You are on page 1of 30

Optimization of survivable

optical transport networks in


Instituto Superior Técnico

the presence of physical layer


impairments

Pema Chentsho
METI
Supervisor:- Prof. Joao Jose de Oliveira Pires

Friday, June 15, 2018 1


Outline of the presentation

 Problem and Background


 Thesis Contributions
 Technology and Methodology adopted
 Evaluations
 Conclusions

Friday, June 15, 2018 2


State of the Network

Subscriber expect more


services with less cost

Friday, June 15, 2018 3


Capacity and Cost
• Carrier Challenges • Solutions
• Increasing Internet traffic • ROADMs enabling large network capacity
• Lowering network cost/bit • Traffic must shift to optical layer

IP/MPLS

OTN OTN OXC


OTN
Cost OTN OXC OTN

ROADM ROADM ROADM


ROADM
DWDM ROADM
ROADM
ROADM

Friday, June 15, 2018 4


Capacity and Cost
• Carrier Challenges • Solutions
• Increasing Internet traffic • ROADMs enabling large network capacity
• Lowering network cost/bit • Traffic must shift to optical layer

IP/MPLS

OXC OXC OXC


OTN
Cost OTN OXC OXC

ROADM ROADM ROADM


ROADM
DWDM ROADM
ROADM
ROADM

Friday, June 15, 2018 5


Methodologies

 Most of the traffics in optical layer ( Transparent Network)


 Mesh interconnected nodes
 Colorless and Directionless RODAMs
 Use optical channels of very high capacity (≥ 100 Gbps)
 Coherent detection

Friday, June 15, 2018 6


Problems of Transparent Network

 Transmission quality is affected by physical layer


impairments.
 Impairments aware RWA

 Use of appropriate protection or restoration


techniques for survivability in the presence of failure.

Friday, June 15, 2018 7


Goals and Objectives

To develop optimization strategies for


survivable optical transport networks directed
to minimize the network cost taking into
account the physical layer impairments.

Friday, June 15, 2018 8


Thesis Contributions
 Adopting different heuristic algorithms

 Developing an algorithm to compute the contention


degree of ROADMs in the network.

 Introduction and implementation of a heuristic


adapted random wavelength assignment (WA)
algorithm.
 Wavelengths reuse

Friday, June 15, 2018 9


DWDM ROADM Network

The Lightpath Establishment

ROADM

Local Drop
(End Point)

Local ADD
(Start Point)

Friday, June 15, 2018 10


ROADM structure
ROADM (Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer)

• WSS = Wavelength Selective Switch


• A module that enables wavelengths of light
to be remotely switched between fibers.

• Optical Splitter/Combiner
• It is used to split the optical power evenly
from the input port into all N output ports
• It combines the signals from N ports into one
port.
Local Drop/add Module

Friday, June 15, 2018 11


ROADM architecture
Broadcast-and-select Route-and-select

-less attenuations due to passive


-Higher attenuations due to passive components
components -higher filtering penalty from the higher
-Lower filtering penalty from WSS number of WSS components-increasing the
threshold OSNR

Friday, June 15, 2018 12


ROADM Functionalities

Friday, June 15, 2018 13


Physical layer impairments
Optical signals traverse the optical
fiber links, passive and/or active
optical components.

Signals encounter many


impairments that effect their
intensity level, as well as their
temporal, spectral and polarization
properties

If the received signal quality is not


within the receiver sensitivity
threshold, the receiver may not be
able to correctly detect the optical
signal.

Friday, June 15, 2018 14


Network Design
PLI-RWA Objective : Minimize the number of wavelengths used (Network Layer)
and also select lightpaths with acceptable transmission quality (physical layer)

Feasibility of the lightpath (maximum Transparency length)


The maximum distance an optical signal can travel and be detected by a receiver
without requiring OEO conversions.

The feasibility of the lightpath depends on:

 The optical signal power


 The fiber distance
 Type of fiber
 The number of wavelengths on a single fiber
 The bit-rate per wavelength
 The number of amplifiers
 The number and type of elements used (splitters, wss, combiners) in ROADM
through which the signals passes before reaching the destination node or
before regeneration.

Friday, June 15, 2018 15


Network Design in the presence of PLIs
RWA subroutine

Friday, June 15, 2018 16


Friday, June 15, 2018 17
OSNR Formulations

𝐿−1
1 1 1 𝐿 1
= +෍ + + 4.14
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙_𝑂𝑆𝑁𝑅 𝑂𝑆𝑁𝑅𝑎𝑑𝑑 𝐿𝑖𝑛𝑘_𝑂𝑆𝑁𝑅𝑖 𝑂𝑆𝑁𝑅𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑂𝑆𝑁𝑅𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝
𝑖=1
Friday, June 15, 2018 18
Results and Evaluations
Traffic Routing with and without Protection

Dijkstra Suurballe
Average 7,46 15,85
Minimum 0 4
COST239 Maximum 20 37
Difference 20 33
Total 194 412
Average 20,81 49
Minimum 4 13
Unbalanced
NSFNET Maximum 48 99
Network
Difference 44 86
Total 437 1029
Average 40,7 87,02
Minimum 0 20
UBN Maximum 129 243
Difference 129 223
Total 1750 3742

Friday, June 15, 2018 19


In the absence of PLIs

Load Balancing Load Balancing


Load Balancing Dijkstra Algorithm I Algorithm II
Suurballe Edge Node
Yen’s k=2 Yen’s k=3 (Edge-disjoint) Disjoint Disjoint
Average 7,76 7,27 7,27 7,27 7,73 7,46
Minimum 0 2 2 2 1 2
COST239 Maximum 20 14 13 13 13 12
Difference 20 12 11 11 12 10
Total 194 189 195 189 201 194
Average 20,95 22,62 22,62 20,86 22,1 21,86
Minimum 4 5 5 6 6 4
NSFNET
Maximum 48 40 37 33 33 31
Difference 44 35 32 27 27 21,86
Total 440 475 475 438 464 459
Average 41,67 42,76 42,55 41,63 41,65 41,81
Minimum 6 6 7 6 4 7
UBN Maximum 129 109 101 78 90 86
Difference 123 103 94 72 86 79
Total 1750 1796 1787 1790 1791 1798

Friday, June 15, 2018 20


In the absence of PLIs
Wavelength assignments- 1 Traffic Unit

WA Heuristics

Sorting
Schemes FirstFit MostUsed Random Adapted Random

ShortestPath First 11 11 14 11
COST239
LongestPath First 11 11 12 11

Random path 12 12 13 11

ShortestPath First 24 24 35 27
NSFNET
LongestPath First 24 24 31 30

Random path 24 24 33 31

ShortestPath First 62 62 89 51
UBN
LongestPath First 61 61 77 56

Random path 62 61 83 75

Friday, June 15, 2018 21


Contention Degree-COST239
Evaluation Metrics First Fit
LongestPathFirst
4.5 ShortestPathFirst
1) Total number of contention 4 Random

Contention Degree
3.5
degree (Lesser the better) 3
2.5
2) Number of nodes that contain 2
1.5
the maximum contention 1
0.5
degree 0
Node Node Node Node Node Node Node Node Node Node Node
3) balancing of contention degree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Node Number
along the nodes.

Evaluation FirstFit MostUsed Random Adapted Random


Metrics
LP First SP First Random LP First SP First Random LP First SP First Random LP First SP First Random
1
2
3

Friday, June 15, 2018 22


In the presence of PLIs
P_(Tx,ch) Broadcast and Select Route and Select
dBm Linear (mW) B&S-OSNR_Pase B&S-OSNR[Pase+ PNLI ] R&S-OSNR_Pase R&S-OSNR[Pase+ PNLI ]
-10 0,1 15,33 15,33 15,33 15,8
-9 0,126 16,33 16,32 16,33 16,8
-8 0,1585 17,33 17,32 17,33 17,79
-7 0,1995 18,33 18,31 18,33 18,78
-6 0,2512 19,33 19,308 19,33 19,76
-5 0,3162 20,33 20,303 20,33 20,71
-4 0,398 21,33 21,29 21,33 21,63
-3 0,5012 22,33 22,02 22,33 22,46
-2 0,6301 23,33 22,73 23,33 23,14
Cost239
-1 0,7943 24,33 23,2 24,33 23,56
0 1 25,33 23,31 25,33 23,6
1 1,259 26,33 22,94 26,33 23,15
2 1,585 27,33 22,07 27,33 22,2
3 1,995 28,33 20,76 28,33 20,84
4 2,512 29,33 19,16 29,33 19,2
5 3,162 30,33 17,37 30,33 17,4
6 3,981 31,33 15,54 31,33 15,5
7 5,012 32,33 13,54 32,33 13,55
8 6,31 33,33 11,57 33,33 11,57
9 7,943 34,33 9,59 34,33 9,59
10 10 35,33 7,59 35,33 7,6

Best path: 3->6

Friday, June 15, 2018 23


40

35

30

R&S-OSNR[Pase+ PNLI ]
OSNR Values [dB]

25

R&S-OSNR_Pase
20

15 B&S-OSNR[Pase+ PNLI ]

10 B&S-OSNR_Pase

0
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
Transmitted Channel Power, 𝑃_(𝑇𝑥, 𝑐ℎ) [dBm]

Friday, June 15, 2018 24


In the presence of PLIs

P_(Tx,ch)
Broadcast and Select Route and Select
dBm Linear (mW) B&S-OSNR_Pase B&S-OSNR[Pase+ PNLI ] R&S-OSNR_Pase R&S-OSNR[Pase+ PNLI ]
-10 0,1 9,21 15,02 9,5 16,27
-9 0,126 10,21 16,02 10,5 17,26
-8 0,1585 11,21 17,02 11,5 18,26
-7 0,1995 12,21 18,01 12,5 19,25
-6 0,2512 13,21 18,99 13,5 20,22
-5 0,3162 14,21 19,95 14,5 21,17
-4 0,398 15,2 20,88 15,5 22,07
-3 0,5012 16,21 21,73 16,5 22,88
-2 0,6301 17,21 22,46 17,5 23,53 Cost239
-1 0,7943 18,21 22,95 18,5 23,9
0 1 19,21 23,1 19,5 23,86
1 1,259 20,21 22,78 20,5 23,32
2 1,585 21,21 21,94 21,5 22,29
3 1,995 22,21 20,67 22,5 20,88
4 2,512 23,21 19,09 23,5 19,2
5 3,162 24,21 17,32 24,5 17,38
6 3,981 25,21 15,44 25,5 15,47
7 5,012 26,21 13,5 26,5 13,51
8 6,31 27,21 11,53 27,5 11,54
9 7,943 28,21 9,54 28,5 9,55
10 10 29,21 7,55 29,5 7,55

Worst path: 1->7->9->11

25
25

20

15 OSNR[Pase+ PNLI ](dB)


OSNR Values [dB]

OSNR_only_Pase(dB)
10

OSNR[Pase+ PNLI ](dB)


5

OSNR_Pase(dB)
0
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15

-5
Transmitted Channel Power, 𝑃_(𝑇𝑥, 𝑐ℎ) [dBm]

Friday, June 15, 2018 26


Conclusions

As the network size increases (Cost239 to UBN), the:

 The feasibility of lightpath in general, reduces.

 When nonlinear effect is considered, the lightpath becomes unfeasible for


high 𝑃𝑇𝑥,𝑐ℎ also, due to the higher link distance. Regenerator is required.

 The OSNR values obtained are lower in general

 𝑂𝑆𝑁𝑅𝑅𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑 (threshold OSNR) increases

 The difference between the two threshold OSNR from the two architecture
increases.

 OSNR values for two architecture gets more identical.

 The feasibility of the lightpath increases as the 𝑃𝑇𝑥,𝑐ℎ increases if only ASE is
considered

Friday, June 15, 2018 27


Future work plan

The following list provides several area of future research for this work:

 Implementation of OSNR formulation framework to higher spectral


efficiencies modulation formats

 survivability (protection) in PLI constrained optical networks.

 Increase the optical reach of lightpaths (adding transponder,


regenerator, traffic grooming, etc.)

 Lightpath monitoring with more feasibility metric (e.g. BER, Q-factor, etc.)

 Wavelength assignment in the presence of wavelength converters and


dynamic traffic scenarios.

Friday, June 15, 2018 28


Acknowledgment

• I would like to thank my supervisors Prof. Joao Pires, and my all classmates.

Friday, June 15, 2018 29


Thank you for your attention

I welcome your questions, suggestions and comments

Friday, June 15, 2018 30