Skip to main content

Characterization and Benchmarking Methodology for Power in Networking Devices
draft-cprjgf-bmwg-powerbench-01

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
Authors Carlos Pignataro , Romain Jacob , Giuseppe Fioccola , Qin Wu
Last updated 2024-03-04 (Latest revision 2024-02-13)
RFC stream (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-cprjgf-bmwg-powerbench-01
Benchmarking Methodology Working Group                      C. Pignataro
Internet-Draft                                       NC State University
Intended status: Standards Track                                R. Jacob
Expires: 5 September 2024                                     ETH Zürich
                                                             G. Fioccola
                                                                   Q. Wu
                                                                  Huawei
                                                            4 March 2024

 Characterization and Benchmarking Methodology for Power in Networking
                                Devices
                    draft-cprjgf-bmwg-powerbench-01

Abstract

   This document defines a standard mechanism to measure, report, and
   compare power usage of different networking devices and under
   different network configurations and conditions.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 September 2024.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.  Code Components
   extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Aim and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Total Weighted Capacity of the interfaces . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Total Weighted Power  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.3.  Energy Efficiency Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Energy Consumption Benchmarking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Test Methodology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  Test Setup  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Traffic and Device Characterization . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Reporting Format  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Benchmarking Tests  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.1.  Throughput  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.2.  Base Power  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     6.3.  Energy Consumption with Traffic Load  . . . . . . . . . .   9
     6.4.  Energy Efficiency Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

   Energy efficiency is becoming increasingly important in the operation
   of network infrastructure.  Network devices are typically always on,
   but in some cases, they run at very low average utilization rates.
   Both network utilization and energy consumption of these devices can
   be improved, and that starts with a normalized characterization
   [RFC7460].  The benchmarking methodology defined here will help
   operators to get a more accurate idea of the power drawn by their
   network and will also help vendors to test the energy efficiency of
   their devices [RFC6988].

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

   There is no standard mechanism to benchmark the power utilization of
   networking devices like routers or switches.
   [I-D.manral-bmwg-power-usage] started to analyze the issue.  This
   document defines the mechanism to correctly characterize and
   benchmark the energy consumption of networking devices to better
   estimate and compare their power usage.

1.1.  Aim and Scope

   Benchmarking can be understood to serve two related but different
   objectives:

      Assessing ''which system performs best'' over a set of well-
      defined scenarios.

      Measuring the contribution of sub-systems to the overall system's
      performance (also known as ''micro-benchmark'').

   The benchmarking methodology outlined in this draft focuses on the
   first objective.  Specifically, it aims to compare the energy
   efficiency for individual devices (routers and switches belonging to
   similar device classes).  The benchmark aims to showcase the
   effectiveness of various energy optimization techniques for a given
   device and load type, with the objective of fostering improvements in
   the energy efficiency of future generations of devices.

1.2.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

2.  Terminology

2.1.  Total Weighted Capacity of the interfaces

   The total weighted capacity of the interfaces (T) is the weighted sum
   of all interface throughputs.

   Definition:

      T = B1*T1 +...+ Bi*Ti +...+ Bm*Tm

   Discussion:

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

      Ti is the total capacity of the interfaces for a fixed
      configuration model and traffic load (the sum of the interface
      bandwidths)

      Bi is the weighted multiplier for different traffic levels (note
      that B1+...+Bj+...+Bm = 1, weight multipliers may be specified for
      router, switch differently, 3 typical weighted multipliers are
      0.1,0.8,0.1)

      m is the number of traffic load levels (if it is considered 100%,
      30%, 0%; m = 3) Note that traffic load levels may be specified
      differently for router and switch, e.g., traffic level 100%,10%,0%
      for access router, traffic level 100%,30%,0% for core router and
      data center switch.

   Measurement units:

      Gbps.

   Issues

      The traffic loads and the weighted multipliers need to be clearly
      established a priori.

      It is unclear if the definition of the Ti's is/should be linked to
      the traffic load levels.  For a given port configuration (which
      may result in 50% of the total capacity a device can provide), one
      may be interested in traffic load of e.g., 5% or 10% or the total
      capacity (not only 50%).

   See Also:

      [ETSI-ES-203-136],[ITUT-L.1310] ,[ATIS-0600015.03.2013].

2.2.  Total Weighted Power

   The total weighted power (P) is the weighted sum of all power
   calculated for different traffic loads.

   Definition:

      P = B1*P1 +...+ Bi*Pi +...+ Bm*Pm

   Discussion:

      Pi is the Power of the equipment in each traffic load level (e.g.
      100%, 30%, 0%)

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

      Bi is the weighted multiplier for different traffic levels (note
      that B1+...+Bj+...+Bm = 1)

      m is the number of traffic load levels (if it is considered 100%,
      30%, 0%; m = 3)

   Measurement units:

      Watt.

   Issues:

      The traffic loads and the weighted multipliers need to be clearly
      established a priori.

      Importantly, the traffic must be forwarded of the correct port!
      It would be easy to cut power down by dropping all traffic, and we
      of course do not want that.  A tolerance on packet loss and/or
      forwarding error must be specified somehow.  That tolerance could
      be zero for some benchmark problems (e.g., Non packet loss (NDR)
      estimation), and non-zero for others.  Tolerating some errors may
      be interesting to navigate the design space of energy saving
      techniques, such as approximate computing/routing.  According to
      measurement procedure in section 6.5 of [ATIS-0600015.03.2013],
      the Equipment Unit Test (EUT) should be able to return to full NDR
      load.  Failure to do so disqualifies the test results.

   See Also:

      [ETSI-ES-203-136],[ITUT-L.1310] ,[ATIS-0600015.03.2013].

2.3.  Energy Efficiency Ratio

   Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER) is defined as the throughput forwarded
   by 1 watt and it is introduced in [ETSI-ES-203-136].  A higher EER
   corresponds to a better the energy efficiency.

   Definition:

      EER = T/P

   Discussion:

      T is the total weighted sum of all interface throughputs

      P is the weighted power for different traffic loads

   Measurement units:

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

      Gbps/Watt.

   Issues:

      The traffic loads and the weighted multipliers need to be clearly
      established a priori.

   See Also:

      [ETSI-ES-203-136],[ITUT-L.1310] ,[ATIS-0600015.03.2013].

3.  Energy Consumption Benchmarking

   The maximum power drawn by a device does not accurately reflect the
   power under a normal workload.  Indeed, the energy consumption of a
   networking device depends on its configuration, connected
   transceivers, and traffic load.  Relying merely on the maximum rated
   power can overestimate the total energy of the networking devices.

   A network device consists of many components, each of which draws
   power (for example, it is possible to mention the power consumption
   of the CPU, data forwarding ASIC, memory, fan, etc.).  Therefore, it
   is important to formulate a consistent benchmarking method for
   network devices and consider the workload variation and test
   conditions.

   Enforcing controlled conditions on test conditions (e.g.,
   Temperature) is important for test procedure to make sure test
   conditions repeatable [RFC6985].  The measurement condition reported
   in [ATIS-0600015.2009] and [ITUT-L.1310] should be applied, e.g., the
   power measurements shall be performed in a laboratory environment
   under specific range of temperature, humidity and atmosphere
   pressure.

4.  Test Methodology

4.1.  Test Setup

   The test setup in general is compliant with [RFC2544].  The Device
   Under Test (DUT) is connected to a Tester and a Power Meter.  The
   Power Meter allows to measure the energy consumption of the device
   and can be used to measure power under various configurations and
   conditions.  Tests SHOULD be done with bidirectional traffic that
   better reflects the real environment.  The Tester is also a traffic
   generator that enables changing traffic conditions.  It is OPTIONAL
   to choose a non-equal proportion for upstream and downstream traffic.

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

                               +----------+
                       +-------|  Tester  |<-------+
                       | +-----|          |<-----+ |
                       | |     +----------+      | |
                       | |                       | |
                       | |      +--------+       | |
                       | +----->|        |-------+ |
                       +------->|  DUT   |---------+
                                |        |
                                +--------+
                                    |
                                    |
                               +----------+
                               |  Power   |
                               |  Meter   |
                               +----------+

                            Figure 1: Test Setup

   It is worth mentioning that the DUT also dissipates significant heat.
   That means that part of the power is used for actual work while the
   rest is dissipated as heat.  This heating can lead to more power
   drawn by fans/ compressor for cooling the devices.  The benchmarking
   methodology does not measure the power drawn by external cooling
   infrastructure.  The Power Meter only measures the internal energy
   consumption of the device.

4.2.  Traffic and Device Characterization

   The traffic load supported by a device affects its energy
   consumption.  Therefore, the benchmark MUST include different traffic
   loads.

   There are different interface types on a network device and the power
   usage also depends on the kind of connector/transceiver used.  The
   interface type used needs to be specified as well.

   In addition, it is necessary to indicate the number of ports used per
   linecard as well as the aggregate bandwidth that each linecard can
   accommodate.

   The traffic load must specify traffic type, packet size mixtures,
   percentage of overall traffic for each traffic type (See Annex D of
   [ATIS-0600015.2009] for more details), as all may affect the energy
   consumption of network devices.

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

5.  Reporting Format

   Network Device Hardware and Software versions:
      For the benchmarking tests, it must be specified.

   Number and type of line cards:
      For each test the total number of line cards and their types can
      be varied and must be specified.

   Number of enabled ports:
      For each test the number of enabled and disabled ports must be
      specified.

   Number of active ports:
      For each test the number of active and inactive ports must be
      specified.

   Port settings and interface types:
      For each test the port configuration and settings need to be
      specified.

   Port Utilization:
      For each test the port utilization of each port must be specified.
      The actual traffic load can use the information defined in
      [RFC2544].

   Traffic attributes:
      For each test they must be specified (e.g., packet size, packet
      rate, etc.)

   CPU load:
      For each test it must be specified.

   Power measurement:
      For each test it must be specified.  All power measurements are
      done in Watts.

6.  Benchmarking Tests

6.1.  Throughput

   Objective:

      To determine the DUT throughput according to [RFC2544].

   Procedure:

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 8]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

      The test is done using a multi-port setup as specified in
      Section 16 and Section 26.1 of [RFC2544].

   Reporting format:

      The results of the throughput SHOULD be reported according to
      Section 5.

6.2.  Base Power

   Objective:

      To determine the base power drawn by the network device, which
      typically consists of processors, fans, memory, etc.

   Procedure:

      The measurement is done without activating the traffic generator.
      In this case, the traffic load level percentage is 0.

   Reporting format:

      The results of the power measurement SHOULD be reported according
      to Section 5.

   Note:

      This measurement is useful since it permits to calculate the
      additional energy consumption that will result when the traffic
      load changes.

6.3.  Energy Consumption with Traffic Load

   Objective:

      To determine the power drawn by a device.  The dynamic power,
      which is added to the base power, should be proportional to its
      traffic load.

   Procedure:

      A specific number of packets at a specific rate is sent to
      specific ports/linecards of the DUT.  All DUT ports must operate
      under a specific traffic load, which is a percentage of the
      maximum throughput.

   Reporting format:

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 9]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

      The results of the power measurement SHOULD be reported according
      to Section 5.

6.4.  Energy Efficiency Ratio

   Objective:

      To determine the energy efficiency of the DUT.

   Procedure:

      Collect the data for all the traffic loads and apply the formula
      of Section 2.  For example, with all DUT ports operating stably
      under a percentage of the maximum throughput (e.g. 100%, 30%, 0%),
      record the average input power and calculate the total weighted
      power P and then the EER .

   Reporting format:

      The results of the energy efficiency ratio SHOULD be reported
      according to Section 5.

7.  Security Considerations

   The benchmarking characterization described in this document is
   constrained to a controlled environment (as a laboratory) and
   includes controlled stimuli.  The network under benchmarking MUST NOT
   be connected to production networks.

   Beyond these, there are no specific security considerations within
   the scope of this document.

8.  Acknowledgements

   We wish to thank the authors of [I-D.manral-bmwg-power-usage] for
   their analysis and start on this topic.

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 10]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

   [RFC2544]  Bradner, S. and J. McQuaid, "Benchmarking Methodology for
              Network Interconnect Devices", RFC 2544,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2544, March 1999,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2544>.

   [RFC6988]  Quittek, J., Ed., Chandramouli, M., Winter, R., Dietz, T.,
              and B. Claise, "Requirements for Energy Management",
              RFC 6988, DOI 10.17487/RFC6988, September 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6988>.

   [RFC7460]  Chandramouli, M., Claise, B., Schoening, B., Quittek, J.,
              and T. Dietz, "Monitoring and Control MIB for Power and
              Energy", RFC 7460, DOI 10.17487/RFC7460, March 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7460>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [ATIS-0600015.03.2013]
              ATIS, "ATIS-0600015.03.2013: Energy Efficiency for
              Telecommunication Equipment: Methodology for Measurement
              and Reporting for Router and Ethernet Switch Products",
              2013.

   [ETSI-ES-203-136]
              ETSI, "ETSI ES 203 136: Environmental Engineering (EE);
              Measurement methods for energy efficiency of router and
              switch equipment", 2017, <https://www.etsi.org/deliver/
              etsi_es/203100_203199/203136/01.02.00_50/
              es_203136v010200m.pdf>.

   [I-D.manral-bmwg-power-usage]
              Manral, V., Sharma, P., Banerjee, S., and Y. Ping,
              "Benchmarking Power usage of networking devices", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-manral-bmwg-power-usage-
              04, 12 March 2013, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
              draft-manral-bmwg-power-usage-04>.

   [ITUT-L.1310]
              ITU-T, "L.1310 : Energy efficiency metrics and measurement
              methods for telecommunication equipment", 2020,
              <https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-L.1310/en>.

Authors' Addresses

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 11]
Internet-Draft                 PowerBench                     March 2024

   Carlos Pignataro
   North Carolina State University
   United States of America
   Email: cpignata@gmail.com, cmpignat@ncsu.edu

   Romain Jacob
   ETH Zürich
   Switzerland
   Email: jacobr@ethz.ch

   Giuseppe Fioccola
   Huawei
   Italy
   Email: giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com

   Qin Wu
   Huawei
   China
   Email: bill.wu@huawei.com

Pignataro, et al.       Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 12]