Abstract

The problem of how to upgrade translucent optical networks is studied in this paper. This study is motivated by the cost advantage of not having network nodes fully equipped with transceivers in the beginning of network deployment but adding transceivers as and when it is necessary. A novel heuristic algorithm for the selection of nodes to upgrade (by adding transceivers) based on the transitional weight of the nodes and the length of the links is proposed. Spare transceivers in the nodes can be used to regenerate signals. An algorithm for locating the regeneration nodes in the network is also proposed. The proposed upgrade node selection algorithm is studied with the regeneration node selection algorithm and a wavelength weighted routing algorithm by means of numerical simulations. Simulation results show that upgrading translucent optical network by means of the proposed upgrade node selection algorithm has lower blocking probability and cost advantage compared to other strategies.

© 2003 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |

  1. B. Ramamurthy, D. Datta, H. Feng, J. P. Heritage, and B. Mukherjee, “Transparent vs. opaque vs. translucent wavelength-routed optical network,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 59–61
  2. A. A. M. Saleh, “Transparent optical networking in backbone networks,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 2000), pp. 62–64
  3. G. Shen, W. D. Grover, T. H. Cheng, and Sanjay K. Bose, “Sparse placement of electronic switching nodes for low-blocking in translucent optical networks,” OSA J. Optical Networking1, 424–441, 2002.
  4. X. Yang and B. Ramamurthy, “Dynamic routing in translucent WDM optical networks,” in Proceeding of IEEE International Conference on Communications, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, New York, NY, 2002), pp. 2796–2802
  5. S. Thiagarajan and A. K. Somani, “An efficient algorithm for optimal wavelength converter placement on wavelength-routed networks with arbitrary topologies,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, New York, NY, 1999), pp. 916–923
  6. B. Ramamurthy, S. Yaragorla, and X. Yang, “Translucent optical WDM networks for the next-generation backbone networks,” in Proceedings of IEEE Global Communications Conference, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, San Antonio, TX, 2001), pp. 60–64

Bose, Sanjay K.

G. Shen, W. D. Grover, T. H. Cheng, and Sanjay K. Bose, “Sparse placement of electronic switching nodes for low-blocking in translucent optical networks,” OSA J. Optical Networking1, 424–441, 2002.

Cheng, T. H.

G. Shen, W. D. Grover, T. H. Cheng, and Sanjay K. Bose, “Sparse placement of electronic switching nodes for low-blocking in translucent optical networks,” OSA J. Optical Networking1, 424–441, 2002.

Datta, D.

B. Ramamurthy, D. Datta, H. Feng, J. P. Heritage, and B. Mukherjee, “Transparent vs. opaque vs. translucent wavelength-routed optical network,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 59–61

Feng, H.

B. Ramamurthy, D. Datta, H. Feng, J. P. Heritage, and B. Mukherjee, “Transparent vs. opaque vs. translucent wavelength-routed optical network,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 59–61

Grover, W. D.

G. Shen, W. D. Grover, T. H. Cheng, and Sanjay K. Bose, “Sparse placement of electronic switching nodes for low-blocking in translucent optical networks,” OSA J. Optical Networking1, 424–441, 2002.

Heritage, J. P.

B. Ramamurthy, D. Datta, H. Feng, J. P. Heritage, and B. Mukherjee, “Transparent vs. opaque vs. translucent wavelength-routed optical network,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 59–61

Mukherjee, B.

B. Ramamurthy, D. Datta, H. Feng, J. P. Heritage, and B. Mukherjee, “Transparent vs. opaque vs. translucent wavelength-routed optical network,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 59–61

Ramamurthy, B.

B. Ramamurthy, D. Datta, H. Feng, J. P. Heritage, and B. Mukherjee, “Transparent vs. opaque vs. translucent wavelength-routed optical network,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 59–61

X. Yang and B. Ramamurthy, “Dynamic routing in translucent WDM optical networks,” in Proceeding of IEEE International Conference on Communications, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, New York, NY, 2002), pp. 2796–2802

B. Ramamurthy, S. Yaragorla, and X. Yang, “Translucent optical WDM networks for the next-generation backbone networks,” in Proceedings of IEEE Global Communications Conference, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, San Antonio, TX, 2001), pp. 60–64

Saleh, A. A. M.

A. A. M. Saleh, “Transparent optical networking in backbone networks,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 2000), pp. 62–64

Shen, G.

G. Shen, W. D. Grover, T. H. Cheng, and Sanjay K. Bose, “Sparse placement of electronic switching nodes for low-blocking in translucent optical networks,” OSA J. Optical Networking1, 424–441, 2002.

Somani, A. K.

S. Thiagarajan and A. K. Somani, “An efficient algorithm for optimal wavelength converter placement on wavelength-routed networks with arbitrary topologies,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, New York, NY, 1999), pp. 916–923

Thiagarajan, S.

S. Thiagarajan and A. K. Somani, “An efficient algorithm for optimal wavelength converter placement on wavelength-routed networks with arbitrary topologies,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, New York, NY, 1999), pp. 916–923

Yang, X.

B. Ramamurthy, S. Yaragorla, and X. Yang, “Translucent optical WDM networks for the next-generation backbone networks,” in Proceedings of IEEE Global Communications Conference, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, San Antonio, TX, 2001), pp. 60–64

X. Yang and B. Ramamurthy, “Dynamic routing in translucent WDM optical networks,” in Proceeding of IEEE International Conference on Communications, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, New York, NY, 2002), pp. 2796–2802

Yaragorla, S.

B. Ramamurthy, S. Yaragorla, and X. Yang, “Translucent optical WDM networks for the next-generation backbone networks,” in Proceedings of IEEE Global Communications Conference, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, San Antonio, TX, 2001), pp. 60–64

Other (6)

B. Ramamurthy, D. Datta, H. Feng, J. P. Heritage, and B. Mukherjee, “Transparent vs. opaque vs. translucent wavelength-routed optical network,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 59–61

A. A. M. Saleh, “Transparent optical networking in backbone networks,” in Proceeding of Optical Fiber Communication Conference, (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 2000), pp. 62–64

G. Shen, W. D. Grover, T. H. Cheng, and Sanjay K. Bose, “Sparse placement of electronic switching nodes for low-blocking in translucent optical networks,” OSA J. Optical Networking1, 424–441, 2002.

X. Yang and B. Ramamurthy, “Dynamic routing in translucent WDM optical networks,” in Proceeding of IEEE International Conference on Communications, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, New York, NY, 2002), pp. 2796–2802

S. Thiagarajan and A. K. Somani, “An efficient algorithm for optimal wavelength converter placement on wavelength-routed networks with arbitrary topologies,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, New York, NY, 1999), pp. 916–923

B. Ramamurthy, S. Yaragorla, and X. Yang, “Translucent optical WDM networks for the next-generation backbone networks,” in Proceedings of IEEE Global Communications Conference, (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, San Antonio, TX, 2001), pp. 60–64

Cited By

OSA participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (13)

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

The node model.

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

The topology of NSFNET.

Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

The transitional weight of nodes.

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

Comparison between the two node selection strategies, when the network is upgraded from M=1 to M=2, W=8, Ls =3000km

Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.

Comparison between the two node selection strategies, when the network is upgraded from M=2 to M=3, W=8, Ls =3000km

Fig. 6.
Fig. 6.

Comparison between the TL strategy and the random selection strategy, when the network is upgraded from M=1 to M=2, W=8, Ls =3000km.

Fig. 7.
Fig. 7.

Comparison between the TL strategy and the random selection strategy, when the network is upgraded from M=2 to M=3, W=8, Ls =3000km.

Fig. 8
Fig. 8

The difference between the increased traffic load after upgrading using the TL and TM algorithms, when the blocking probability constraint is 0.01 and the network is upgraded from M=1 to M=2, W=8, Ls =3000km.

Fig. 9.
Fig. 9.

The increased traffic load after upgrading using the TL algorithm and the random selection strategy, when the blocking probability constraint is 0.01 and the network is upgraded from M=1 to M=2, W=8, Ls =3000km.

Fig. 10.
Fig. 10.

The relationship between the blocking probability and the number of wavelengths for the TL and TW algorithms, when the network is upgraded from M=1 to M=2, Ls =3000km, 40Erlangs.

Fig. 11.
Fig. 11.

The relationship between the blocking probability and the transparent length for the TL and TW algorithms, when the network is upgraded from M=1 to M=2, W=8, 40Erlangs.

Fig. 12.
Fig. 12.

Comparison between the two node selection strategies, when wavelength conversion is considered and the network is upgraded from M=1 to M=2, Ls =3000km, W=8.

Fig. 13.
Fig. 13.

Comparison between the two node selection strategies, when tunable lasers are used and the network is upgraded from M=1 to M=2, Ls =3000km, W=8.

Tables (2)

Tables Icon

Table 1. Sequence of Nodes Selected for Upgrading

Tables Icon

Table 2. Links Ordered in Descending Order of Link Lengths

Equations (2)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

C k = s , d , ( s d ) T k sd , k ( 1 , 2 , , N )
F k = α · P k + ( 1 α ) · Q k

Metrics