2. IST Project LION

3. 2 Outline IST-project LION –Layers Interworking in Optical Networks –Overview – objectives –Testbed Progress: 2 examples –Recovery experiments on testbed –Design of survivable multilayer IP over Optical Network

4. 3 Telecom Italia Lab - Prime Contractor Agilent Technologies Italia Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya Cisco Systems International T - NOVA - Deutsche Telekom Interuniversity Microelectronics Centre Siemens ICN Nippon Telegraph and Telephone National Technical University of Athens Sirti The University of Mining and Metallurgy Telekomunikacja Polska Tellium IST Project LION

5. 4 Context –Evolution of current transport networks towards next generation optical networks Main Objective –Study, development and experimental assessment of an Automatic Switched Optical Network (ASON) Project Data –Starting date : Jan-2000 –Duration : 36 months –Total Cost : 10,686,236 EURO –EC Contribution : 5,499,951 EURO

6. 5 Objectives of the Project Definition of architecture and functional requirements for next generation optical networks (e.g. ASON and G-MPLS) Identification of resilience strategies for multi-layer networks Cost evalutation of IP over ASON solutions (case studies) Definition of a network management view for ASONs Design and implementation of two interworking Network Managers via a CORBA interface Design and implementation of UNI and NNI Design and implementation of Optical Control Planes Development of a test bed IP over ASON

7. 6 Emerging Network Requirements Convergence of voice-video-data applications over the same infrastructure Reduced complexity and de-layering Higher penetration of opt. transport services Flexible and cost-effective end-to-end provisioning of optical connections Optical re-routing and restoration Support of multiple clients (metro) Multiple levels of QoS Optical Virtual Private Networks (OVPN)

8. 7 ASON Test bed T-Nova NMS OXC2 OXC3 Siemens Domain ci@oNet NMS OXC4 Tellium Domain OXC1 OADM2 OADM3 OADM1 TILAB Domain GSR5 GSR2 GSR1 GSR4 GSR3 Siemens OXCs with NNI signaling TILAB UNI/NNI signaling G.709 interfaces TILAB UNI/NNI signaling G.709 interfaces Tellium OXC UNI (data) NNI (data & signaling) UNI (data & signaling) Cisco GSRs with UNI signaling Interdomain NMS interworking via a CORBA-based interface

9. 8 Outline IST-project LION –Layers Interworking in Optical Networks –Overview – objectives –Testbed Progress: 2 examples –Recovery experiments on testbed –Design of survivable multilayer IP over Optical Network

10. 9 ADM C ADM D ADM B Traffic generator GSR2 GSR5 GSR1 GSR3 SW1 SW3 SW4 SW2 OXC1 GSR4 AR1 AR2 Client Server GbE STM-1 / POS-1 STM-16 / POS-16 Eth 10/100 POTS 2R transponder WDM OADM2 OADM3 OADM1 LSP 2 -> 5 (working) LSP 2 -> 5 (backup) LSP 5 -> 2 (working) LSP 5 -> 2 (backup) Measurements: MPLS rerouting

11. 10 ADM C ADM D ADM B Traffic generator GSR2 GSR5 GSR1 GSR3 SW1 SW3 SW4 SW2 OXC1 GSR4 AR1 AR2 Client Server GbE STM-1 / POS-1 STM-16 / POS-16 Eth 10/100 POTS 2R transponder WDM OADM2 OADM3 OADM1 LSP 2 -> 5 (working) LSP 2 -> 5 (backup) LSP 5 -> 2 (working) LSP 5 -> 2 (backup) Measurements: Optical Protection

12. 11 Optical protection GSR2  GSR5 (250 Byte) 8311140 MPLS rerouting GSR5  GSR2 (250 Byte) GSR2  GSR5 (1500 Byte) GSR5  GSR2 (1500 Byte) 936 Lost Packets minavemax 375 1521 796 002711 490 000321 236574 654378 746 19035323264 131310 154168 622 00045 441122 77073 707 minavemax  25 ms  7  39 s GbE does not allow fast failure detection --> HELLO detection scheme (+/- 40 sec) Packet Loss Measurement

13. 12 Outline IST-project LION –Layers Interworking in Optical Networks –Overview – objectives –Testbed Progress: 2 examples –Recovery experiments on testbed –Design of survivable multilayer IP over Optical Network

14. 13 IP-MPLS OTN MPLS LSP (working) Optical node failure  optical recovery can only restore transit lightpaths Backup MPLS LSP Some actions at the IP- MPLS layer is needed. MPLS LSP (protected in OTN) Multilayer survivability: bottom-up strategy

15. 14 Recovery scheme at the IP-MPLS layer (MPLS rerouting, local protection,…) -> IP topology has to be biconnected –Assumption: MPLS rerouting OTN IP-MPLS Some working and spare LSPs shown. Topology has to be biconnected to allow IP-MPLS recovery of router failures 2 3 OTN Capacity needed on OTN links 2 Static multilayer resilient scheme Recovery scheme at the OTN layer (1+1 protection, link restoration,…) –Assumption: dedicated path protection Multilayer scheme –Options to support IP spare capacity double protection IP spare not protected common pool –Assumption: bottom-up escalation strategy Static recovery schemes

16. 15 Dynamic ASON-based recovery schemes Dimensioning of multiple IP layer topologies –1 for nominal (fault-free) scenario –1 for each topology related with a single IP router failure Single IP router failure scenarios IP-MPLS Failure-free scenario OTN IP-MPLS OTN IP-MPLS … OTN … 1 1 2 Worst case capacity and resource requirements over all scenarios Dynamic, ASON-based multilayer resilience scheme Capacity needed in OTN is calculated for each dimensioning, taking into account capacity needed to recover from OTN failures (by means of 1+1 path protection) Resources needed in OTN to recover from all possible single IP or OTN failures are the worst case resource requirements of the OTN taken over the failure-free scenario and all IP failure scenarios

17. 16 ASON local reconfiguration needs fewest capacity ASON global reconfiguration  double protection Note: ASON reconfiguration schemes have better fault coverage Relative Optical Layer Cost (%-age of nominal case) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% ASON global reconfiguration double protectionIP spare not protected common poolASON local reconfiguration Multilayer resilience scheme Line CostNode CostTributary Cost Cost comparison

18. 17 For Further Contacts Project Leader of IST LION antonio.manzalini@tilab.com Phone: +39 011 2285 817 antonio.manzalini@tilab.com