Sie sind auf Seite 1von 17

1.

INTRODUCTION
DenseWavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM)[1] is the process of
multiplexing signal of different wavelength onto a single fiber. Through this operation, it
creates many virtual fibers each capable of carrying a different signal. At its simplest,
WDM system can be viewed as a parallel set of optical channels, each using a slightly
different light wavelength, but all sharing a single transmission medium. This new
technical solution can increase the capacity of existing networks without the need for
expensive re-cabling and can tremendously reduce the cost of network upgrades.
'Internet Protocol (IP) over DWDM' is the concept of sending data packets over
an optical layer using WDM for its capacity and other operations. In the modern day
world, the optical layer has been supplemented with more functionality, which were once
in the higher layers. This creates a vision of an all-optical network where all management
is carried out in the photonic layer. The optical network is proposed to provide end-to-
end services completely in the optical domain, without having to convert the signal to the
electrical domain during transit.Transmitting IP directly over DWDM has become a
reality and is able to support bit-rates of OC-192.using MPLS control plane over optical
control plane (MPLambdaS) has made forwarding,routing,traffic engineering very
simple.[2]

2. Why IP over DWDM is important


An enormous amount of bandwidth capacity is required to provide the services
demanded by consumers. For many applications, it is desirable that data be transported
from one point in a network to one or more other points in the least possible time. For
some applications the time sensitivity is so important that minimum delay is the
overriding factor for all protocol and equipment design decisions. So, there is a need for
Burst mode optical data switching and streaming data traffic as this will help cater for
data centric applications as well as video applications with no draw backs at all. Internet
Protocol over DWDM aims to reduce the cost per connected bit transmitted.
The IP over DWDM system has inherent advantages because of the absence of
many layers. It brings in the property of virtual fibers where each wavelength can be
considered as a dedicated connection. The signals need not be converted onto an
electrical domain for performing control operations on it. Hence, the latency in the
IP/DWDM system is less compared to that encountered in the Synchronous Optical
Network (SONET) system,[3] which allows data streams of different formats to be
combined onto a single high-speed fiber optic synchronous data stream. The absence of a
vendor specific component (SONET and other networking solutions (ATM[4], etc) are
vendor specific) makes the DWDM system service transparent.
IP over DWDM is overtaking ATM technology, because ATM is basically
popular for the integration of the data and voice it provides. Now for people who have
nothing to do with voice (data centric), question the idea of using ATM. Thus ATM is
slowly loosing to DWDM because:
ATM switches are the most expensive parts of the entire equipment.
ATM is believed to be hopeless for handling video, which will probably represent
most of the traffic on the public networks of the future.
ATM is not keeping pace with the evolution of transmission technology. For
example
the ATM community has only just agreed on a standard for10-gigabit interfaces.

3. IP Network Structure for Optical Networks


The options shown in Figure 1 illustrates possible options for implementing an IP
network over fiber optics, but now the drive is behind running IP over the best layer. At
the bottom is the optical layer, based on an Optical Transport Network (OTN) that
consists of the following sublayers:

Figure 1. IP and the lower-layer evolution

Figure 1.(a) represents the structure of running IP over ATM/SONET/Optical and (b) is
IP over SONET/Optical, while (c) represents the much-desired structure of IP over
Optical (DWDM). In this structure the optical channel (Och) section defines an optical
connection (light path) between two optical client entities. (The Och equates to a lambda
in DWDM parlance.)
The optical multiplex section (OMS) defines the connectivity and treatment for a
multiplex or grouping of Och-level connections. (The OMS equates to a group of
lambdas flowing over fiber-optic cable between two DWDM multiplexers.)
The optical transmission section (OTS) defines how optical signals are
transmitted over the optical media.[3]
Figure 1.c (IP over Optical (DWDM)) shows the target architecture that many providers
are aiming for: the SONET layer has been eliminated in favor of running IP directly over
the optical layer. Eliminating the ATM and SONET layers means fewer network
elements to manage [5], [6], [7]. The existing suite of MPLS traffic engineering (TE)
protocols has been extended to operate over optical networks, and the IP layer,
particularly the IP routers, can now interface directly with the optical layer. This intended
all-optical transport network is hoped will maintain a high data rate, making the
technology more attractive, since the systems can also perform well at high bandwidth
speeds thereby reducing the latency.

3.1 Targeted IP Network Structure


Figure 2 below shows the final intended structure of running IP over DWDM.
There is no need for SONET in IP/DWDM networks because, starting with the basic
concept of layering. In most networks, a layered approach is used in building up the
various pieces of equipment and various formats used in building a network. The basic
idea is that each layer provides a service, hopefully in a service independent way to the
layers above it. In this format it is thought that maximum flexibility to introduce new
formats is maintained, while preserving the installed base of existing equipment. Hence
there is a price paid for layering a system.

Figure 2 Collapse of layers in the IP over DWDM domain [8]

The multi-layer stack has a cascade of inefficiencies built up. This can be justified in
view of the below stated facts that: Every layer runs at its own speed. e.g. DWDM runs in
Gbps, ATM runs in Mbps and IP runs in Kbps. So, low speed devices cannot fill the
wavelength bandwidth, thus creating the bottleneck for the system.
Due to this new technological revolution, the core technologies are pushed to the
edges of the network. For example: Now, Gigabit routers are available, so there is no
need for grooming (or multiplexing), as a single router port is able to access all resources.
Multiple layers also mean that there is excessive overhead data bits to be used in running
the systems, which reduces the capacity of the system to deliver actual information,
hence by running IP over DWDM directly all these redundancies and network problems
can be half solved and taken care of.

4. MPLS (Multi Protocol Label Switching)


It is an IETF framework that provide efficient forwarding, routing, designation and
switching of traffic flow through network.[9,10]
Components:
1. Ingress node (edge LSR-Label Switch Router)
2. core LSR
3. egress node (edge/egress LSR)

To adapt MPLS to control optical CrossConnects (OXCs) four main issues need
to betackled: addressing, signalling, routing and survivability. For the IP layer to
communicate across a DWDM domain the ingress and the egress optical CrossConnect
addresses mustbe known and they must be capable of resolving higher-level addresses
[11 - 14].In an Ingress of the MPLS domain a Forwarding Equivalence Classes (FEC) is a
group of IP packets that are forwarded over the same path and treated in the same
manner. The assignment may be based on e.g. host address, or a “longest match” of the
destination address prefix of IP packets (thus destination). The FEC to which an IP
packet is assigned is encoded with a short, fixed length label. Figure 3 shows the
elements and components of an MPLS core network with three types of nodes.
At the nodes of an MPLS network the labelled packets are forwarded
based on the label-swapping paradigm. This means that the label associated with the IP
packet is examined at each Label Switching Router (LSR) and is used as an index into the
Label Information Base (LIB). The label is mapped on a next hop label forwarding entry
in this In MPLS IP packets are classified in so-called Forwarding Equivalence Classes
(FECs) at the table, which determine where to forward the packet. The old label is
replaced with a new label and the packet is forwarded to its next hop. Thus, while an IP
packet is in the MPLS domain the packet’s network header is no subject of further
analysis at subsequent MPLS hops.

Fig 3 In an MPLS core network three types of nodes are used [17]: 1) Ingress node
with label assignment. 2) Intermediate nodes with label lookup, label swapping and
forwarding.3) Egress node with label removal

In order to establish and maintain a path according to the information collected by the
routing protocols, the LSRs along this route must assign and distribute labels among
neighbouring nodes. Herewith a Label Switched Path (LSPs) is created between ingress
and egress points of the MPLS domain. An LSP is created by the concatenation of one or
more label switched routers, allowing a packet to be forwarded by swapping labels.
Thedistribution of labels is required to allow a LSR to inform another LSR of the
label/FEC binding it has made. With this the LIB in the LSRs used in the label swapping
process is kept up to date. A Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) accomplishes the
distribution of label/FEC bindings among participating LSRs, in order to establish an
LSP.
5. Multi-Protocol Lambda Switching (MP S)
Lambda switching is derived from Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS),generally
refered as GMPLS. A number of different approaches have been suggested to “push” as
much as possible of the traffic flow down to layer 2, thus performing “switching” instead
of “routing” in IP-networks.MP S is an effort from the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF) to create a standardised solution for this. The “label” is a number, assigned at an
IP router at the edge of a label switched or MP S domain, which identifies a path across
the network, so that the packets may be routed more quickly without having to lookup the
destination address in the IP packet, and in this case the wavelength is used as the label
[11]. This label can either be appended to the IP packet, or can be stored in the
encapsulation frame when a suitable field exists. With MP S no physical connection are
dedicated, but a pathis defined and all the packets in a particular session are sent along
that path by giving them all the same label when they enter the MP S network, figure 3
illustrates the MP S. At each node each packet is routed according to its label value and
is provided with a new label for use at the next node, hence the name label switching
comes in.

Fig. 3 Concept of MP S
The LSR, in this case, is an Optical CrossConnect (OXC). The label used in MP S
is the wavelength that the data is transmitted on just as an LSR (Label Switching Router),
maps an incoming label to an outgoing one, the OXC maps an incoming wavelength to an
outgoing wavelength and OXCs need routing protocols and label distribution protocols.
Hence for simplicity, it can be assumed that MP S to be just implementing Label
Switching in the Optical domain.
6 Justification to go for MPLS/ MP S
MPLS provides a number of benefits to IP network providers:
Efficient forwarding: due to the use of labels, core routers/LSR no longer need to
make a route lookup in very large routing tables, instead a much smaller LIB can be
used to make the forwarding decision;
Service differentiation: certain paths, or FECs, may be assigned different CoS. Use
of the label in combination with CoS parameters allow easy identification of such
traffic streams;
Traffic engineering: because MPLS paths are topology based, and labels are used to
identify them, a path easily can be re-routed. Also here the label is used to
accomplish this.

The Tabel 1 can justify the reason to go for this and the release of burden for
MPLS approach from normal IP
service
Functions in DATAGRAM service Functions in IP router with MPLS
1. Remove and create the frame 1. create and remove frame header and
header and trailer trailer.
2. check the packet header, check sum 2. decrement TTL
3. decrement TTL (Time to leave) 3. Look up the next MPLS hop in the
4. perform any packet security switching tabel (very fast)
5. process any IP options field
6. create new packet header and field
values
7. compute a new header checksum
8. look up the next hop router in the
routing table
9. deliver the frame header to the
output interface for transport

Tabel 1:functions of normal IP and IP/MPLS


In MPLS there exists no buffering of packets. Hence no scheduling algorithm is
required. The packets are sent as and when they arrive.

Besides the numerous advantages, there are some disadvantages as well:


MPLS is topology oriented, and hence a label needs to be assigned to each route. This
is a weakness, since a route may not be in use, and therefore the label would be
wasted.
7. IP- OPTICAL networking model

7.1 service model


The optical network model considered consists of multiple Optical Crossconnects
(OXCs) interconnected by optical links. each OXC is assumed to be capable of switching
a data stream from a given input port to a given output port. This switching function is
controlled by appropriately configuring a crossconnect table. Conceptually, the cross
connect table consists of entries of the form <input port i, output port j>, indicating
that data stream entering input port i will be switched to output port j. An "lightpath"
from an ingress port in an OXC to an egress port in a remote OXC is established by
setting up suitable crossconnects in the ingress, the egress and a set of intermediate
OXCs such that a continuous physical path exists from the ingress to the egress port.
Lightpaths are assumed to be bi-directional, i.e., the return path from the egress port to
the ingress port follows the same path as the forward path.It is assumed that one or more
control channels exist between neighboring OXCs for signaling purposes.

Fig 4. domain network model

In this section two possible service models are discussed in brief.The first being at the
optical UNI and the second being at the optical sub-network NNI[15].
7.1.1. Client Server Model
Under this model the optical network primarily provides a set of
high bandwidth pipes to the client requesting such. Standardized
signaling can be used to invoke the following:
Light path creation.
Light path deletion.
Light path modification.
Light path status enquiry.
The continued operation of the system requires that the client systems continuously
register with the optical network. Signalling extensions need to be added to allow clients
to register, deregister and query other clients for an optical-networked administered
address so that lightpaths can be established with other clients across the optical network.
Along with these signaling extensions a service discovery mechanism needs to be added
which will allow the client to discover the static parameters of the link along with the
UNI signaling protocol being used on the link. In this service model the routing protocols
inside the optical network are exclusive of what is followed inside the client network.
Only a minimal set of messages need to be defined between the router and the optical
network. RSVP-TE, LDP or a TCP based control channel can be used for the same.
Within the optical cloud NNI interface is defined between the various optical
subnetworks.
7.1.2 Integrated Service Model
In the Integrated Service Model the IP and the optical networks are treated as a single
network and there is no distinction between the optical switches and the IP routers as far
as the control plane goes. MPLS would be the preferred method for control and routing
and there is no distinction between the UNI, NNI or any other routerrouter interface.
Under this model, optical network services are provisioned using MPLS signaling as
specified in [GMPLS]. In this service model the edge router can do the creation and
modification of the label switched paths across the optical network. In some
sense this resembles the client server model just presented, but it seems to promise
seamless integration when compared to the client server model. OSPF with TE
extensions to support optical networks could be used to exchange topology information
and do the routing .It might happen in an optical network that a LSP across the optical
network may be a conduit for a lot of other LSPs. This can be advertised as a virtual link
inside a forward adjacency in protocols like OSPF. Thus from the point of view of the
data plane an overlay is created between two edge routers across the optical network.

Some of the proposed models for interaction between IP and optical


components in a hybrid network are
(1) Augmented model
(2) Overlay model
(3) Peer model
Augmented Model
In the augmented model, there are actually separate routing instances in the IP and optical
domains but information from one routing instance is leaked into the other routing
instance. For example IP addresses could be assigned to optical network elements
and carried by optical routing protocols to allow reachability information to be shared
with the IP domain to support some degree of automated discovery.
Peer Model
In the peer model(fig5), the same signaling protocol (GMPLS) is used to set up the whole
path, including both the packet and transport elements, with the client.s requests being
spliced into the requests needed to set up the internal tunnel. Whilst this has the
advantage of providing a single management layer to the Service Provider, there are some
significant considerations:
Fig 5 GMPLS Peer Model

• The Service Provider may wish to keep topology information of the optical core private.
• Much of the equipment available for the optical core today uses proprietary signaling
rather than GMPLS.
• Service Providers may wish to keep the paths set in the transport core as stable as
possible, managed on a overall network basis for protection and restoration purposes.
Thus they would not want the service requests of the packet network to be fulfilled
automatically.

Overlay Model
In this model the optical and packet networks are managed independently and may
potentially be signaled by different protocols. One solution is for the optical transport
network (OTN) to provide a User-to-Network Interface (UNI) that allows client
network devices to request connections across it dynamically.

Fig. 6: The OTN and UNI Access


A signaling protocol needs to be defined to bridge the UNI.

An internal tunnel between endpoint UNI-N nodes is set up using either GMPLS or some
proprietary signaling mechanism. This tunnel can be provisioned ahead of time, or on
demand in response to the client request. The data path between the client nodes is then
set up by overlaying it upon this internal tunnel.

Fig. 7 : UNI Overlay Model

An internal tunnel between endpoint UNI-N nodes is set up using either GMPLS or some
proprietary signaling mechanism. This tunnel can be provisioned ahead of time, or on
demand in response to the client request. The data path between the client nodes is then
set up by overlaying it upon this internal tunnel.

8.UNI Services
The client and OTN edge nodes that support UNI are not traditional signaling peers, in
that the OTN service provider agrees a contract (in the billable sense!) with the client to
provide a certain level of service across the network. A UNI message from client to OTN
is best viewed as a request for service.
Given the contractual angle, it is important for there to be a defined method for
identifying and authenticating clients across the UNI. This allows the OTN to check that
a client.s account is in good standing before granting a connection request. For billing
and auditing purposes, the OTN may also need to keep track of the connection by
assigning a connection identifier that is valid beyond the lifetime of the connection and
returning this to the client. In order to set up a connection, a client needs to discover what
services are available from the OTN and, that done, signal its requirements across the
UNI. The types of service parameters signaled across the UNI are
• requested bandwidth of the connection.
• class of service (e.g. the network restoration/protection strategy required)
• diversity (discussed below)
• data plane specific characteristics (e.g. for SONET/SDH, port, transparency and
concatenation information).
A fundamental requirement of UNI is that clients are not allowed access to OTN internal
addresses or topology information. This means that UNI connection requests are not
allowed to specify explicit routes. The .Diversity. parameter allows a UNI client to
request that a new connection follows a different route to a set of previous connections
without requiring internal knowledge of the OTN. This is necessary to allow the client to
request a disjoint backup to a primary route.

9.Routing Approaches
9.1Fully peered routing model
This routing model is used for the peer model described above. Under this approach there
is only one instance of the routing protocol running in the IP and Optical domains. An
IGP like OSPF or IS-IS with suitable optical extensions is used to exchange topology
information. These optical extensions will capture the unique optical link parameters. The
OXCs and the routers maintain the same link state database. The routers can then
compute end-to-end paths to other routers across the OXCs. Such a Label Switched Path
(LSP) can then be signaled using MPLS signaling protocols like RSVP-TE or
CR-LDP. This lighpath is always a tunnel across the optical network between edge
routers. Once created such lightpaths are treated as virtual links and are used in traffic
engineering and route computation. As and when forwarding adjacencies (FAs) are
introduced in the link state corresponding links over the IP Optical interface are removed
from the link state advertisements. Finally the details of the optical network are
completely replaced by the FAs advertised in the link state.
9.2 Domain Specific Routing
This routing model supports the augmented routing model. In this model the routing
between the optical and the IP domains is separated with a specific routing protocol
running between the domains. The focus is on the routing information to be exchanged at
the IP optical interface. Interdomain routing protocols like BGP may be used to exchange
information between the IP and optical domain. OSPF areas may also be used to
exchange routing information across the two domains.
9.3 Routing using BGP
BGP will allow IP networks to advertise IP addresses within its network to external
optical networks while receiving external IP prefixes from the optical network. Edge
routers and OXCs can run External BGP (EBGP). Within the optical network EBGP can
be used between optical subnetworks across the NNI and Internal BGP (IBGP)
can be used within the optical network. Using this scheme it is essential to identify the
optical network corresponding to the egress IP addresses. The reason is as follows.
Whenever an edge router wants to setup a LSP across an optical network it is just
going to specify the destination IP. Now if the edge router has to request another path to
the destination it must know if there already exist lightpaths with residual capacity to the
destination. To determine this it needs to know which ingress ports in an OXC
correspond to which external destination. Thus a border OXC receiving external IP
addresses by way of EBGP must include information about its IP address and pass it on
to the edge router. The edge router must store this association between the OXCs and the
external IP addresses and need not propagate the egress address further. Specific
mechanisms to propagate the BGP egress addresses are yet to be determined.
9.4 Routing using OSPF
OSPF supports the concept of hierarchical routing using OSPF areas.Information across a
UNI can be exchanged using this concept of a hierarchy. Routing within each area is flat.
Routers attached to more than one areas are called Area Border Routers (ABR). An ABR
propogates IP addressing information from one area to another using a summary LSA.
Domain specific routing can be done within each area.to other routers across the OXCs.
Such a Label Switched Path (LSP) can then be signaled using MPLS signaling protocols
like RSVP-TE or CR-LDP. This lighpath is always a tunnel across the optical network
between edge routers. Once created such lightpaths are treated as virtual links and are
used in traffic engineering and route computation. As and when forwarding adjacencies
(FAs) are introduced in the link state corresponding links over the IP Optical interface
are removed from the link state advertisements. Finally the details of the optical network
are completely replaced by the FAs advertised in the link state.
9.5 Overlay Routing
Overlay routing is much like the IP over ATM and supports the overlay connection
model. IP overlays are setup across the optical network. Address resolution similar to that
in IP over ATM is used. The optical network can maintain a registry of IP addresses and
VPN identifiers it is connected to. On querying the database for an external IP address it
would return the appropriate egress port address on the OXC. Once an initial set of
lightpaths are created VPN wide routing adjacencies can be formed using OSPF. The IP
VPN would then be "overlayed" on the underlying optical network which
could have an independent way of routing.
9.6 Path Selection

CR-LDP PATH OSPF


SELECTOR TE EXT

RSVP-TE TE DATA IS-IS


BASE TE EXT

Fig 8.Lightpath Selection

A possible scenario for path selection is presented in fig 8. These systems use CR-LDP or
RSVP-TE to signal MPLS paths. These protocols can source route by consulting a traffic
engineering database, which is maintained along with the IGP database. This
information is carried opaquely by the IGP for constraint based routing. If RSVP-TE or
CR-LDP is used solely for label provisioning, the IP router functionality must be present
at every label switch hop along the way. Once the label has been provisioned by the
protocol then at each hop the traffic is switched using the native capabilities of the device
to the eventual egress LSR.
Path selection can be online or offline. An offline computation is normally
centralized while as an online computation is normally distributed. An offline
computation is facilitated by simulation or network planning tools and can be used to
provide guidance to subsequent real time computations. An online computation may be
done whenever a connection request comes in. A combination of offline and online
computations may be used by a network operator. Offline computations are used when
complicated traffic engineering, demand planning, cost planning and global optimization
is a priority.
In case of online computations there can be two choices when it comes to routing.
1) Explicit routing using a global view of the network can be used to calculate the most
optimal solution taking into consideration constraints other than link metrics.
2) Hop by hop routing using path calculation at every node. This may not be able to
provide an optimal solution taking into consideration constraints other than non additive
link metrics.
9.7 Constraints on Routing
The constraints highlighted here apply to any circuit switched networks but differences
with an optical network are explained where applicable[GMPLS-CONTROL].
One of the main services provided by any transport network is restoration.
Restoration introduces the constraint of physically diverse routing. Restoration can be
provided by pre-computed paths or computing the backup path in real time. The backup
path has to be diverse from the primary path at least in the failed link or completely
physically diverse. A logical attribute like the Shared Risk Link Group (SRLG) is
abstracted by the operators from various physical attributes like trench ID and destructive
areas. Such an attribute may be needed to be considered when making a decision about
which path to take in a network. Two links which share a SRLG cant be the backup for
one another because they both may go down at the same time. In order to satisfy such
constraints path selection algorithms are needed to find two disjoint paths in a graph.
Suurballe’s algorithm as discussed [16] is a good example of an algorithm to find two
node disjoint paths in a network.
Another restoration mechanism is restoration in a shared mesh architecture
wherein backup bandwidth may be shared among circuits. It may be the case that two
link disjoint paths share a backup path in the network. This may be possible because a
single failure scenario is assumed. A few heuristics to optimize the bandwidth allocated
to a backup path in a mesh architecture have already been proposed [Bell-Labs].
Another constraint of interest is the concept of node, link, LSP inclusion
or exclusion, propagation delay, wavelength convertibility and connection bandwidth
among other things. A service provider may want to exclude a set of nodes due to the
geographic location of the nodes. An example would be nodes lying in an area which is
earthquake prone. Propagation delay may be another constraint for a large global
network. Traffic from the US to Europe, shouldn’t normally be routed over links across
the Pacific ocean but instead should use links over the Atlantic ocean since propagation
delay in this case would be much less.
Wavelength convertibility is a problem encountered in waveband networks. It
refers to ability of OXC to crossconnect two different wavelengths. The wavelengths may
be completely different or slightly different. Since wavelength convertibility currently
involves an optical-electrical-optical (OEO) conversion, vendors may selectively deploy
these converters inside the network. Therein lies the problem of routing a circuit over a
network using the same wavelength. This requires that the path selection algorithms
know the availability of each wavelength on each link along the route. With link
bundling, this is difficult since information about all the wavelengths may be included in
the same bundle. Link probing may have to be employed at the source router to find out
the number of wavelengths available along the path. Bandwidth availability is another
consideration in routing. This is simplified in a wavelength optical network since requests
are end to end.
10.PROTOCOLS FOR GMPLS
PROTOCOLS DESCRIPTIONS
ROUTING: Routing protocols for the auto-discovery of
OSPF-TE,IS-IS-TE network topology, advertise resource
availability (e.g. bandwidth or protection
type). The major enhancement are as
follows:
Advertising of link protection type(
1+1,1:1,unprotected,extra traffic)

Implementing derived links (FA) for


improved scalability.

Accepting and advertising with no IP


address – link ID

Incoming and outgoing interface ID

Route discovery for back up that is


different from the primary path.
SIGNALING: Signaling protocols for Traffic engineered
RSVP-TE, LSP’s. The major enhancements are :
CR-LDP.
Label exchange to include non-packet
networks(generalized labels)

Estaablishment of bi-directional LSP

Signaling for establishment of back up path


Waveband switching support-set of
contiguous wavelength switched together

LINK MANAGEMENT: Control channel management:


LMP Established by negotiating link parameters
and ensuring the health of a link (hello
protocol)
Link connectivity Verification: Ensures
the physical connectivity of the link
between the neighboring nodes using a
PING-like test message
11. Future N/W architecture
The MPLS based network architecture (fig 9)has been found to be favorable for the
IP/DWDM system. It shall
host features like:
• MPLS control plane will handle costraints like Data rate, Attentuation, Dispersion,
Length, Delay.
• Using Next hop forwarding label entry (NHFLE) for determining the output port
(or path) of a packet.
• The control plane shall be enforced by network management by having a dedicated
supervisory channel. Each OXC shall be an IP addressable device.
• The subnets will acts as a single abstract node performing restorations within itself
Fig 9: future network architecture

The required protocol stack, for achieving those goals, would be as shown in Fig.7. The
MPLS control plane shall regulate all the connections. The switch fabric would perform
packet switching based on the wavelengths. The data plane shall be responsible for
transmitting the packets. The switch shall maintain mapping between the wavelength +
port at input and the wavelength + port at output. The table ensures that the packets reach
the proper destination eventually. This is similar to how wavelength routing is done.

CONCLUSIONS:
This paper has been discussing several issues arising in an IP-optical network. The basic
concepts underlying an IP over DWDM system .The IP/DWDM systems shall support
the Open architecture & provide complete service transparency. It shall host a MPLS
control plane in the OXCs for providing much of the services. The future holds many a
challenges to the all-optical networks. But, the commercial implementations for IP over
DWDM are not far away. It opens the pathway to Terabit networking and unleashes the
enormous bandwidth potential of the silica fiber. The trend of IP/DWDM solutions over
the last few years seems to have taken an exponential growth. DWDM acts as the
stepping stone towards a true optical networking era.
LIST OF ACRONYMS
BGP - Border Gateway Protocol
CR-LPD - Constraint-Based Routing LDP
DWDM – Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing FA - Forwarding Adjacency
FEC - Forwarding Equivalence Class
GMPLS-Generalized Multi Protocol Label Switching
IGP - Interior Gateway Protocol
IS-IS – Intermediate System to Intermediate System Protocol
LDP - Label Distribution Protocol
LIB- Label Information Base
LMP - Link Management Protocol
LSP - Label Switched Path
LSR - Label Switched Router
MPLS - Multi-Protocol Lambda Switching
NHRP - Next Hop Resolution Protocol
NNI – Network to Network interface
OCT - Optical Channel Trail
OLXC - Optical layer crossconnect
OMS - Optical Multiplex Section
OSPF - Open Shortest Path First
OTN - Optical Transport Network
OTS - Optical Transmission Section
OXC - Optical Crossconnect
PSC - Packet Switch Capable
PVC - Permanent Virtual Circuit
QoS - Quality of Service
RSVP - Resource reSerVation Protocol
RSVP-TE - Resource reSerVation Protocol with Traffic Engineering
TDM - Time Division Multiplexing
TE - Traffic Engineering
TTL - Time to Live
UNI - User to Network Interface
VC - Virtual Circuit
REFERENCES
[1] optical networking and DWDM by walter goralski
[2] optical networks 3rd generation by ulysses black
[3] optical network:a practical perspective by Rajiv ramaswamy
[4] High performances communication networks by jean varland
[5] D. O. Awduche, Y. Rekhter, J. Drake, and R. Coltun, “Multi-protocol lambda
switching: Combining MPLS traffic engineering control with optical
crossconnects,” IETF Internet Draft, 1999.
[6] H. Zang, J. P. Jue, and B. Mukherjee, “A review of routing and wavelength
assignment approaches for wavelength-routed optical WDM networks,” Optical
Networks Magazine, vol. 1 Jan 2000.
[7] L. Zhang, S. deering, D. Estrin, S. Shenker, and D. Zappala, “RSVP: A New
Resource ReSerVation Protocol,” IEEE Comm. Mag., May 2002
[8] IP Over DWDM by Suresh Lanka
[9] “ www.ietf.org”
[10] “www.mplsrc.com”
[11] A. Banerjee et al., “Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching: An Overview of
Routing and Management Enhancements,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol 39. No. 1,
Jan. 2001.
[12] A. Banerjee et al., “Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching: An Overview of
Routing and Management Enhancements,” IEEE Comm. Mag., Jan 2001
[13] P.Ashwood-Smith et al., “Generalized MPLS Signaling – CR-LDP Extensions,”
Interent draft, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-cr ldp-01.txt, Mar. 2001.
[14] P.Ashwood-Smith et al., “Generalized MPLS – Signaling Functional
Description,” Internet draft, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signaling-02.txt, Mar.
2001.
[15] J. Luciani, B. Rajagopalan, D. Awuduche, B. Cain,
Bilel Jamoussi, Debanjan Saha, "IP Over Optical Networks - A
Framework," Internet Draft draft-many-ip-optical-framework-01.txt,
November 2000.
[16] J. Suurballe, "Disjoint Paths in a Network," Networks,
vol. 4, 1974.
[17] MPLS/GMPLS tutorial by IEC “www.iec.org”