Low-Latency Routing Scheme for a Fronthaul Bridged Network

Yu Nakayama; Daisuke Hisano; Takahiro Kubo; Youichi Fukada; Jun Terada; Akihiro Otaka

doi:10.1364/JOCN.10.000014

Journal of Optical Communications and Networking
Vol. 10,
Issue 1,
pp. 14-23
(2018)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/JOCN.10.000014

Low-Latency Routing Scheme for a Fronthaul Bridged Network

Yu Nakayama, Daisuke Hisano, Takahiro Kubo, Youichi Fukada, Jun Terada, and Akihiro Otaka

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Yu Nakayama, Daisuke Hisano, Takahiro Kubo, Youichi Fukada, Jun Terada, and Akihiro Otaka, "Low-Latency Routing Scheme for a Fronthaul Bridged Network," J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 10, 14-23 (2018)

Export Citation
- BibTex
- Endnote (RIS)
- HTML
- Plain Text
Citation alert
Save article

Abstract

A fronthaul bridged network has attracted attention as a means of efficiently constructing the centralized radio access network (C-RAN) architecture. If we change the functional split of C-RAN and employ time-division duplex (TDD), the data rate in fronthaul will become variable, and the global synchronization of fronthaul streams will occur. This feature results in an increase in the queuing delay in fronthaul bridges among fronthaul flows. To address this problem, this paper proposes a novel low-latency routing scheme designed to minimize the worst-case delay in fronthaul networks with path-control protocols. The proposed scheme formulates the worst-case delay of each fronthaul stream based on the distribution of nodes, the propagation delay, and metric of the links. It selects the set of paths that minimizes the maximum value of the worst-case delay from the candidate path sets for fronthaul flows generated with the $k$ -th shortest path algorithm. We confirmed with computer simulations that the proposed scheme can adequately minimize the worst-case delay, irrespective of the network topology. The maximum queuing delay is minimized by considering the time synchronization between fronthaul flows and the burst size determined by the TDD subframe length.

Full Article | PDF Article

More Like This

Decoupling of Uplink User and HARQ Response Signals to Relax the Latency Requirement for Bridged Fronthaul Networks

Daisuke Hisano, Yu Nakayama, Takahiro Kubo, Hiroyuki Uzawa, Youichi Fukada, and Jun Terada
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 11(4) B26-B36 (2019)

Fronthaul Network Modeling and Dimensioning Meeting Ultra-Low Latency Requirements for 5G

Gabriel Otero Pérez, José Alberto Hernández, and David Larrabeiti
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 10(6) 573-581 (2018)

5G Fronthaul–Latency and Jitter Studies of CPRI Over Ethernet

Divya Chitimalla, Koteswararao Kondepu, Luca Valcarenghi, Massimo Tornatore, and Biswanath Mukherjee
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 9(2) 172-182 (2017)

Previous Article Next Article

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Figures (8)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Tables (3)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Equations (9)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Variable	Definition
$F$	Set of fronthaul flows in fronthaul network
$f$	Flow identifier, $f \in F$
$P_{f}$	Set of candidate paths for $f \in F$
$p$	Path identifier, $p \in P_{f}$
$k_{f}$	Maximum size of $P_{f}$ decided by operator
$N_{f, p}$	Set of nodes on $p \in P_{f}$ for $f \in F$ , $N_{f, p} \subset V$
$n$	Node identifier, $n \in N_{f, p}$
$L_{f, p}$	Set of links on $p \in P_{f}$ for $f \in F$ , $L_{f, p} \subset E$
$l$	Link identifier, $l \in L_{f, p}$
$e_{l}$	Capacity of $l$
$λ_{f, l}$	Maximum competition number for $l$
$F_{l}$	Set of flows that traverse $l$ , $F_{l} \subset F$
$m$	Maximum burst size in fronthaul network
$d_{f, p}^{e 2 e}$	e2e delay for $p$ -path of $f$ -th flow
$d_{n}^{prc}$	Processing delay of $n$ -th node
$d_{l}^{prop}$	Propagation delay of $l$ -th link
$d_{l}^{ser}$	Serialization delay of $l$ -th link
$d_{f, l}^{q}$	Queuing delay of $l$ -th link
$τ$	Threshold for worst-case delay in fronthaul network
$x_{f, p}$	Selection state of $p$ -th path of $f$ -th flow
$S$	State of path selection

Item	Value
Number of CUs	2
Number of DUs	50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100
Iterations for each number of DUs	50
Simulation time	5 s
Capacity of DU-bridge link	1 Gbps
Capacity of bridge-bridge link	10 Gbps
Capacity of CU-bridge link	100 Gbps
Burst size $m$	9000 bytes
Processing delay $d_{n}^{prc}$	1 μs
Propagation delay $d_{l}^{prop}$	5 μs/km
Maximum size of path set $k_{f}$	2
Threshold for MCMC	1,000,000
Threshold for worst-case delay $τ$	250 μs

Variable	Definition
$F$	Set of fronthaul flows in fronthaul network
$f$	Flow identifier, $f \in F$
$P_{f}$	Set of candidate paths for $f \in F$
$p$	Path identifier, $p \in P_{f}$
$k_{f}$	Maximum size of $P_{f}$ decided by operator
$N_{f, p}$	Set of nodes on $p \in P_{f}$ for $f \in F$ , $N_{f, p} \subset V$
$n$	Node identifier, $n \in N_{f, p}$
$L_{f, p}$	Set of links on $p \in P_{f}$ for $f \in F$ , $L_{f, p} \subset E$
$l$	Link identifier, $l \in L_{f, p}$
$e_{l}$	Capacity of $l$
$λ_{f, l}$	Maximum competition number for $l$
$F_{l}$	Set of flows that traverse $l$ , $F_{l} \subset F$
$m$	Maximum burst size in fronthaul network
$d_{f, p}^{e 2 e}$	e2e delay for $p$ -path of $f$ -th flow
$d_{n}^{prc}$	Processing delay of $n$ -th node
$d_{l}^{prop}$	Propagation delay of $l$ -th link
$d_{l}^{ser}$	Serialization delay of $l$ -th link
$d_{f, l}^{q}$	Queuing delay of $l$ -th link
$τ$	Threshold for worst-case delay in fronthaul network
$x_{f, p}$	Selection state of $p$ -th path of $f$ -th flow
$S$	State of path selection

Item	Value
Number of CUs	2
Number of DUs	50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100
Iterations for each number of DUs	50
Simulation time	5 s
Capacity of DU-bridge link	1 Gbps
Capacity of bridge-bridge link	10 Gbps
Capacity of CU-bridge link	100 Gbps
Burst size $m$	9000 bytes
Processing delay $d_{n}^{prc}$	1 μs
Propagation delay $d_{l}^{prop}$	5 μs/km
Maximum size of path set $k_{f}$	2
Threshold for MCMC	1,000,000
Threshold for worst-case delay $τ$	250 μs

Abstract

Cited By

Figures (8)

Tables (3)

Equations (9)

Journal of Optical Communications and Networking