Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Trading network management complexity for blocking probability when placing optical regenerators
State University of Campinas.
The University of Texas at Dallas. (OPNEAR Laboratory)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5636-9910
The University of Texas at Dallas. (OPNEAR Laboratory)
The University of Texas at Dallas. (OPNEAR Laboratory)
Show others and affiliations
2008 (English)In: 2008 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HIGH PERFORMANCE SWITCHING AND ROUTING (HPSR), 2008, 291-296 p.Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Optical signal regenerators (3R) are required to overcome the adverse effect of fiber and other transmission impairments. 3R units may be placed either at every node (full placement) or at some selected nodes (sparse placement) of the optical network. It has been argued [1] that while the latter placement strategy may not be optimal in terms of the total number of 3R units required to support a given set of static traffic demands, it offers a number of practical advantages over the former, e.g., a contained complexity of network management in terms of signaling overhead. In this paper the full and sparse placement strategies are compared in a dynamic optical network, whereby lightpaths are set up and torn down to best fit the offered changing demands. The study shows that the blocking probability due to the lack of available 3R units achieved by the sparse placement strategy may be comparable to the one achieved by the full placement strategy. Surprisingly, it may even be lower in some cases, thus providing an additional motivation in favor of the sparse placement strategy. The study also shows that the algorithm used to choose the nodes where to place the 3R units must be designed carefully. Two placement algorithms are compared, reporting differences in signaling overhead level as high as 6 times (when achieving a desired level of lightpath connectivity) and differences in blocking probabilities as high as two orders of magnitude (when using the same level of signaling overhead).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2008. 291-296 p.
Keyword [en]
3R uinit sparse placement strategies;blocking probability;dynamic optical network;lightpath connectivity;network management complexity;optical signal regenerators;signaling overhead;static traffic;optical fibre networks;optical repeaters;probability;telecommunication network management;telecommunication signalling;telecommunication traffic;
National Category
Telecommunications
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-79178DOI: 10.1109/HSPR.2008.4734458ISI: 000265589000042Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-60749136604OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-79178DiVA: diva2:495202
Conference
International Conference on High Performance Switching and Routing (HPSR 2008). Shanghai, PEOPLES R CHINA. MAY 15-17, 2008
Note

QC 20120209

Available from: 2012-02-08 Created: 2012-02-08 Last updated: 2016-06-22Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Monti, Paolo

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Monti, Paolo
Telecommunications

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 13 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf