Energy Efficient Ethernet Fallback State Negotiation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing energy-efficient Ethernet solutions lack a mechanism for coordinating power savings across links, leading to inefficient energy management due to varying traffic profiles and latency sensitivity, which results in suboptimal power state transitions and increased buffering requirements.

Innovation Solution

A system and method that enables fallback states by receiving wake-up time information for power savings states from link partners, determining supported states, and transmitting allocated wake-up times using LLDP or Layer 3 protocols, allowing dynamic negotiation of power savings states to optimize energy efficiency.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Use of energy by moving object

If power savings states are implemented in EEE, then energy consumption is reduced, but wake-up time and buffering requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveenergy consumptionVSAvoidwake-up time
Core Design Contradiction:
Use of energy by moving objectVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements multiple power savings states with different wake-up time characteristics (e.g., deeper sleep states with longer wake-up times versus lighter sleep states with shorter wake-up times). The system dynamically selects and transitions between these states based on traffic patterns and latency requirements, changing the operational parameters to optimize the trade-off between energy savings and wake-up time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts the power savings state based on real-time traffic conditions, latency sensitivity, and buffer availability. Rather than using a fixed power state, the system continuously monitors link utilization and traffic characteristics to determine the optimal power state, making the power management approach adaptive and dynamic.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Use of energy by moving object

If deeper power savings states are used, then energy savings increase, but buffering requirements and latency increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveenergy savingsVSAvoidbuffering requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
Use of energy by moving objectVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent defines multiple power savings states with different energy consumption and wake-up time characteristics. By selecting appropriate states based on buffer availability and traffic patterns, the system optimizes the balance between energy savings and buffering requirements without needing to provision for worst-case scenarios.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of always using the deepest power savings state for maximum energy savings, the system applies partial action by selecting shallower power states when buffers are limited or latency is critical. This ensures sufficient energy savings are achieved without excessively increasing buffering requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Use of energy by moving object

If power savings states are implemented without coordination, then individual device energy efficiency improves, but overall link energy efficiency deteriorates due to mismatched state transitions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveindividual device energy efficiencyVSAvoidoverall link energy efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Use of energy by moving objectVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a negotiation mechanism where devices exchange wake-up time information and buffer status through LLDP or Layer 3 protocols. This feedback loop allows both ends of the link to coordinate their power state selections, ensuring that power savings states are only entered when both devices can handle the wake-up time and buffer requirements, thereby optimizing overall link energy efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses a universal negotiation protocol (LLDP or Layer 3) that can operate across different device types and implementations. This multi-functional approach allows the coordination mechanism to work regardless of the specific power savings implementation details, enabling broad compatibility while achieving coordinated power management.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Loss of information

If wake-up time information is exchanged for all power savings states, then complete power state information is available, but messaging overhead increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepower state information completenessVSAvoidmessaging overhead
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of exchanging wake-up time information for all possible power savings states, the system extracts and exchanges only the relevant wake-up time information needed for the current traffic conditions and buffer status. This selective information exchange reduces messaging overhead while maintaining sufficient information for optimal power state selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Data Source

PatentEP2247027B1System and method for enabling fallback states for energy efficient ethernet
Publication Date: 2017.09.13 AVAGO TECHNOLOGIES GENERAL IP (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD
  • EP2247027B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2247027B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2247027B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A system and method for enabling fallback states for energy efficient Ethernet (EEE). EEE devices can be designed to support multiple power saving states that impact layers higher than the PHY layer. Typically, these higher levels of power savings would require a greater period of time to accommodate a return to an active state. In a dynamic negotiation process, the receiving device can advertise multiple fallback power saving states to the transmitting device. The transmitting device's allocation of buffering can then determine which of the power saving states would be supported.