Skip to main content
Log in

Constrained and Unconstrained overspill routing in optical networks: a detailed performance evaluation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Photonic Network Communications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this article, we present a detailed performance evaluation of a hybrid optical switching (HOS) architecture called Overspill Routing in Optical Networks (ORION). The ORION architecture combines (optical) wavelength and (electronic) packet switching, so as to obtain the individual advantages of both switching paradigms. In particular, ORION exploits the possible idle periods of established lightpaths to transmit packets destined to the next common node, or even directly to their common end-destination. Depending on whether all lightpaths are allowed to simultaneously carry and terminate overspill traffic or overspill is restricted to a sub-set of wavelengths, the architecture limits itself to constrained or un-constrained ORION. To evaluate both cases, we developed an extensive network simulator where the basic features of the ORION architecture were modeled, including suitable edge/core node switches and load-varying sources to simulate overloading traffic conditions. Further, we have assessed various aspects of the ORION architecture including two basic routing/forwarding policies and various buffering schemes. The complete network study shows that ORION can absorb temporal traffic overloads, as intended, provided sufficient buffering is present. We also demonstrate that the restriction of simultaneous packet insertions/extractions, to reduce the necessary interfaces, do not deteriorate performance and thus the use of traffic concentrators assure ORION’s economic viability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Balasubramanian, S., et al. (2004). Medium access control protocols for light trail and light bus networks. Proceedings of 8th IFIP ONDM, Ghent, Belgium, Feb. 2004.

  2. Bjornstad, S., et al. (2003). A highly efficient optical packet switching node design supporting guaranteed service. Proceedings of ECOC, Rimini, Italy, Sept. 2003, pp. 110–111.

  3. Christodoulopoulos, K., et al. (2006). Performance Evaluation of Overspill Routing in Optical Networks. Proceedings of ICC 2006 Istanbul, Turkey, June 2006.

  4. Floyd S., et al. (1993) Random early detection gateways for congestion avoidance. IEEE/ACM Transaction on. Networking, 1(4): pp. 397–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gumaste A., et al. (2004). Light-trails: an optical solution for IP transport. OSA Journal of Optical Networks, 3(5): pp. 261–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gumaste A., et al. (2005). Next-generation optical storage area networks: The light-trails approach. IEEE Communications Magazine, 43(3): pp. 72–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Le Vu H., et al. (2005). Scalable performance evaluation of a hybrid optical switch. IEEE/OSA Journal of Lightwave Technology 23(10): pp. 2961–2973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Lee, G. M., et al. (2003). Performance evaluation of an optical hybrid switching system. Proceedings of IEEE GLOBECOM ’03 San Francisco, USA, Dec. 2003, Vol. 5, pp. 2508–2512.

  9. Lee Hyeong-II et al. (2005). Hybrid optical transport Network (HOTNET): An optical network with hybrid switching technologies for integrated services. IEICE Transactions on Communications E88-B, (10): pp. 3874–3885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Qiao C., et al. (1999). Optical burst switching (OBS)— a new paradigm for an optical Internet. Journal of High Speed Networks (JHSN) 8(1): 69–84

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ramaswami, R., & Sivarajan, K (1998). Optical networks: a practical perspective. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.

  12. Renaud M., et al. (1997). Network and system concepts for optical packet switching. IEEE Communication Magazine 35(4): 96–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Van Breusegem E., et al. (2005). A broad view on overspill routing in optical networks: a real synthesis of packet and circuit switching? Elsevier Journal of Optical Switching and Networking, 1(1): 51–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Van Breusegem E., et al. (2006). Overspill routing in optical networks: a true hybrid optical network design. IEEE Journal of Selected Areas in Communications, 24(4): 13–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Vlachos K. et al. (2003a). Ultrafast time-domain technology and its application in all-optical signal processing. IEEE/OSA Journal of Lightwave Technology 21(9): 1857–1868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Vlachos K., et al. (2003b). An Optical FSK/IM coding technique for the implementation of a label controlled, AWG-based Optical Packet Router. IEEE/OSA Journal of Lightwave Technology, 21(11): pp. 2617–2628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wen B., et al. (2001). Optical Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM) Network Simulator (OWns) Architecture and performance Studies, SPIE Optical Networks Magazine, 2(5): 16–26

    Google Scholar 

  18. Xin, C., et al. (2003) A hybrid optical switching approach. Proceedings of IEEE GLOBECOM ’03 San Francisco, USA, Dec. 2003, Vol. 7, pp. 3808–3812.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kyriakos Vlachos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vlachos, K., Van Breusegem, E., Christodoulopoulos, K. et al. Constrained and Unconstrained overspill routing in optical networks: a detailed performance evaluation. Photon Netw Commun 13, 227–240 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11107-006-0052-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11107-006-0052-z

Keywords

Navigation