Photonic Network Communications

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 191–207 | Cite as

Capacity Efficiency and Restorability of Path Protection and Rerouting in WDM Networks Subject to Dual Failures

Article

Abstract

Resilient optical networks are predominately designed to protect against single failures of fiber links. But in larger networks, operators also see dual failures. As the capacity was planned for single failures, disconnections can occur by dual failures even if enough topological connectivity is provided. In our approach the design of the network minimizes the average loss caused by dual failures, while single failures are still fully survived. High dual failure restorability is the primary aim, capacity is optimized in a second step. For WDM networks with full wavelength conversion, we formulate mixed integer linear programming models for dedicated path protection, shared (backup) path protection, and path rerouting with and without stub-release. For larger problem instances in path rerouting, we propose two heuristics. Computational results indicate that the connectivity is of much more importance for high restorability values than the overall protection capacity. Shared protection has similar restorability levels as dedicated protection while the capacity is comparable to rerouting. Rerouting surpasses the protection mechanisms in restorability and comes close to 100% dual failure survivability. Compared to single failure planning, both shared path protection and rerouting need significantly more capacity in dual failure planning.

multiple failures path protection rerouting path restoration WDM networks 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    M. Clouqueur, W. D. Grover, Availability analysis of span-restorable mesh networks, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 20, no. 4, (May 2002), pp. 810-821.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    D. A. Schupke, A. Autenrieth, T. Fischer, Survivability of multiple fiber duct failures, in: Proc. of Third International Workshop on the Design of Reliable Communication Networks (DRCN), (Budapest, Hungary, 2001), pp. 213-219.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Clouqueur, W. D. Grover, Mesh-restorable networks with complete dual failure restorability and with selectively enhanced dual-failure restorability properties, in: Proc. of SPIE Optical Networking and Communications Conference (OptiComm), no. 4874-1, (Boston, MA, USA, 2002), pp. 1-12.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    S. Kim, S. Lumetta, Evaluation of protection reconfiguration for multiple failures in WDM mesh networks. In Proc. of Optical Fiber Communication Conference and Exhibit (OFC), vol. 1, (Atlanta, GA, USA, 2003), pp. 210-211.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. Clouqueur, W. D. Grover, Quantitative comparison of end-to-end availability of service paths in ring and mesh-restorable networks, in: Proc. of the 19th Annual National Fiber Optics Engineers Conference (NFOEC), (Orlando, FL, USA, 2003), pp. 317-326.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    M. Clouqueur, W. D. Grover, Computational and design studies on the unavailability of mesh-restorable networks, in: Second International Workshop on the Design of Reliable Communications Networks (DRCN), (Munich, Germany, 2000), pp. 181-186.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. E. Doucette, W. D. Grover, Capacity design studies of span-restorable mesh networks with shared-risk link group (SRLG) effects, in: Proc. of SPIE Optical Networking and Communications Conference (OptiComm), no. 4874-3, (Boston, MA, USA, 2002), pp. 25-38.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    W. He, M. Sridharan, A. K. Somani, Capacity optimization for surviving double-link failures in mesh-restorable optical networks, in: Proc. of SPIE Optical Networking and Communications Conference (OptiComm), no. 4874-02, (Boston, MA, USA, 2002), pp. 13-24.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    H. Choi, S. Subramaniam, H.-A. Choi, On double-link failure recovery in WDM optical networks, in: Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM, vol. 2, (New York, NY, USA, 2002), pp. 808-816.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    S. Lumetta, M. Médard, Classification of two-link failures for all-optical networks, in: Proc. of Optical Fiber Communication Conference and Exhibit (OFC), vol. 2, (Anaheim, CA, USA, 2001), pp. TuO3-1-TuO3-3.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    C.-C. Sue, S.-Y. Kuo, Restoration from multiple faults for WDM network with and without wavelength conversion, in: Proc. of First International Conference on Networking (ICN), (Colmar, France, 2001) Part 1, pp. 317-325.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    H. Sakauchi, Y. Okanoue, S. Hasegawa, Spare-channel design schemes for self-healing networks, IEICE Transactions on Communications, vol. E75-B, no. 7, (July 1992), pp. 624-633.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    G. Willems, P. Arijs, W. Van Parys, P. Demeester, Capacity vs. availability trade-offs in mesh-restorable WDM networks, in: Proc. of Third International Workshop on the Design of Reliable Communication Networks (DRCN), (Budapest, Hungary, 2001), pp. 107-112.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    H. F. Salama, Multicast routing for real-time communication on high-speed networks. Ph.D. thesis, North Carolina State University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, (Raleigh, NC, USA, 1996).Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    D. A. Schupke, R. Prinz, Performance of path protection and rerouting for WDM networks subject to dual failures, in: Proc. of Optical Fiber Communication Conference and Exhibit (OFC), vol. 1, (Atlanta, GA, USA, 2003), pp. 209-210.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Communication NetworksMunich University of TechnologyMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations