On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 06:54, Jeremya jeremy@electrosilk.net wrote:
These figures pale into insignificance compared to the power required for standard SIP devices - typically 5-8 watts per device multiplied by the number of devices.
When you factor in Gigabit Ethernet the power ups significantly.
Optimisation at the server level is not significant on any scale. Optimisation on communications power: i.e. end-devices, DSL & switches is where the power savings are important.
Sure, the total power consumption of the whole system is dominated by the power consumption of end-point devices, there's no doubt about that and the paper says that.
Nevertheless, as an ITSP you are typically paying for the energy consumed by your servers and in that case knowing what you can expect and how many servers you need is useful. Modern data-center servers have significant base-line power consumption and a portion of that needs to be attributed to the SIP service running on those servers.
-Jan
Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
Jan Janak conducted a very interesting research project regarding energy efficiency of VoIP systems during 2010, a collaboration between iptel.org and Columbia University.
The team used the source code from sip-router.org GIT repository from January 2010, which corresponds to Kamailio (former OpenSER) and SER v3.0. The latest stable series v3.1 shares the same internal architecture with v3.0.
As part of the research work, Jan could also gather some figures about capacity and performances of v3.0 with a quite complex configuration file: etc/sip-router-oob.cfg (involving authentication and NAT traversal as well).
You can read the paper about energy efficiency at:
- Green VoIP Article: http://asipto.com/u/2j
The draft notes about capacity and performances of v3.0 are available at:
- Performances and Capacity for v3.0 Wiki page: http://asipto.com/u/2k
Some interesting results:
- one instance of SIP server with 500 000 online users (mixed users –
behind and not NAT routers) – consumed energy 210W
- one instance of SIP server with 1 000 000 online users (no NAT
involved) – consumed energy 190W
- on a 32-bit machine with 4GB of memory and with 2.5GB reserved for
SIP server, the server could support 43 000 simultaneous TLS connections – consumed energy 203W
- one SIP server instance with 80 000 permanent TCP connections, the
SIP server could still handle at least 1000 requests per second and a connection arrival rate of 1000 new connections per second, done for 20 000 new connections. CPU load generated by the SIP server was from 6% to 8%.
I added a new section to the draft notes to list the enhancements done for the latest stable release (v3.1.x) that contribute to performance improvements, like asynchronous TLS, fine tuning of memory for TLS connections and raw UDP sockets.
Cheers, Daniel
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Hello,
out of curiosity, since you used the sources from GIT - was memory debugging on? It is usually enabled in master branch and that could have some impact in memory usage and performances...
Thanks, Daniel
On 5/25/11 3:00 PM, Jan Janak wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 06:54, Jeremyajeremy@electrosilk.net wrote:
These figures pale into insignificance compared to the power required for standard SIP devices - typically 5-8 watts per device multiplied by the number of devices.
When you factor in Gigabit Ethernet the power ups significantly.
Optimisation at the server level is not significant on any scale. Optimisation on communications power: i.e. end-devices, DSL& switches is where the power savings are important.
Sure, the total power consumption of the whole system is dominated by the power consumption of end-point devices, there's no doubt about that and the paper says that.
Nevertheless, as an ITSP you are typically paying for the energy consumed by your servers and in that case knowing what you can expect and how many servers you need is useful. Modern data-center servers have significant base-line power consumption and a portion of that needs to be attributed to the SIP service running on those servers.
-Jan
Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
Jan Janak conducted a very interesting research project regarding energy efficiency of VoIP systems during 2010, a collaboration between iptel.org and Columbia University.
The team used the source code from sip-router.org GIT repository from January 2010, which corresponds to Kamailio (former OpenSER) and SER v3.0. The latest stable series v3.1 shares the same internal architecture with v3.0.
As part of the research work, Jan could also gather some figures about capacity and performances of v3.0 with a quite complex configuration file: etc/sip-router-oob.cfg (involving authentication and NAT traversal as well).
You can read the paper about energy efficiency at:
- Green VoIP Article: http://asipto.com/u/2j
The draft notes about capacity and performances of v3.0 are available at:
- Performances and Capacity for v3.0 Wiki page: http://asipto.com/u/2k
Some interesting results:
- one instance of SIP server with 500 000 online users (mixed users –
behind and not NAT routers) – consumed energy 210W
- one instance of SIP server with 1 000 000 online users (no NAT
involved) – consumed energy 190W
- on a 32-bit machine with 4GB of memory and with 2.5GB reserved for
SIP server, the server could support 43 000 simultaneous TLS connections – consumed energy 203W
- one SIP server instance with 80 000 permanent TCP connections, the
SIP server could still handle at least 1000 requests per second and a connection arrival rate of 1000 new connections per second, done for 20 000 new connections. CPU load generated by the SIP server was from 6% to 8%.
I added a new section to the draft notes to list the enhancements done for the latest stable release (v3.1.x) that contribute to performance improvements, like asynchronous TLS, fine tuning of memory for TLS connections and raw UDP sockets.
Cheers, Daniel
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
No, I turned it off.
-Jan
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 11:50, Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
out of curiosity, since you used the sources from GIT - was memory debugging on? It is usually enabled in master branch and that could have some impact in memory usage and performances...
Thanks, Daniel
On 5/25/11 3:00 PM, Jan Janak wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 06:54, Jeremyajeremy@electrosilk.net wrote:
These figures pale into insignificance compared to the power required for standard SIP devices - typically 5-8 watts per device multiplied by the number of devices.
When you factor in Gigabit Ethernet the power ups significantly.
Optimisation at the server level is not significant on any scale. Optimisation on communications power: i.e. end-devices, DSL& switches is where the power savings are important.
Sure, the total power consumption of the whole system is dominated by the power consumption of end-point devices, there's no doubt about that and the paper says that.
Nevertheless, as an ITSP you are typically paying for the energy consumed by your servers and in that case knowing what you can expect and how many servers you need is useful. Modern data-center servers have significant base-line power consumption and a portion of that needs to be attributed to the SIP service running on those servers.
-Jan
Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
Jan Janak conducted a very interesting research project regarding energy efficiency of VoIP systems during 2010, a collaboration between iptel.org and Columbia University.
The team used the source code from sip-router.org GIT repository from January 2010, which corresponds to Kamailio (former OpenSER) and SER v3.0. The latest stable series v3.1 shares the same internal architecture with v3.0.
As part of the research work, Jan could also gather some figures about capacity and performances of v3.0 with a quite complex configuration file: etc/sip-router-oob.cfg (involving authentication and NAT traversal as well).
You can read the paper about energy efficiency at:
- Green VoIP Article: http://asipto.com/u/2j
The draft notes about capacity and performances of v3.0 are available at:
- Performances and Capacity for v3.0 Wiki page: http://asipto.com/u/2k
Some interesting results:
- one instance of SIP server with 500 000 online users (mixed users –
behind and not NAT routers) – consumed energy 210W
- one instance of SIP server with 1 000 000 online users (no NAT
involved) – consumed energy 190W
- on a 32-bit machine with 4GB of memory and with 2.5GB reserved for
SIP server, the server could support 43 000 simultaneous TLS connections – consumed energy 203W
- one SIP server instance with 80 000 permanent TCP connections, the
SIP server could still handle at least 1000 requests per second and a connection arrival rate of 1000 new connections per second, done for 20 000 new connections. CPU load generated by the SIP server was from 6% to 8%.
I added a new section to the draft notes to list the enhancements done for the latest stable release (v3.1.x) that contribute to performance improvements, like asynchronous TLS, fine tuning of memory for TLS connections and raw UDP sockets.
Cheers, Daniel
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Jan-
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 06:54, Jeremya jeremy@electrosilk.net wrote:
These figures pale into insignificance compared to the power required for standard SIP devices - typically 5-8 watts per device multiplied by the number of devices.
When you factor in Gigabit Ethernet the power ups significantly.
Optimisation at the server level is not significant on any scale. Optimisation on communications power: i.e. end-devices, DSL & switches is where the power savings are important.
Sure, the total power consumption of the whole system is dominated by the power consumption of end-point devices, there's no doubt about that and the paper says that.
Nevertheless, as an ITSP you are typically paying for the energy consumed by your servers and in that case knowing what you can expect and how many servers you need is useful. Modern data-center servers have significant base-line power consumption and a portion of that needs to be attributed to the SIP service running on those servers.
Just want to clarify... I assume that no transcoding, transrating, or other "translation" between end points is included? I don't see any mention of rtpproxy or other media servers. I ask because these tend to be compute-intensive tasks that would have significant impact server energy usage and performance (e.g. max calls and calls-per-sec).
-Jeff
Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
Jan Janak conducted a very interesting research project regarding energy efficiency of VoIP systems during 2010, a collaboration between iptel.org and Columbia University.
The team used the source code from sip-router.org GIT repository from January 2010, which corresponds to Kamailio (former OpenSER) and SER v3.0. The latest stable series v3.1 shares the same internal architecture with v3.0.
As part of the research work, Jan could also gather some figures about capacity and performances of v3.0 with a quite complex configuration file: etc/sip-router-oob.cfg (involving authentication and NAT traversal as well).
You can read the paper about energy efficiency at:
- Green VoIP Article: http://asipto.com/u/2j
The draft notes about capacity and performances of v3.0 are available at:
- Performances and Capacity for v3.0 Wiki page: http://asipto.com/u/2k
Some interesting results:
- one instance of SIP server with 500 000 online users (mixed users â
behind and not NAT routers) â consumed energy 210W
- one instance of SIP server with 1 000 000 online users (no NAT
involved) â consumed energy 190W
- on a 32-bit machine with 4GB of memory and with 2.5GB reserved for
SIP server, the server could support 43 000 simultaneous TLS connections â consumed energy 203W
- one SIP server instance with 80 000 permanent TCP connections, the
SIP server could still handle at least 1000 requests per second and a connection arrival rate of 1000 new connections per second, done for 20 000 new connections. CPU load generated by the SIP server was from 6% to 8%.
I added a new section to the draft notes to list the enhancements done for the latest stable release (v3.1.x) that contribute to performance improvements, like asynchronous TLS, fine tuning of memory for TLS connections and raw UDP sockets.
Cheers, Daniel
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 23:43, Jeff Brower jbrower@signalogic.com wrote:
Jan-
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 06:54, Jeremya jeremy@electrosilk.net wrote:
These figures pale into insignificance compared to the power required for standard SIP devices - typically 5-8 watts per device multiplied by the number of devices.
When you factor in Gigabit Ethernet the power ups significantly.
Optimisation at the server level is not significant on any scale. Optimisation on communications power: i.e. end-devices, DSL & switches is where the power savings are important.
Sure, the total power consumption of the whole system is dominated by the power consumption of end-point devices, there's no doubt about that and the paper says that.
Nevertheless, as an ITSP you are typically paying for the energy consumed by your servers and in that case knowing what you can expect and how many servers you need is useful. Modern data-center servers have significant base-line power consumption and a portion of that needs to be attributed to the SIP service running on those servers.
Just want to clarify... I assume that no transcoding, transrating, or other "translation" between end points is included? I don't see any mention of rtpproxy or other media servers. I ask because these tend to be compute-intensive tasks that would have significant impact server energy usage and performance (e.g. max calls and calls-per-sec).
Correct, those tests did not include any manipulation of media streams. We were primarily interested in system components that are present in SIP based deployments and missing in Skype because we wanted to see how those two systems differ in terms of architecture, power consumption, etc.
We did run some tests with rtpproxy-like media relays though. You'll find some numbers in the paper.
-Jan
-
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Jan Janak -
Jeff Brower