1 / 1

survivable networks using (virtual) paths (ng)SDH/SONET, ATM, MPLS, WR-DWDM

BUTE (BME). Shared Protection Rearrangement. Tibor Cinkler, Diána Meskó, Attila Mitcsenkov, {cinkler, mesko, mitcsenkov}@tmit.bme.hu. Motivation. Results for blocking robability. Blocking [%] vs. Network Capacity for the 30-node network – homogeneous traffic.

garson
Download Presentation

survivable networks using (virtual) paths (ng)SDH/SONET, ATM, MPLS, WR-DWDM

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BUTE (BME) Shared Protection Rearrangement Tibor Cinkler, Diána Meskó, Attila Mitcsenkov, {cinkler, mesko, mitcsenkov}@tmit.bme.hu Motivation Results for blocking robability Blocking [%] vs. Network Capacity for the 30-node network – homogeneous traffic • survivable networks using (virtual) paths • (ng)SDH/SONET, ATM, MPLS, WR-DWDM • restoration for any single failure • dynamic, adaptive route establishment Algorithms • Shared Path Protection (SBPP: Shared Backup Path Protection) • - End-to-End / Failure Independent Path Protection (FIPP) • - Segment-by-Segment / Domain-by-Domain • - Link-by-Link / Failure Dependent Path Protection (FDPP) • (True Mesh Path Restoration) • Rearrangement • - Simultaneously for all affected Protection Paths • - Decomposed • Working and Protection Path Calculation • - On-Line ( Dynamic (Adaptive) ) • - Joint • - Decomposed Blocking due to the protection blocking vs. Network Capacity for the 30-node network – homogeneous traffic Conclusion • Algorithms: • - SPP • - SPP-LD • - PDSP-LD • Method: • - Modelling Tricks: Link-Doubling • - MILP formulation solved by CPLEX • Three Networks: • - 16, 22, 30 nodes • Protection resources may be rearranged since they do not carry any traffic • Done adaptively • Improved performance • Assuming Link-by-Link Shared Path Protection • (Failure Dependent Shared Path Protection (FDPP)) • (True Mesh Shared Path Protection/Restoration) • instead of SPP - Further improvement Ethernet spanning tree optimization Joint project with: NoE e-Photon/ONe IP MuSE T. Cinkler, A. Kern, I. Moldován {cinkler, kern, moldovan}@tmit.bme.hu • 1GbE, 10GbE + low costs  candidate for metro network technology • Metro Ethernet (ME) should provide Carrier Grade services: ( Traffic and user separation, QoS, Protection, Traffic Engineering, etc.) • MEF and IEEE 802 provides technology for ME : but not optimization methods. We provide an OPTIMIZATION FRAMEWORK for MEs • Traffic engineered Logical Channels (LCs) • Provide QoS using absolute priority based scheduling • Dedicated, QoS and shared protection of LCs ! ILP and heuristic algorithms are proposed ! RemarkableOptimization Gain Protecion + Opt  gain remains Heuristic methods are near-optimal

More Related