1. Analytical Approach to Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation Algorithm used in LRPON MS Thesis Defense + PhD Qualifiers Anu Mercian Committee Members: Martin Reisslein (Chair) Michael McGarry Cihan Tepedelenlioglu Yanchao Zhang

2. Agenda Passive Optical Networks (PON) Long-Range PON (LRPON) Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation (DBA) Part 1: Multi-threading Polling Part 2: Parallel Polling Part 3: Multi-polling techniques Conclusion Future Works

3. INTRODUCTION We live in a bandwidth-hungry world with services demanding superior performance in voice, data and video services

4. Passive Optical Networks When the physical layer is Optic Fibers, bandwidth obtained in the higher layers is promising © wikipedia

5. Structure of PON Downstream Traffic Upstream Traffic © [20] G. Kramer, G. Pesavento. Ethernet Passive Optical Network(EPON): Building a next Generation Optical Access Network

6. Evolution of PON APON – ATM passive optical networks BPON – Broadband PON (~622Mbps) EPON – Ethernet PON (more widespread(easy overlay)) GPON – higher bandwidth (larger variable length packets) (ITU G.984) GEPON – within the Ethernet, gigabit availability LRPON – long-reach to allow >20km (~100km) © Glen Kramer, Gerry Pesavento; Ethernet Passive Optical Network(EPON): Building a Next Generation Opitcal Access Network

7. Importance of LRPON High CapEx and OpEx involved in PON deployment to cover large area with a OLT/Central office for every 20Km of distribution LRPON covers 100Km reducing CapEx and OpEx Reduction in active sites leads to larger distances

8. Multi Point Control Protocol IEEE 802.3ah standard © Michael P.McGarry, Martin Reisslein, Martin Maier; Ethernet Passive Optical Network Architectures and Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation Algorithms

9. Dynamic bandwidth allocation Static Bandwidth Allocation – Each link is given a standard BW allocated. Disadvantages of SBA Necessity of Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation – Statistical Multiplexing Design Space [22]: –Grant scheduling framework –Grant sizing schemes –Scheduling Policies © [22] M.P. McGarry; M. Reisslein. Investigation of the DBA Algorithm Design Space for EPONs

10. Grant Scheduling framework Online or IPACT(Interleaved Polling with Adaptive Cycle time) Offline

11. Grant sizing schemes Fixed Gated Limited

12. Scheduling Policies Shortest Propagation Delay Shortest Grant or Shortest Processing Time First(SPT) Where τ is the half RTT

13. Problem Statement I LRPON promises less OpEx and CapEx but the large propagation delay gives poor delay performance. A Solution – Multi-thread polling (MTP)[16]. Discrepancies in MTP: MTP gives good delay performance when compared to offline scheduling framework. But is it better than online technique? © [16] H. Song et. al. Multi-thread polling: A Dynamic Bandwidth Distribution Scheme in LPON

14. Delay Analysis Polling delay Granting delay Queuing Delay Channel Utilization[22]

15. Multi-Thread Polling Idea is to send request before the previous Gate message is received creating a new thread © [16] H. Song et. al. Multi-thread polling: A Dynamic Bandwidth Distribution Scheme in LPON

16. Features of MTP Tuning Multiple Threads Inter-thread Scheduling Achieving Fairness

17. Reduced Delay in MTP Polling delay Granting Delay Queuing delay

18. MTP: Analysis MTP based on design space is (multiple-offline, excess) Polling delay for MTP is less because it has another opportunity in the same cycle Granting delay for IPACT is less because IPACT is online, and does not involve wait time Overall delay for IPACT is lower

19. Experiment Settings Simulator used: Simulator developed using CSIM discrete event simulation library Channel settings –Channel Capacity C = 1 Gbps –Number of ONUs M = 16 –Max Grant size = 7688bytes Self-similar traffic –Quad model packet size distribution –60% 64bytes, 4% 300bytes, 11% 580bytes, 25% 1518bytes Same distance between ONU and OLT

20. Results Distance between ONU and OLT = 100Km Overall Delay

21. Results Channel UtilizationOverall Delay Distance between ONU and OLT = 20 Km

22. Problem Statement II Offline technique was extended to obtain a multi- thread process which gave delay performance better than offline but not as good as IPACT. What if online was extended as a multi-process?

23. Concept of Parallel Polling Multiple online processes in parallel Motivation: –IPACT performs better than Multiple-offline threads so multi-online could be even better –Issues in Multi-thread process: Problem of wait time or idle time –Fairness Issue –Void formation

24. Parallel Polling: A possible solution Each cycle time has two threads in parallel with each one services as online

25. Advantages of PP PP is based on online grant scheduling framework, therefore low idle time and hence high utilization No issue of fairness issue as GRANT is given as per REPORTed Thread tuning will be required and compared between the effective cycle load Easy and simple implementation

26. Delay performance of PP Polling delay Granting delay Queuing delay

27. Delay Comparison Polling delay of PP will be slightly less than MTP as the cycle length of online process is less than the offline Granting delay for PP is very less when compared to MTP because of online technique Queuing delay is same for same simulator settings Therefore,

28. Results Distance between ONU and OLT = 100Km Overall Delay Channel Utilization

29. Results Distance between ONU and OLT = 20Km Channel Utilization Overall Delay

30. Problem Statement III MTP is better than offline scheduling framework PP is better than online scheduling framework So multiple polling of OLT is advantageous for LRPON?

31. Multiple polling techniques Multi-thread polling[16] Parallel Polling Double Phase polling[2], can be also called Multi- group polling © [2] S.Y. Choi et. al. Double Phase Polling Algorithm Based on Partitioned ONU Subgroups for High Utilization in EPONs

32. Results Distance between ONU and OLT = 100Km Channel Utilization Overall Delay

33. Results Distance between ONU and OLT = 20Km Overall Delay Channel Utilization

34. Conclusions MTP is good for LRPON when compared to offline but not when compared to online PP gives comparatively best delay performance for LRPON Multiple polling techniques in one cycle time gives promising results for LRPON with QoS awareness Channel utilization of PP and IPACT are high when compared to Multi-group, offline and MTP

35. Future Work Can scheduling policies be useful for techniques based on offline grant scheduling framework? Can fairness be achieved in PP using online excess bandwidth distribution (OEBD) PP a new technique and can be explored further. will it be promising for GPON as well? Can multiple polling techniques be of use to LRPON Consideration of performance of Real-time polling with respect to current multi-polling techniques

36. How will these DBA schemes perform with video and voice traffic. What if distances between ONU and OLT are random, how will the techniques perform? How can delay performance for PP be improved for SRPON.

37. THANK YOU and Questions?

38. References [1] A.H. Lashkari; H.R. Zeidanldo; A.A.Sabeeh. Static Bandwidth Allocation on Optical Networks. In Proceedings of International Conference on Machine Learning and Compu ting(IPCSIT), pages 498–503, Singapore, May 2011. [2] S.Y. Choi; S. Lee; T.-J. Lee; M.Y. Chung; H. Choo. Double-Phase Polling Algorithm Based on Partitioned ONU Subgroups for High Utilization in EPONs. IEEE Optical Communication Networks, 1(5):484–497, October 2009. [3] A. Dixit; G. Das; B. Lannoo; D. Colle; M. Pickavet; P. Demeester. Adaptive Multi-Gate Polling with Void Filling for Long- Reach Passive Optical Networks. In Proceedings of ICTON, pages 1–4, March 2011. [4] A. Djupsjobacka. Time division multiplexing using optical switches. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 6(7):1227–1231, August 1988. [5] O. Duffy. Poisson Traffic Model and Self similar traffic. In Proceedings of online website OwenDuffy.net, wikipedia, pages 1– 4, March 2010. [6] M. Kamran. A framework for dynamic bandwidth allocation algorithms in TDM ethernet passive optical networks. In Proceedings of International Symposium on High Capacity Optical Networks and Enabling Technologies, pages 1–5, October 2007. [7] H. Song; B.-W. Kim; and B. Mukherjee. Long-Reach Optical Access Network: A Survey of Research Chanllenges, Demonstrations, and Bandwidth Assignment Mechanisms. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 12(1):112–123, June 2010. [8] J.R. Kiniry. Wavelength division multiplexing: ultra high speed fiber optics. IEEE Internet Computing, 2(2):13–15, April 1998. [9] M. Maier. WDM Passive Optical Networks and Beyond: the Road Ahead. IEEE/OSA Journal of Optical Communications and Networking, 1(4):C1–C16, 2009. [10] M.P. McGarry; M. Reisslein; M. Maier. Ethernet Passive Optical Network Architectures and Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation Algorithms. IEEE Communications Surveys, 10(3):46–60, July 2008. [11] A. Helmy; H. Fathallah; H. Mouftah. Interleaved Polling Versus Multi-Thread Polling for Bandwidth Allocation in Long- Reach PONs. IEEE Optical Communications Networks, 4(3):210–218, March 2012..

39. [12] B. Kantarci; H. Mouftah. Bandwidth distribution Solutions for Performance Enhancement in Long-Reach Passive Optical Networks. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, PP(99):1–20, 2011. [13] B. Skubic; J. Chen; J. Ahmed; B. Chen; L. Wosinska; B. Mukherjee. Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation for Long-Reach PON: Overcoming Performance Degradation. IEEE Communications Magazine, pages 100–108, November 2010. [14] G. Kramer; B. Mukherjee. IPACT: A Dynamic Protocol for an Ethernet PON(EPON). IEEE Communications Magazine, pages 74–80, February 2002. [15] H. Song; A. Banerjee; B.-W. Kim; B. Mukherjee. Multi-Thread Polling: A Dynamic Bandwidth Distribution Scheme in Long-Reach PON. In Proceedings of IEEE GLOBECOM, pages 2450–2454, March 2007. [16] H. Song; B.-W. Kim; B. Mukherjee. Multi-Thread Polling: A Dynamic Bandwidth Distribution Scheme in Long-Reach PON. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communication, 27(2):134–142, February 2009. [17] L. Shi; S. S. Lee; H. Song; B. Mukherjee. Energy-Efficient Long-Reach Passive Optical Network: A Network Planning Approach Based on User Behaviors. IEEE Systems Journal, 4(4):449–457, December 2010. [18] F.J. Effenberger; K. McCammon; V. O’Byrne. Passive optical network deployment in North America. Journal of Optical Networking, 6(7):808–818, July 2007. [19] G. Kramer; B. Mukherjee; G. Pesavento. Ethernet PON(ePON): Design and Analysis of an Optical Access Network. Photonic Network Communications, 3(3):307–319, August 2001. [20] G. Kramer; G. Pesavento. Ethernet Passive Optical Network(EPON): Building a Next Generation Opitcal Access Network. IEEE Communications Magazine, pages 66–73, February 2002. 47[21] J.R. Ferguson; M. Reisslein; and M.P. McGarry. Online excess bandwidth distribution for Ethernet passive optical networks. IEEE Optical Networking, 8(4):358–369, April 2009. [22] M.P. McGarry; M. Reisslein. Investigation of the DBA Algorithm Design Space for EPONs. IEEE/OSA Journal of Lightwave Technology, 30(14):2271–2280, 2012. [23] N.A.M. Radzi; N.Md. Din; M.H. Al-Mansoori; I.S. Mustafa; S. Kh; Sadon. Efficient Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation Algorithm for Upstream EPON. In Proceedings of IEEE 9th Internation Conference on Communications, pages 376–380, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, December 2009.

40. [24] M.P. McGarry; M. Reisslein; C.J. Colbourn; M. Maier; F. Aurzada; M. Scheutziw. Just-in-Time Scheduling for Multi- channel EPONs. IEEE Systems Journal, 26(10):1204–1216, May 2008. [25] X. Bai; C. Assi; A. Shami. On the fairness of dynamic bandwidth allocation schemes in Ethernet Passive Optical Networks. Computer Communications, 29(11):2125–2135, 2006. [26] C. Wu; X. Shi; X. Yang; J. Su. The Impact of Parallel and Multithread Mechanism on Network Processor Performance. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Grid and Cooperative Computing, pages 1–5, October 2006. [27] W.-P. Chen; W.-F. Wang; W.-S.Hwang. Adaptive dynamic bandwidth allocation algorithm with sorting report messages for Ethernet passive optical network. IET Communications, 4(18):2230–2239, 2010

41. BACK UP

42. Basis study Availability of many DBA schemes in research brings a need to classify these DBA schemes based on their importance

43. Classification Description Existent classifications cover QoS aware and unaware but their usability is not explicitly mentioned Connecting scheduling framework to user traffic type and demand –Direct –Predictive –Intelligent

44. EPON-LRPON Classification

45. Usability Direct – User’s that require high throughput but do not compensate on fairness Predictive – User’s that have a flexible requirement Intelligent – When user’s of high load and low load are combined

46. Results: Poisson Channel Utilization Overall Delay 20Km 100Km

47. Results: Poisson 20Km 100Km Channel Utilization Overall Delay

48. Results: Poisson 20Km 100Km Channel UtilizationOverall Delay

49. Design Space Equations Offline Online DPP

50. MTP PP

51. Idle time Equations

52. Multi-thread Polling

53. Parallel Polling