Survivable Multipath Routing of Anycast and Unicast Traffic in Elastic Optical Networks

Róża Goścień; Krzysztof Walkowiak; Massimo Tornatore

doi:10.1364/JOCN.8.000343

Journal of Optical Communications and Networking
Vol. 8,
Issue 6,
pp. 343-355
(2016)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/JOCN.8.000343

Survivable Multipath Routing of Anycast and Unicast Traffic in Elastic Optical Networks

Róża Goścień, Krzysztof Walkowiak, and Massimo Tornatore

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Róża Goścień, Krzysztof Walkowiak, and Massimo Tornatore, "Survivable Multipath Routing of Anycast and Unicast Traffic in Elastic Optical Networks," J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 8, 343-355 (2016)

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

Abstract

In this paper, we focus on the survivability of elastic optical networks (EONs) that jointly support two types of traffic demands: unicast and anycast. To provide network survivability, we apply multipath routing; i.e., we allow the splitting of a demand into a number of routing paths if the paths’ combination guarantees the realization of a specific demand volume in the case of a single link failure. We formulate the corresponding optimization problem as an integer linear program (ILP) and propose a survivable multipath allocation (SMA) algorithm to solve the problem in a reasonable amount of time. Next, we perform numerical experiments to compare the efficiency (ability to provide a good-quality solution in a reasonable amount of time) of the ILP model and SMA as well as to evaluate the impact of survivable multipath routing on the objective defined as a maximum spectrum usage in EONs. Our results show that the SMA method finds good-quality solutions in a reasonable amount of time and that survivable multipath routing in EONs requires additional spectrum resources, up to 45%. However, the amount of additional resources depends on the required protection level, amount of anycast traffic, the maximum number of paths used for demand realization, and the considered network topology.

Full Article | PDF Article

More Like This

Delayed spectrum allocation in elastic optical networks with anycast traffic

Pegah Afsharlar, Arash Deylamsalehi, and Vinod M. Vokkarane
OSA Continuum 4(8) 2118-2132 (2021)

Traffic-Grooming- and Multipath-Routing-Enabled Impairment-Aware Elastic Optical Networks

Madushanka Nishan Dharmaweera, Juzi Zhao, Li Yan, Magnus Karlsson, and Erik Agrell
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 8(2) 58-70 (2016)

Survivable Multipath Routing and Spectrum Allocation in OFDM-Based Flexible Optical Networks

Lu Ruan and Nan Xiao
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 5(3) 172-182 (2013)

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 (4)

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 (6)

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

		Bit-Rate [Gbps]
Distance	Type	50	100	150	200	250	300	350	400
500 km	# slices	4	4	6	6	6	8	8	10
500 km	# regs	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
1000 km	# slices	4	4	6	6	10	10	12	18
1000 km	# regs	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
1500 km	# slices	4	6	8	10	22	26	30	34
1500 km	# regs	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1
2000 km	# slices	4	6	14	18	22	26	30	34
2000 km	# regs	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1

	ILP	SMA		FF		Multi_mcs		Multi_bw		Multi_bw_hops
	$k = 4$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$
Average Values of the Objective Function
$T = 0.5 Tbps$	8.3	11.0	9.5	13.0	13.0	11.4	11.3	14.7	14.6	14.9	14.8
$T = 1.0 Tbps$	10.8	12.7	11.9	16.9	16.9	15.0	14.3	24.1	23.9	24.1	23.9
$T = 1.5 Tbps$	14.4	16.8	15.2	21.3	21.3	19.1	17.7	28.6	28.1	28.6	28.4
$T = 2.0 Tbps$	18.6	21.5	18.9	27.3	27.3	23.5	21.6	35.7	35.7	35.8	35.8
Average Gap to the ILP Result
$T = 0.5 Tbps$	—	23.7%	11.6%	34.6%	34.6%	25.6%	25.3%	42.1%	42.1%	42.6%	42.6%
$T = 1.0 Tbps$	—	15.5%	11.7%	35.5%	35.5%	28.9%	27.0%	55.3%	54.7%	55.3%	54.6%
$T = 1.5 Tbps$	—	11.8%	6.1%	32.5%	32.5%	23.9%	19.3%	48.9%	48.3%	49.1%	48.8%
$T = 2.0 Tbps$	—	0.0%	−11.4%	24.8%	24.8%	5.0%	−0.8%	44.3%	44.3%	45.0%	45.0%
Average Processing Time [s]
$T = 0.5 Tbps$	2415.6	0.08	1641.16	0.01	2.91	0.02	6.11	0.01	5.73	0.01	5.72
$T = 1.0 Tbps$	3600.0	0.11	2186.8	0.01	3.87	0.02	8.33	0.01	7.79	0.01	7.79
$T = 1.5 Tbps$	3600.0	0.14	2897.88	0.01	5.11	0.03	11.30	0.01	10.61	0.01	10.62
$T = 2.0 Tbps$	3600.0	0.18	3528.45	0.02	6.37	0.04	14.64	0.02	13.79	0.09	13.77

	$α_{d} = 0 %$		$α_{d} = 20 %$		$α_{d} = 40 %$		$α_{d} = 60 %$		$α_{d} = 80 %$		$α_{d} = 100 %$
AR	$K = 3$	$K = 4$	$K = 3$	$K = 4$	$K = 3$	$K = 4$	$K = 3$	$K = 4$	$K = 3$	$K = 4$	$K = 3$	$K = 4$
0%	4.09%	4.33%	4.16%	4.16%	1.09%	1.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.90%	0.90%	0.42%	0.42%
20%	2.36%	4.09%	2.02%	2.32%	0.99%	2.50%	0.47%	0.72%	0.50%	0.79%	0.08%	0.31%
40%	2.16%	3.49%	3.64%	3.88%	3.36%	3.36%	0.49%	0.49%	0.88%	0.97%	0.79%	0.96%
60%	0.41%	1.69%	0.60%	0.81%	0.64%	0.64%	0.93%	1.29%	0.70%	0.75%	1.53%	1.63%
80%	1.94%	2.70%	1.13%	1.57%	0.51%	0.72%	1.45%	2.20%	1.82%	2.14%	1.99%	2.23%
100%	2.11%	3.71%	1.57%	2.06%	1.97%	1.97%	0.47%	0.60%	0.57%	0.57%	0.97%	0.97%

		Bit-Rate [Gbps]
Distance	Type	50	100	150	200	250	300	350	400
500 km	# slices	4	4	6	6	6	8	8	10
500 km	# regs	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
1000 km	# slices	4	4	6	6	10	10	12	18
1000 km	# regs	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
1500 km	# slices	4	6	8	10	22	26	30	34
1500 km	# regs	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1
2000 km	# slices	4	6	14	18	22	26	30	34
2000 km	# regs	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1

	ILP	SMA		FF		Multi_mcs		Multi_bw		Multi_bw_hops
	$k = 4$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$	$k = 4$	$k = 30$
Average Values of the Objective Function
$T = 0.5 Tbps$	8.3	11.0	9.5	13.0	13.0	11.4	11.3	14.7	14.6	14.9	14.8
$T = 1.0 Tbps$	10.8	12.7	11.9	16.9	16.9	15.0	14.3	24.1	23.9	24.1	23.9
$T = 1.5 Tbps$	14.4	16.8	15.2	21.3	21.3	19.1	17.7	28.6	28.1	28.6	28.4
$T = 2.0 Tbps$	18.6	21.5	18.9	27.3	27.3	23.5	21.6	35.7	35.7	35.8	35.8
Average Gap to the ILP Result
$T = 0.5 Tbps$	—	23.7%	11.6%	34.6%	34.6%	25.6%	25.3%	42.1%	42.1%	42.6%	42.6%
$T = 1.0 Tbps$	—	15.5%	11.7%	35.5%	35.5%	28.9%	27.0%	55.3%	54.7%	55.3%	54.6%
$T = 1.5 Tbps$	—	11.8%	6.1%	32.5%	32.5%	23.9%	19.3%	48.9%	48.3%	49.1%	48.8%
$T = 2.0 Tbps$	—	0.0%	−11.4%	24.8%	24.8%	5.0%	−0.8%	44.3%	44.3%	45.0%	45.0%
Average Processing Time [s]
$T = 0.5 Tbps$	2415.6	0.08	1641.16	0.01	2.91	0.02	6.11	0.01	5.73	0.01	5.72
$T = 1.0 Tbps$	3600.0	0.11	2186.8	0.01	3.87	0.02	8.33	0.01	7.79	0.01	7.79
$T = 1.5 Tbps$	3600.0	0.14	2897.88	0.01	5.11	0.03	11.30	0.01	10.61	0.01	10.62
$T = 2.0 Tbps$	3600.0	0.18	3528.45	0.02	6.37	0.04	14.64	0.02	13.79	0.09	13.77

Abstract

Cited By

Figures (4)

Tables (6)

Equations (9)

Journal of Optical Communications and Networking