Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Overview
Over the years, advancement in technologies has improved transmission
limitations, the number of wavelengths we can send down a piece of fiber,
performance, amplification techniques, and protection and redundancy of the
network. When people have described and spoken at length about optical
networks, they have typically limited the discussion of optical network technology
to providing physical-layer connectivity. When actual network services are
discussed, optical transport is augmented through the addition of several
protocol layers, each with its own sets of unique requirements, to make up a
service-enabling network. Until recently, transport was provided through specific
companies that concentrated on the core of the network and provided only point-
to-point transport services. A strong shift in revenue opportunities from a service
provider and vendor perspective, changing traffic patterns from the enterprise
customer, and capabilities to drive optical fiber into metropolitan (metro) areas
has opened up the next emerging frontier of networking. Providers are now
considering emerging lucrative opportunities in the metro space. Whereas
traditional or incumbent vendors have been installing optical equipment in the
space for some time, little attention has been paid to the opportunity available
through the introduction of new technology advancements and the economic
implications these technologies will have.
Specifically, the new technologies in the metro space provide better and more
profitable economics, scale, and new services and business models. The current
metro infrastructure comprises this equipment, which emphasizes voice traffic; is
limited in scalability; and was not designed to take advantage of new
technologies, topologies, and changing traffic conditions. Next-generation
equipment such as next-generation Synchronous Optical Network (SONET),
metro core dense wavelength division multiplexing (DWDM), metro-edge
DWDM, and advancements in the optical core have taken advantage of these
limitations, and they are scalable and data optimized; they include integrated
DWDM functionality and new amplification techniques; and they have made
improvements in the operational and provisioning cycles.
This tutorial provides technical information that can help engineers address
numerous Cisco innovations and technologies for Cisco Complete Optical
Multiservice Edge and Transport (Cisco COMET). They can be broken down into
five key areas: photonics, protection, protocols, packets, and provisioning.
Network Capacity
A limiting factor in DWDM systems that restricts the minimum channel spacing
and, therefore, the capacity of the system lies in pulse distortions and
interference that arises from nonlinear effects. Four-wave mixing (FWM) and
cross-phase modulation (XPM) are two such nonlinear effects that are channel-
spacing dependent and, therefore, restrict the minimum channel spacing and
ultimate fiber capacity. However, the efficiency of these nonlinear effects is
Network Availability
The network availability is determined from the failure in time (FIT) rates of the
components that make up the network. The regeneration sites that are placed
every 500 km in conventional EDFA–based networks are "heavy" in high-speed
electronics and optical components and, therefore, have the highest FIT rate and
thus the highest failure rate in the network. Using hybrid distributed Raman
amplifiers plus EDFA amplification in extended–long-haul systems dramatically
reduces the number of regeneration sites, yielding significantly higher network
availability.
Channel Spacing
With enhancements in demultiplexing technology, it is now possible to deploy
DWDM systems with 50-GHz channel spacing at 10-Gbps rates. This scenario
allows for greater channel counts and, therefore, higher capacities. Previously in
the C-band with 100-GHz spacing, it was possible to deploy 40 channels; with
50-GHz spacing, this figure has been doubled to 80 channels.
With the closer channel spacing, multichannel, nonlinear effects such as FWM
and XPM become more critical. To control these nonlinear effects, automatic
power provisioning (APP) of the amplifiers is required to control and maintain
channel launch powers below nonlinear thresholds. To maintain span distances
with the greater channel counts and with the requirement to maintain per-
channel launch power below nonlinear thresholds, greater sensitivity is required
in the receivers. This (change increased to greater) increased sensitivity has been
achieved through the introduction of out-of-band forward error correction (OOB
FEC) transponders. The 7-dB FEC gain, in fact, allows for enhanced span
distances, even with this increased capacity.
Until recently, the EDFA gain bandwidth was restricted to the so-called C-band, a
wavelength band of about 35 nm spanning from just below 1530 nm to just over
1560 nm. However, by optimizing the erbium fiber doping composition and fiber
The introduction of amplifiers for the L-band has allowed for increased system
capacity over the installed fiber plant. This additional bandwidth allows for
growth of up to 80 additional long-haul channels at 50-GHz spacing.
Alternatively, this bandwidth can be used with a hybrid of L-band EDFA
amplifiers and Raman amplification for extended-long-haul applications,
allowing greater reach between costly regeneration sites.
Topics
1. Error Correction, Threshold Control
2. Protection
3. Protocols and Packets
4. Provisioning
5. Provisioning Services
6. Summary
Self-Test
Correct Answers
Glossary
2. Protection
As mentioned previously, traditional networks have been optimized for voice
traffic, from both transport and protection levels. Many network topologies exist,
from point-to-point, ring, and hub-and-spoke to fully meshed networks.
Meshed Networks
"Meshed networks" refers to any number of sites arbitrarily connected together
with at least one loop. For this discussion, the connections between sites are
SONET, at various line rates. Sites within the meshed network that can be
reached from other sites through at least two distinct routes form the mesh,
whereas the remaining sites are spurs off of this mesh. Meshed networks are
often large rings with numerous sub-rings, as shown in Figure 1.
The real benefit of PPPN, however, lies not in the development of PPMN itself,
but in the user interface. Cisco's Java-based graphical user interface (GUI), the
Cisco Transport Controller, makes provisioning within a meshed network as
simple as clicking a mouse button. All the nodes on the network, as soon as they
are turned up, begin the process of autodiscovery. Within minutes, each node has
a full description and status of the other nodes and connections throughout the
network. (This scenario is possible because Cisco uses Internet protocol [IP] and
Open Shortest Path First [OSPF] for SONET Data Country Code [DCC]
communications). Creating a circuit is then accomplished by simply specifying
the source and destination, another Cisco innovation called A-Z Provisioning.
Software then determines the shortest path through the network and establishes
all the intermediate cross-connections. A check box determines whether the
circuit is to be protected or not. When checked, PPMN is provisioned. A protect
circuit is established on the second-shortest path through the network between
the source and destination, and a second set of cross-connections is created. With
this capability, turn-up and provisioning of circuits can be done in a matter of
hours rather than days.
When reviewing the options available to scale this need, one immediately thinks
of Ethernet as the leader for the inexpensive and flexible transport of packet-
based topologies. However, Ethernet relies on the Spanning-Tree Protocol
(802.1d) to provide for loop detection and elimination, generally recovering from
a fault in 5 to 30 seconds.
SONET offers the ability to provide protection from physical and logical failures
in the ring in 50 ms based on the automatic protection switching (APS) standard.
Whereas some proprietary technologies exist for recovery in shorter periods, the
50 ms recovery time was needed for many of the voice services carried over these
networks. In addition to recovery issues, Ethernet is based on point-to-point,
non-meshed physical layouts not conducive to deployment over the existing ring-
based architectures of SONET. These two keys issues left providers with few
options for solving the bandwidth needs of their customers.
The working group rapidly adopted numerous objectives set forth to drive the use
of RPR technology into the service-provider market:
Failure Domain
A Layer-2 switched domain is considered to be a failure domain because a
misconfigured or malfunctioning workstation can introduce errors that impact or
disable the entire domain. For example, a jabbering network interface card (NIC)
might flood the entire domain with broadcasts or undesirable frames at a very
high rate. A protocol malfunction (for example, spanning-tree error or
misconfiguration) can inhibit a large part of the network. Problems of this nature
can be very difficult to localize in a flat, switched Ethernet environment.
Therefore, care must be taken in terms of how this type of network is deployed.
Service providers can take many steps to limit the failure domain per VLAN.
First, service providers can limit the number of switches that are participating in
that VLAN. Cisco's VLAN trunking protocol (VTP) can enable every switch in the
network to be aware of a new VLAN in the network and to autoconfigure trunk
ports and spanning trees. In an enterprise network, this feature can be very
helpful, but it can be highly detrimental in a service provider's Layer-2 network.
Therefore, VTP should be disabled and VLANs manually configured as needed
per switch. Secondly, Cisco technology can specify VLANs that are enabled on the
802.1Q trunk links. Only the VLANs of interest should be configured on a trunk
link. Finally, the topology of the network should be well known and mapped out,
both generally and specifically, per VLAN. This scenario allows the service
provider to better isolate potential network faults.
However, if the service provider is building the network based on pure Ethernet
transport, then the Ethernet topology becomes critically important. The first
thing to account for is summarized by the rule: "If some redundancy is good,
more redundancy is not better!" This mistake is one of the major ones made by
network architects utilizing spanning tree and Ethernet. Spanning tree requires
control packets (called bridge protocol data units, or BPDUs) to be sent out and
processed by each switch in the broadcast domain to stabilize the topology and
reroute around failures. The more complicated the network, the more time it will
take for the network to converge. In addition, a large Layer-2 switched network
may enter a state in which the central processing unit (CPU) is so busy processing
BPDUs that some are missed, preventing the spanning tree from ever recovering.
It was not uncommon in the early days of VLANs to have a network in such a
state that all redundancy had to be removed just to stabilize the network.
The network should be designed in such a way that the primary and secondary
root bridges of the spanning tree can be easily and readily identified. These
switches should be located in a central point of presence (POP).
Virtual LANs
A VLAN is essentially an extended Layer-2 switched domain—that is, a broadcast
domain that extends as far as the VLAN reaches. If several VLANs coexist across
a set of Layer-2 switches, each individual VLAN has the same characteristics of a
failure domain, broadcast domain, and spanning-tree domain, as described
previously. Therefore, although customers can use VLANs to segment the metro
network, deploying pervasive VLANs throughout the metro introduces
complexity and reduces the deterministic behavior of the network. Avoiding
loops and restricting VLANs to the specific Layer-2 switch where they have a
presence minimizes the complexity.
The interface between an edge GMPLS node and a GMPLS label-switched router
(LSR) on the network side can also be referred to as a User Network Interface
(UNI), whereas the interface between two network-side LSRs may be referred to
as a Network-to-Network Interface (NNI). Nonetheless, GMPLS does not specify
separately a UNI and a NNI protocol, an important point to understand when
looking at the requirements. In GMPLS, edge nodes are simply connected to
LSRs on the network side, and these LSRs are in turn connected between them.
There is no delineated boundary over which a distinct protocol function is
introduced such as with O–UNI. Of course, the lack of defined boundary and
distinct protocol set does not mean the behavior of an edge node needs to be
exactly the same as the behavior of an LSR on the network side. Specifically, in
the aforementioned case, the edge node might be responsible for signaling paths
across the network. If GMPLS is used, however, the edge node needs to
communicate as a peer to the network-side device. Specifically, the two network
elements will share topology, addressing, and other types of routing information.
In fact, the boundaries between devices are not only divided along protocol
layers, but they are also divided between different operations management
groups. Indeed, service providers typically have two or more distinct operations
groups specific to either data service or transport layers. Typically one group
owns the provisioning, operations, and management of the transport and another
is responsible for the functions for data services. Communications between the
data-services and transport organizations are defined by a workflow process
whereby orders are submitted by the data-services group and then subsequently
filled by the transport group. This group distinction has a major impact on the
choice of protocols. Service providers with distinct groups where one supports
data services and the other supports transport services are more inclined to
desire strict adherence to a non-routing–enabled boundary between the two
administrative functions of these groups. Here O–UNI is a preferred method
because it separates the roles of each operations department.
4. Provisioning
One new technology that will simplify provisioning is called the unified control
plane, or UCP. UCP represents a common set of control functions and
interconnection mechanisms that allow unified communication, routing, and
control across disparate types of underlying transport technologies (for example,
IP, ATM, SONET/SDH, and DWDM). Traditionally, each specific technology has
its own control protocols and, as a result, cannot communicate directly with the
others. Networks are layered one on top of the other, creating overlays at each
layer to collectively provide end-user services. Obviously, this process requires
It is important to note that GMPLS does not define separately edge nodes
connected to the network that imply boundaries between user and network
planes. The interface between an edge GMPLS node and a GMPLS LSR on the
network side is often referred to as a user-to-network interface, or UNI. To
support the UNI case specifically, the Optical Internetworking Forum has
extended several GMPLS components and defined a set of UNI protocols
explicitly. The protocols are known as Optical User-to-Network Interface, or O–
UNI, whereby the client-side device runs O–UNI–C protocols and the network-
side device runs O–UNI–N protocols. O–UNI provides a user-to-network
bidirectional signaling interface between the service requester and service-
provider control-plane entry point and does not share routing information across
these domains.
5. Provisioning Services
The historical context around how optical networks have been designed and
deployed provides much appreciation for why new requirements (for example,
efficient and timely provisioning and management) and services (for example,
on-demand services, CoS, communities of interest) are prevailing challenges
today. New network requirements invalidate the assumptions upon which legacy
networks were founded. Indeed, the communications networks that exist today
were designed primarily for private-line and voice service using circuit switching.
Capacity was portioned out in 64-kbps pieces (the size of an uncompressed voice
channel) using multiple layers of hierarchy. Typically these networks required
several months to deploy a service. This time frame met requirements then
because the traffic demand was quite predictable and assumed to remain static
for years at a time. As the business case for providing data services became
attractive, service providers retrofitted their network typically by yet another
layering of protocols to support multiple data-service interfaces and networks,
including ATM, Frame Relay, and IP.
On the transport side of providers, UCP is seen initially as a means to tie together
multivendor domains through the use of O–UNI. Desired here is one method of
access to provision across the entire optical transport network, despite having
multiple domains of different vendor equipment. Figure 7 illustrates this concept
of provisioning across multiple-vendor domains within the transport network.
Longer-term, transport architects realize that UCP has a broader and more
significant meaning to service providers.
6. Summary
This document has discussed how photonics, protection, protocols, packets, and
provisioning insert into the metro edge, metro core, and long-haul and extended-
long-haul segments. It is important to remember that the Cisco innovations are
ongoing and that legacy equipment will not disappear over night. The enterprise
and service providers still need to protect and provide existing services when
migrating or evolving their current architecture offerings. In addition, service
providers will need to take advantage of the existing infrastructure. The focus on
network evolution is paramount to profitability of providers with existing
network and operations management infrastructure.
Figure 8. Cisco's Coment Technical Innovations
a. 2 km
b. 10 km
c. 100 km
d. 500 km
e. 5,000 km
a. Attenuation
a. Attenuation
a. RIP
b. EIGRP
c. BGP
d. IS–IS
e. OSPF
a. Enterprise
b. Service provider
c. Home user
d. Government
e. Small office
a. Unicast
b. Mulitcast
c. Broadcast
d. Simulcast
e. Duocast
a. VLAN
b. MPLS
c. LRE
d. QinQ
e. O–E–O
a. ATM
b. Frame relay
c. Ethernet
d. X.25
e. Appletalk
a. OPEX, CAPEX
b. UNI, NNI
c. LSR–NS, LSR–NBS
d. EGMPLS, NGMPLS
e. NE, FE
11. Transport providers see the combination of the O–UNI and GMPLS protocols
as a way to facilitate a seamless evolution to next-generation technologies
without having to upgrade or replace network equipment. Service providers
understand that GMPLS may not exist in all.
a. true
b. false
12. GMPLS defines separately edge nodes connected to the network that imply
boundaries between user and network planes.
a. true
b. false
13. UCP will include both O–UNI and GMPLS protocols under the Cisco UCP
umbrella to prov ide essential flexibility in addressing a variety of service and
network models.
a. true
b. false
a. true
b. false
a. true
b. false
Correct Answers
1. In conventional long-haul (EDFA) technology, the transmission signals must
be regenerated every ______ or so to overcome signal distortion due to
dispersion and nonlinear effects.
a. 2 km
b. 10 km
c. 100 km
d. 500 km
e. 5,000 km
a. Attenuation
a. Attenuation
a. RIP
b. EIGRP
c. BGP
d. IS–IS
e. OSPF
a. Enterprise
b. Service provider
c. Home user
d. Government
e. Small office
7. A jabbering network interface card (NIC) might flood the entire domain with
__________ or undesirable frames at a very high rate.
a. Unicast
b. Mulitcast
c. Broadcast
d. Simulcast
e. Duocast
a. VLAN
b. MPLS
c. LRE
d. QinQ
e. O–E–O
a. ATM
b. Frame relay
c. Ethernet
d. X.25
e. Appletalk
10. The interface between an edge GMPLS node and a GMPLS label-switched
router (LSR) on the network side can also be referred to as a _________,
whereas the interface between two network-side LSRs may be referred to as a
__________.
a. OPEX, CAPEX
b. UNI, NNI
c. LSR–NS, LSR–NBS
d. EGMPLS, NGMPLS
e. NE, FE
11. Transport providers see the combination of the O–UNI and GMPLS protocols
as a way to facilitate a seamless evolution to next-generation technologies
without having to upgrade or replace network equipment. Service providers
understand that GMPLS may not exist in all.
a. true
b. false
12. GMPLS defines separately edge nodes connected to the network that imply
boundaries between user and network planes.
a. true
b. false
a. true
b. false
a. true
b. false
15. Ethernet relies on the spanning-tree protocol (802.1d) to provide for loop
detection and elimination, generally recovering from a fault in five to 30
seconds. SONET offers the ability to provide protection from physical and
logical failures in the ring in 50 ms based on the automatic protection
switching (APS) standard.
a. true
b. false
Glossary
APP
Automatic Power Provisioning
APS
Automatic Protection Switching
ATM
Asynchronous Transfer Mode
BER
Bit-Error Rate
BGP
Border Gateway Protocol
BLSR
Bidirectional Line-Switched Ring
BTDU
Bridge Protocol Data Units
CoS
Class of Service
CPU
Central Processing Unit
DCC
Data Communications Channel
DPT
Dynamic Packet Transport
DS
Digital Signal
DWDM
Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing
EDFA
Erbium-Doped Fiber Amplifier
EoMPLS
Ethernet-over–MPLS
FCI
Frame Copy Indication
FEC
Forward Error Correction
FIT
Failure In Time
FWM
Four-Wave Mixing
GHz
Gigahertz
GMPLS
Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching
GUI
Graphical User Interface
IETF
Internet Engineering Task Force
IP
Internet Protocol
IS–IS
Intermediate System–to–Intermediate System
LAN
Local-Area Network
LEM
Line Extender Module
LSR
Label-Switched Router
MAC
Media Access Control
MAN
Metro-Area Network
MPLS
Multiprotocol Label Switching
NIC
Network Interface Card
NNI
Network-to-Network Interface
O–E–O
Optical-to-Electrical-to-Optical
O–UNI
Optical User-to-Network Interface
O–UNI–C
Optical User-to-Network Interface Client
O–UNI–N
Optical User-to-Network Interface Network
OC
Optical Carrier
OOB FEC
Out-of-Band Forward Error Correction
OSNR
Optical Signal-to-Noise Ratio
OSPF
Open Shortest Path First
OTN
Optical Transport Network
PHY
Universal Physical-Layer
PNNI
Private Network-to-Network Interface
POP
Point of Presence
PPMN
Path Protected Meshed Network
QoS
Quality of Service
RPR
Resilient Packet Ring
RXT
Receive Transponders
SDCC
SONET Data Communications Channel
SDH
Synchronous Digital Hierarchy
SLA
Service-Level Agreement
SRP
Spatial Reuse Protocol
TDM
Time Division Multiplexing (T1, T3, E1, etc.)
TLS
Transparent LAN Services
UCP
Universal Control Plane
UNI
User-to-Network Interface
UPSR
Unidirectional Path-Switched Ring
VLAN
Virtual LAN
VTP
VLAN Trunking Protocol
WAN
Wide-Area Network
WDM
Wavelength Division Multiplexing
XPM
Cross-Phase Modulation