IP over WDM network

Fang Yu
294 Class Presentation
Outline
 History of WDM networks
 Current Internet: Multi-layer protocol stack
between IP and WDM layers
 Future: IP directly over WDM
 Challenge
 Virtual Topology Reconfiguration
 Multi-layer routing
 One proposal: Optical Burst Switching technologies
History
 In the late 70s
 First fiber based optical transmission system
 Before 1995
 Mostly a single high-speed optical channel
 All multiplexing done in electrical domain(TDM)
 50Mb/s to 10Gb/s data services
 After 1995
 WDM allows simultaneously transmitting multiple high-speed
channels on different frequencies (Up to 160 wavelengths
today)
 40G per (OC768)
 Total link capacity = 160 *40G =6.4 Tbps
Current Typical Protocol Stacks
N e tw o rk
IP
D a ta lin k

N e tw o rk
ATM
D a ta lin k

IP
SONET N e tw o rk

ATM
D a ta lin k

SONET
WDM P h y s ic a l
WDM
 Transport Layer Model
“Packet” 1/0 DCS 4E 4E
“Packet” 1/0 DCS Service
CHCG Layers
“Packet” “Packet” 1/0 DCS 1/0 DCS LA 4E 4E
DS1
(1.5 Mb/s)
ATM/IP ATM/IP
DS3 LA 3/1 DCS 3/1 DCS 3/1 DCS
(45 Mb/s) Layer
ATM/IP ATM/IP 3/1 DCS 3/1 DCS CHCG
Core ATM/IP DACS III DACS III
Layers CHCG
LA DACS III DACS III 3/3 DCS
DS3 Layer (DACS III)
(45 Mb/s)
PHNX SONET ADM
LA ADM ADM
ADM ADM
CHCG Layer
ADM ADM
ADM
OC48+
Wavelength Path
(2.5+ Gb/s)
Hard- LA OTS OTS OTS OTS OTS OTS Crossconnect
Wired PHNX CHCG
(OTS: Optical Transport
System)

Proprietary
(20-400 Gb/s) Wavelength Mux Section
CHCG Crossconnect
LA PHNX Fiber Conduit/ Media
Sheath Layer
 Disadvantage of Current Multi-
layer Protocol Stack
 Inefficient
 In IP over ATM over SONET over WDM network, 22%
bandwidth used for protocol overhead
 Layers often do not work in concert
 Every layer now runs at its own speed. So, low speed
devices cannot fill the wavelength bandwidth.
 When detecting of failure, different layers compete for
protection
 Optical layer detects failure almost immediately, restores error
in 2us to 60ms
 SONET layer detects failure in 2.3–100 us, restores error in 60
ms
Disadvantage of Current Multi-
layer Protocol Stack (Cont)
 Functional overlap: So many layers are doing
the same thing
 Routing
 Protections
 Slow speed
 Electronic devices can not catch the transmission
speed available at optical layer
 Latencies of connection
 Historical Reason for Multi-layer
 SONET over WDM
 Conventional WDM deployment is using SONET as standard interface to
higher layers
 IP over ATM
 IP packets need to be mapped into ATM cells before transporting over WDM
using SONET frame
 OEO conversions at every node is easier to build than all optical switch

Electronic
Electronic O/E/O Network
E/O O/E/O E/O
Network
O/E/O
O/E/O
O/E/O
O/E/O
E/O E/O
Electronic
Electronic
Network
Network Optical Core
 Simplified Protocol Stacks?
IP
IP
Frame Relay
WDM-aware
Electronic layer
ATM

SONET WDM

WDM
Current Typical Protocol Stack Simplified Protocol Stack
IP Directly Over WDM?
 Establish high-speed optical layer connections
(lightpaths)
 IP routers connected through lightpaths rather than
fiber
IP ro u te r

B C

E W a v e le n g th
c ro ssco n n e c t
L ig h tp a th s
A

D
Challenge for IP over WDM
network
 WDM-aware Electronic layer
 Reconfiguration and load balancing
 Protection and restoration
 Optical flow switching
 Network management/control
 Cross-layer optimization
 Reconfigurable (within milli-seconds) OXC
 Wavelength Converters
2 3 3
2
WC

No  converters With  converters

1 New request 1 New request
1 3 1 3
Virtual Topology Reconfiguration
 Physical topology
 Seen by optical layer
 Virtual topology: a set of nodes interconnected by light-paths
(wavelength)
 Seen by electronic layer
 Reconfigure of light-paths in WDM network by
 Changing the light path connectivity between electronic switches
 Tuning of the transmitter wavelength and the frequency-selective-
switches
A B A B

C D C D
 Virtual Topology
Reconfiguration(Cont.)
 Enable network to dynamically response to changing of traffic pattern
 Load balancing

 Efficiency

Fixed

Blocking Probability
0.1 Routing

Reconfigurable
X6 Routing
 Issues: 0.01
 Time scale of changes WDM ring, 20 nodes
 Triggered by what mechanisms one transceiver/node
call BW = 1 wavelength
 IP routing properties (e. g. stability)
0.001
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Call arrival rate
 Multi-layer Routing
 IP layer routing is the bottleneck of present Internet
 Solution: Routing long duration flows at lower layers

User 1 Network control User 2

... ...
Router 1 Router 2 Router 3

WDM layer
• Conventional packet routing
• Optical bypass of intermediate routers for high volume traffic
• End-to end (user-to-user) flow of entire file bypassing routers
LIDS
Switching all the packets in
optical layer?
 Requires intelligence in the optical layer
 Need to store packet during header
processing
 Optical buffers are extremely hard to
implement
 1 pkt = 12 kbits @ 10 Gbps requires 1.2 s of
delay => 360 m of fiber)
 Optical Packet Switch still has a long
way to go………………………
Various Optical Switching
Technologies
Optical Burst Packet Switching
 Retrospect the goal of IP over WDM:
 Avoid electronic bottlenecks
 Decrease the cost by simplifying the
multiple layer architecture
 OBS is one proposal of how to realize
such a network
 Optical Burst Switching
 Resources are allocated using one way
reservation
 Sender sends a request
 Sender sends burst without waiting for an
acknowledgement of its reservation request
 Switch does preparation for the burst when getting
the request
 Bursts can have variable lengths
 Burst switching does not necessarily require
buffering
 Various OBSs
 The schemes differ in the way bandwidth release is
triggered.
 In-band-terminator (IBT) – header carries the routing
information, then the payload followed by silence
(needs to be done optically).
 Tell-and-go (TAG) – a control packet is sent out to
reserve resources and then the burst is sent without
waiting for acknowledgement. Refresh packets are
sent to keep the path alive.
Main Characteristics of Optical
Burst Switching
 There is a time separation(offset time) between header
and data
 Header and data are usually carried on different
channels
 Header goes through sophisticated electronic processing
 Data is kept in optical domain
 Conclusion
 Current IP over ATM over SONET over WDM network
is inefficient and redundant
 Future IP directly over WDM network
 Advantages
 Less latency

 Automatic provisioning

 Higher bandwidth utilization

 Challenge of packet directly over WDM network

 Optical buffer

 Optical burst switch is one of the proposed techniques to IP

over WDM network
Reference
 John Strand, “Optical Networking and IP over Optical”, Feb 4, 2002
 Kumar N. Sivarajan, “IP over Intelligent Optical Networks”, Jan 5, 2001
 Gaurav Agarwal, “A Brief Introduction to Optical Networks”, 2001
 Yang Lihong, “Optical Burst Switching”, CMU networking seminar presentation
 Vincent W. S. Chan, “Optical Networks: Technology and Architecture”
 Eytan Modian, “WDM-Based Packet Networks”, IEEE Communication Magazine,
March 1999
 Ornan (Ori) Gerstel, Rajiv Ramaswami,, “Optical Layer Survivability—An
Implementation Perspective”, IEEE Journal on selected areas in
communications, October 2000
 Eytan Modiano, Aradhana Narula-Tam, “Survivable lightpath routing:a new
approach to the design of WDM-based networks”, IEEE JSAC,April 2002
 R. Ramaswami and K. N. Sivarajan, Optical Networks: A Practical Perspective,
San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.