Techno-Economic Analysis of Fixed and Flexible Node Architectures in Multiperiod Scenarios [Invited]

Rui Manuel Morais; João Pedro; Armando Nolasco Pinto

doi:10.1364/JOCN.7.00B109

Journal of Optical Communications and Networking
Vol. 7,
Issue 12,
pp. B109-B121
(2015)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/JOCN.7.00B109

Techno-Economic Analysis of Fixed and Flexible Node Architectures in Multiperiod Scenarios [Invited]

Rui Manuel Morais, João Pedro, and Armando Nolasco Pinto

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Rui Manuel Morais, João Pedro, and Armando Nolasco Pinto, "Techno-Economic Analysis of Fixed and Flexible Node Architectures in Multiperiod Scenarios [Invited]," J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 7, B109-B121 (2015)

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

Related Topics
Optics & Photonics Topics
?

The topics in this list come from the Optics and Photonics Topics applied to this article.

About this Article
History
- Original Manuscript: June 1, 2015
- Revised Manuscript: September 11, 2015
- Manuscript Accepted: September 11, 2015
- Published: October 19, 2015
Virtual Issues
Journal of Optical Communications and Networking OFC 2015 (2015)

Abstract

We analyze the capital expenditures (CapEx) and operational expenditures (OpEx) related to the power consumption and footprint requirements of fixed and flexible node architectures in a multiperiod scenario and under different traffic requirements. We consider fixed architectures based on muxponders, and nonblocking and partial nonblocking flexible architectures based on electrical cross connects (EXC) of different sizes. In flexible architectures, the impact of hitless traffic regrooming on the network CapEx and OpEx is also assessed. Results show that in spite of the initial higher investment required by flexible architectures, in the long term they tend to present lower CapEx and OpEx. Moreover, hitless regrooming can assist in postponing the need for increasing the footprint requirements in partial nonblocking EXCs.

Full Article | PDF Article

More Like This

Evaluating Modular Node Architectures With Limited Shelf Interconnection [Invited]

Rui Manuel Morais, João Pedro, and Tom Rarick
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 9(2) A176-A188 (2017)

Impact of Node Architecture in the Power Consumption and Footprint Requirements of Optical Transport Networks

Rui Manuel Morais, João Pedro, Paulo Monteiro, and Armando Nolasco Pinto
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 5(5) 421-436 (2013)

Flexible Node Architectures for Metro Networks [Invited]

Marco Schiano, Alessandro Percelsi, and Marco Quagliotti
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 7(12) B131-B140 (2015)

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 (6)

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 (4)

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 (14)

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

	Muxponder-Based	Nonblocking EXC	Partial Nonblocking EXCs
Connection of client signals	Only client signals to be groomed in the same higher bit rate signal can be connected to the same module.	A client signal can be connected to any module that has an empty port compatible with its bit rate.	A client signal can be connected to any module that has an empty port compatible with its bit rate.
Switching between modules	Performed using external links.	Performed through the backplane.	Performed through the backplane.
Grooming configuration	Fixed by the muxponder module (limited to a small set).	All possible mixtures of signals.	All possible mixtures of signals provided that they share the same backplane.
Slot connection restrictions	No restriction.	No restriction.	Client- and line-module-switching traffic needs to be connected to the same backplane.
Reconfiguration	Manual (on-site).	Software (remote).	Software (remote).
Hitless regrooming	No.	Yes, without restrictions.	Yes, between modules connected to the same backplane.

Module Type	Variable	Ports	Parameter	Slots	Parameter	Power Consumption (W)	Price (m.u.)
Transceivers
$1.25 Gbit / s$ (SR)	${Tsv}_{1.25}$	—	—	—	—	1	0.02
$2.5 Gbit / s$ (SR)	${Tsv}_{2.5}$	—	—	—	—	1	0.05
$10 Gbit / s$ (SR)	${Tsv}_{10}$	—	—	—	—	3.5	0.1
$40 Gbit / s$ (SR)	${Tsv}_{40}$	—	—	—	—	8	0.4
$100 Gbit / s$ (LR)	${Tsv}_{100}$	—	—	—	—	15	14
Muxponder Modules
$10 Gbit / s$ ^a	$M_{10}^{1 \dots 5}$	1	—	1	$S_{10}^{1 \dots 5}$	50	1.2
$100 Gbit / s$ ^b	$M_{100}^{6}$	1	—	2	$S_{100}^{6}$	150	16
$100 Gbit / s$ ^c	$M_{100}^{7}$	1	—	2	$S_{100}^{7}$	150	13
Shelf	$M_{sf}^{mb}$	—	$S_{sf}^{mb}$	16^d	—	^e	^e
Control	$M_{ctr}^{mb}$	—	—	1	$S_{ctr}^{mb}$	300	5.3
EXC Modules
$1.25 Gbit / s$	$M_{1.25}$	32	$P_{1.25}$	1	$S_{1.25}$	224	3.8
$2.5 Gbit / s$	$M_{2.5}$	24	$P_{2.5}$	1	$S_{2.5}$	360	4.5
$10 Gbit / s$	$M_{10}$	10	$P_{10}$	1	$S_{10}$	340	5
$40 Gbit / s$	$M_{40}$	2	$P_{40}$	1	$S_{40}$	320	6.4
$100 Gbit / s$	$M_{100}$	1	$P_{100}$	1	$S_{100}$	360	12
Shelf	$M_{sf}^{nbe}$	—	$S_{sf}^{nbe}$	128^d	—	^e	^e
Control	$M_{ctr}^{nbe}$	—	—	1	$S_{ctr}^{nbe}$	1200	76
ESM	$M_{esm}^{nbe}$	—	—	3	$S_{esm}^{nbe}$	500	10
Shelf (partial)	$M_{sf}^{pbe}$	—	$S_{sf}^{pbe}$	16^d	—	^e	^e
Control (partial)	$M_{ctr}^{pbe}$	—	—	1	$S_{ctr}^{pbe}$	400	8.3
ESM (partial)	$M_{esm}^{pbe}$	—	—	1	$S_{esm}^{pbe}$	200	3

Pattern	$1.25 Gbit / s$	$2.5 Gbit / s$	$10 Gbit / s$	$40 Gbit / s$
1	60%	30%	10%	0%
2	0%	5%	30%	65%

	Pattern 1				Pattern 2
	Only Added Traffic		20% Changing Destination		Only Added Traffic		20% Changing Destination
	5 Nodes	10 Nodes	5 Nodes	10 Nodes	5 Nodes	10 Nodes	5 Nodes	10 Nodes
Muxponder-based	102.01%	98.50%	111.46%	122.74%	−21.87%	6.31%	−28.72%	−2.99%
Nonblocking EXC	0.61%	0.00%	0.73%	0.00%	0.01%	0.08%	0.27%	0.42%
Partial nonblocking EXCs	9.26%	123.68%	−2.66%	25.53%	8.03%	36.95%	6.14%	19.40%
Partial nonblocking EXCs (regrooming)	7.21%	110.14%	−6.69%	14.74%	1.93%	22.95%	−3.96%	1.83%

	Muxponder-Based	Nonblocking EXC	Partial Nonblocking EXCs
Connection of client signals	Only client signals to be groomed in the same higher bit rate signal can be connected to the same module.	A client signal can be connected to any module that has an empty port compatible with its bit rate.	A client signal can be connected to any module that has an empty port compatible with its bit rate.
Switching between modules	Performed using external links.	Performed through the backplane.	Performed through the backplane.
Grooming configuration	Fixed by the muxponder module (limited to a small set).	All possible mixtures of signals.	All possible mixtures of signals provided that they share the same backplane.
Slot connection restrictions	No restriction.	No restriction.	Client- and line-module-switching traffic needs to be connected to the same backplane.
Reconfiguration	Manual (on-site).	Software (remote).	Software (remote).
Hitless regrooming	No.	Yes, without restrictions.	Yes, between modules connected to the same backplane.

Abstract

Cited By

Figures (6)

Tables (4)

Equations (14)

Journal of Optical Communications and Networking