Photonic Network Communications

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 253–261 | Cite as

Packet loss analysis in optical packet-switched networks with limited deflection routing

  • Ireneusz Szcześniak
  • Tadeusz Czachórski
  • Jean-Michel Fourneau


We present an approximate analytical method for the evaluation of packet loss probability in synchronous optical packet-switched networks which operate under limited deflection routing with the contention resolution method based on priorities. Packets are lost because they are removed by nodes. They are removed because they experience too many deflections and stay prohibitively long in the network. Such packets have to be removed because they will be ignored by the transmission protocols (like TCP) and because the quality of their optical signal is unacceptable. Presented are results for the network in the topology of the torus of the two-dimensional grid, which operates at a steady state with the uniform load u, \({u \in \langle 0, 1\rangle}\). The strength of our analysis is its novel mathematical approach, which is capable of providing very low packet loss probabilities. For the network composed of 100 nodes, we predict the packet loss probability as low as 10−9 or lower, while simulation provided results only at the order of 10−6. For a given permissible packet loss probability, our analysis provides the maximal network load and the number of allowed deflections. We verify the analysis with simulation in the cases for which simulation gave results.


Optical packet switching Performance evaluation Analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Green P.: Progress in optical networking. IEEE Commun. Mag. 39(1), 54–61 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guillemot C. et al.: Transparent optical packet switching: the European ACTS KEOPS project approach. J. Lightwave Technol. 16(12), 2117–2134 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dittmann L. et al.: The European IST project DAVID: a viable approach toward optical packet switching. IEEE J. Sel. Area Comm. 21(7), 1026–1040 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gravey P. et al.: Multiservice optical network: main concepts and first achievements of the ROM program. J. Lightwave Technol. 19(1), 23–31 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yoo S.J.B. et al.: High-performance optical-label switching packet routers and smart edge routers for the next-generation Internet. IEEE J. Sel. Area Comm. 21(7), 1041–1051 (2003)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Listanti M., Eramo V., Sabella R.: Architectural and technological issues for future optical Internet networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 38(9), 82–92 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yao S., Mukherjee B., Yoo S.J.B., Dixit S.: Electrical ingress buffering and traffic aggregation for optical packet switching and their effect on TCP-level performance in optical Mesh networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 40(9), 66–72 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xue, F., Yoo, S.J.B.: Self-similar traffic shaping at the edge router in optical packet-switched networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE ICC 2002, vol. 4, pp. 2449–2453. Anchorage, AK, April 2002Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Xu L., Perros H.G., Rouskas G.: Techniques for optical packet switching and optical burst switching. IEEE Commun. Mag. 39(1), 136–142 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brassil J.T., Cruz R.L.: Bounds on maximum delay in networks with deflection routing. IEEE Trans. Parall. Distr. Syst. 6(7), 724–732 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Czachórski, T., Fourneau, J.M.: Performance evaluation of an optimal deflection routing algorithm on an odd torus. In: Proceedings of HET-NETs 2004, pp. 63/1–63/10. Ilkley, UK, July 2004Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jue, J.P.: An algorithm for loopless deflection in PhotonicPacket-switched networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE ICC 2002, vol. 5, pp. 2776–2780. Anchorage, AK, April 2002Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Decina, M., Trecordi, V., Zanolini, G.: Throughput and packet loss in deflection routing multichannel-metropolitan area networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE GLOBECOM 1991, vol. 2, pp. 1200–1208. Phoenix, AZ, December 1991Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Szcześniak, I.: Analysis of a finite number of deflections in fully and uniformly loaded regular networks. In: Proceedings of Networking 2004, pp. 675–686. Athens, Greece, May 2004Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Acampora A.S., Shah S.I.A.: Multihop lightwave networks: a comparison of store-and-forward and hot-potato routing. IEEE Trans. Commun. 40(6), 1082–1090 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yao S., Mukherjee B., Dixit S.: PLATO: a generic modeling technique for optical packet-switched networks. Int. J. Wireless Opt. Commun. 1(1), 91–101 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bannister J., Borgonovo F., Fratta L., Gerla M.: A versatile model for predicting the performance of deflection-routing networks. Perform. Evaluation 16(1), 201–222 (1992)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    El-Bawab T.S., Shin J.D.: Optical packet switching in core networks: between vision and reality. IEEE Commun. Mag. 40(9), 60–65 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bregni, S., Guerra, G., Pattavina, A.: Optical packet switching of IP traffic. In: Proceedings of Sixth Working Conference on Optical Network Design and Modeling, pp. 135–149. Torino, Italy, February 2002Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Szcześniak, I.: OPUS: Optical Packet Switching Unified Solver, version 0.1,, November 2004
  21. 21.
    Varga, A.: The OMNeT++ discrete event simulation system. In: Proceedings of European Simulation Multiconference, pp. 319–324. Prague, Czech Republic, June 2001Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ireneusz Szcześniak
    • 1
  • Tadeusz Czachórski
    • 1
  • Jean-Michel Fourneau
    • 2
  1. 1.IITiSPolish Academy of SciencesGliwicePoland
  2. 2.PRiSMVersailles UniversityVersailles CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations