Advertisement

Journal of Network and Systems Management

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 607–628 | Cite as

Cost Comparison of Alternative Architectures for IP-over-Optical Core Networks

  • Weiyi Zhang
  • Balagangadhar G. BathulaEmail author
  • Rakesh K. Sinha
  • Robert Doverspike
  • Peter Magill
  • Aswatnarayan Raghuram
  • Gagan Choudhury
Article

Abstract

We explore alternative architectures to reduce cost of IP-over-optical core networks. We conducted a detailed cost study of three architectures. We start with a Baseline architecture that captures present mode of operations with future traffic projections and utilizes technologies such as Ethernet line-cards and OTN sub-wavelength switching. The next architecture, Streamlined, replaces the hub-and-spoke topology of Baseline with a flat topology and is also more judicious in its restoration design. Our detailed study shows significant cost savings for the Streamlined architecture compared to the Baseline. We reduce the cost further in our third proposed architecture: Ethernet enabled IP core consisting of OTN switches (with and without packet switching) and without any backbone routers or MPLS switches. Our results also demonstrate that we can achieve significant reduction in switching costs but reducing cost of transport remains a significant challenge. This paper is an extended version of our previous work published in (11th international conference on the design of reliable communication networks (DRCN), pp 227–234, 2015).

Keywords

Cost model Network architectures IP DWDM OTN Multilayer 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the support of the DARPA CORONET Program, Contract N00173-08-C-2011. The views, opinions, and/or findings contained in this article are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official views or policies, either expressed or implied, of DARPA or the Department of Defense. Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhang, W., Bathula, B.G., Sinha, R.K., Doverspike, R., Magill, P., Raghuram, A., Choudhury, G.: Evolution of the IP-over-Optical Core network. In: 11th International Conference on the Design of Reliable Communication Networks (DRCN), pp. 227–234. (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    “OTN interfaces” Technical Report. http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.709/en
  3. 3.
    “Defense advanced research projects agency (DARPA) strategic technology office (STO) dynamic multi-terabit core optical networks:architecture, protocols, control and management (CORONET),” Technical Report. http://www.monarchna.com/CORONET-InfoPamphlet-DARPA
  4. 4.
    Chiu, A., Choudhury, G., Clapp, G., Doverspike, R., Feuer, J.G.M., Jackel, J., Kim, G., Klincewicz, J., Kwon, T., Li, G., Magill, P., Simmons, J., Skoog, R., Strand, J., Lehmen, A., Wilson, S.W.B., Xu, D.: Architectures and protocols for capacity efficient, highly dynamic and highly resilient core networks [Invited]. J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 4(1), 1–14 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chiu, A.L., Choudhury, G., Clapp, G., Doverspike, R., Gannett, J.W., Klincewicz, J.G., Li, G., Skoog, R.A., Strand, J., VonLehmen, A., Xu, D.: Network design and architectures for highly dynamic next-generation IP-over-optical long distance networks. J. Lightwave Technol. 27(12), 1878–1890 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ramamurthy, B., Sinha, R., Ramakrishnan, K.: Multi-layer design of IP over WDM backbone networks: impact on cost and survivability. In: Design of Reliable Communication Networks (DRCN), 2013 9th International Conference on the, pp. 60–70. (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oikonomou, K.N., Sinha, R.K., Doverspike, R.: A network design technique for selective restoration. In: Optical Fiber Communication Conference/National Fiber Optic Engineers Conference 2011, p. OWAA5. Optical Society of America (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Palkopoulou, E., Schupke, D.A., Bauschert, T.: Quantifying CAPEX savings of homing architectures enabled by future optical network equipment. Telecommun. Syst. 52(2), 1123–1129 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    “Provider backbone bridge traffic engineering IEEE std. 802.1Qay,” Technical Report. 2009. http://www.ieee802.org/1/pages/802.1ay.html
  10. 10.
    Allan, D., Ashwood-Smith, P., Bragg, N., Farkas, J., Fedyk, D., Ouellete, M., Seaman, M., Unbehagen, P.: Shortest path bridging: efficient control of larger Ethernet networks. Commun. Mag. IEEE 48(10), 128–135 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    “Multi-protocol layer switching - transport protocol (MPLS-TP),” Technical Report. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6639
  12. 12.
    “Virtual private LAN service (VPLS),” Technical Report. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4762.txt
  13. 13.
    Choudhury, G., Klincewicz, J.: Survivable IP link topology design in an IP-over-WDM architecture. In: Design of Reliable Communication Networks, 2009. DRCN 2009. 7th International Workshop on, pp. 147–152. (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    “CORONET topology,” Technical Report. http://monarchna.com/CORONET_CONUS_Topology.xls

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Weiyi Zhang
    • 1
  • Balagangadhar G. Bathula
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rakesh K. Sinha
    • 1
  • Robert Doverspike
    • 2
  • Peter Magill
    • 3
  • Aswatnarayan Raghuram
    • 4
  • Gagan Choudhury
    • 4
  1. 1.AT&T Labs - ResearchMiddletownUSA
  2. 2.Network Evolution Strategies, LLCMiddletownUSA
  3. 3.Silicon Lightwave Services, LLCNewarkUSA
  4. 4.AT&T LabsMiddletownUSA

Personalised recommendations