Subject: [Roll] [roll] routing-metrics #79 (new): Link Energy metric: comment received during WG Last Call of draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics-09.txt

From: "roll issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 14:45:14 -0000

#79: Link Energy metric: comment received during WG Last Call of draft-ietf-
roll-routing-metrics-09.txt
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  jpv@…            |       Owner:  jpv@…        
     Type:  defect           |      Status:  new          
 Priority:  major            |   Milestone:               
Component:  routing-metrics  |     Version:               
 Severity:  In WG Last Call  |    Keywords:               
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
 The following captures the question raised during LC: need for link energy
 metric ?

 Original Email below (refer to the archives for the full discussion)

 Email sent september 18

 David,

 Thanks for this Last Call on the RoLL routing metrics draft.

 I reply now just to make sure I replied before the September 30th, 2010,
 the deadline Chair set and that I consider.

 I have proposed last year to have energy link metrics: how much energy
 in Joules is required on a particular link to send 1280bytes as an IPv6
 packet.

 I have proposed this link metric also as an extension to the ripless
 draft-mulligan-roll-ripless-01.

 In draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics energy _is_ used as a metric but as
 node energy only, not link energy.

 Link metrics _are_ considered in draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics but
 not as energy.

 Private discussion pointed me unilaterally I may be wrong but I think
 publicly I may be right.

 I will send more comments later.

 Alex

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://svn.tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/trac/ticket/79>
roll <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/>

---

From: JP Vasseur <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 20:08:10 +0200

Dear all,

The thread was started by Alex proposing to add link energy metric some time ago. The issue has been raised again during WG LC of draft-roll-routing-metrics-09.txt. Several WG members were not in favor of adding such a metric for several reasons:
* No clear use-case (Phil, Dominique, Jerry), 
* So much merit (Colyn) 
* May even lead to undesirable path optimization effect and much added complexity (JP). 

So the consensus is to not add link energy metric at this point. This may be investigated in further document.

Ticket will be closed with the text above.

Thanks.

JP.

---

From: "roll issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:11:26 -0000

#79: Link Energy metric: comment received during WG Last Call of draft-ietf-
roll-routing-metrics-09.txt
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  jpv@…            |        Owner:  jpv@…        
     Type:  defect           |       Status:  closed       
 Priority:  major            |    Milestone:               
Component:  routing-metrics  |      Version:               
 Severity:  In WG Last Call  |   Resolution:  fixed        
 Keywords:                   |  
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Changes (by jpv@…):

  * status:  new => closed
  * resolution:  => fixed

Comment:

 Dear all,

 The thread was started by Alex proposing to add link energy metric some
 time ago. The issue has been raised again during WG LC of draft-roll-
 routing-metrics-09.txt. Several WG members were not in favor of adding
 such a metric for several reasons:
 * No clear use-case (Phil, Dominique, Jerry),
 * So much merit (Colyn)
 * May even lead to undesirable path optimization effect and much added
 complexity (JP).

 So the consensus is to not add link energy metric at this point. This may
 be investigated in further document.

 Thanks.

 JP.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://svn.tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/trac/ticket/79#comment:1>
roll <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/>