled.
 This model is useful if you expect that componens are of low
 relevance for energy management and typically not modeled at all.

 2. Model components as full devices
 This is almost the same as 1.  The only difference is that
 containment of components is modeled.
 This model is useful if compoments are of high importance for
 energy management, expected to be used frequenetly, and  thus
 fully modeled.
 The disadvantage here is a potentially big overhead for component
 modeling.

 3. Model components as full devices but without power interfaces
 Here we have all reporting features of a device also available
 for a component (nameplate, apparent power, power quality, etc.)
 but we do not model power interfaces between components and the
 containing devices.

 4. Small components model
 Here only the essential features of components are modeled, such as
 their power, energy, power states, and optionally time series of
 power/energy values.  There are no power interfaces modeled.
 This model is useful if components are expeced to appear frequently,
 but it is OK to limit their models to properties relevant for
 energy management.

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/7#comment:2>
eman <http://tools.ietf.org/eman/>