Transcript Presentation

Future Optical Internet
ATM will play a key role
Different Protocol Stacks Integrated
to provide different size bandwidth
pipes and CoS
IP/ATM Network
IP SONET Network
ADM
ADM
IP/ATM Network
OXC
IP SONET Network
HDWDM
OC-3084
ADM
OXC
ADM
OXC
OADM
OADM
IP Optical Network
IP over ATM
QoS & VPNs up to OC3
IP Sonet
OC3, OC12, OC48
IP Optical
Greater than OC-48
Future Optical Internet
MPLS & ATM
ATM VCs
ATM VCs
SONET LSP
SONET LSP
DWDM LSP
IP over ATM
QoS & VPNs up to OC3
IP Sonet
OC3, OC12
IP Optical
OC-48, OC-192
Optical Internet Architecture
“Rings are Dead”
Both sides of fiber ring
ring used for IP traffic
Traditional SONET
Transport Node
Traditional SONET
Transport Node
WDM
WDM
3 0C-48 Tx
2 OC-48 Rx
Asymmetric
Tx/Rx lambdas
that can be
dynamically
altered
Traditional SONET Restoral
Low priority traffic
that can be buffered
or have packet loss
in case of fiber cut
High Priority
Traffic
Cannot exceed
50% of bandwidth
in case of fiber cut
10xGbE & CWDM
 Several companies have announced long haul GbE and
CWDM with transceivers at 50km spacing
 10GbE coming shortly
 Costs are as little as $12K US per node (or transceiver)
 Future versions will allow rate adaptive clocking for use
with “gopher bait” fiber, auto discovery, CPE self manage
 Excellent jitter specification
 Most network management and signaling done at IP layer
 Anybody with LAN experience can build a long haul WAN
– all you need is dark fiber
 Still some issues remain with OAM&P and frame jitter
Market drivers for GbE in the WAN
 Many ISPs, regional networks, municipalities, school districts are
purchasing dark fiber or building dark fiber networks up to 1000 km
rather than managed bandwidth
 With dark fiber increased bandwidth only entails upgraded equipment
costs and no additional monthly charges
 Significant savings in relocating servers to central site and using VoIP
 Also many carriers willing to sell “gopher bait” fiber (fiber that does not
meet stringent SONET/DWDM requirements) at a discount
 As such, cost of transmission equipment is becoming a significant factor
versus cost of fiber
 SONET and ATM networks require specialized engineering knowledge
and skills
 Customers want a technology in the WAN they are familiar with and that
is easily extensible from the LAN e.g. Ethernet
 Don’t require the same reliability as telco systems
Optical Networks for the Rest of Us
 With customer owned dark fiber, 10GbE and 4 channel CWDM
anybody can build a 40Gbps network up to 1000km or greater
at a fraction of cost of traditional telco network
 May not be suitable for mission critical traffic (at least not yet)
 But ideal for high bandwidth Internet to the school, small
business and home
 Ring structures are a customer option – not a mandatory
requirement
 The driver is NOT new applications, but cost savings –1 year
payback
 Typical cost is one time $20K US per school for a 20 year IRU
 In Ottawa we are deploying a 60km- 96 strand network
connecting 22 institutions – cost $500K US
Historical Context
 In the 80’s the Information Highway was conceived as
being a “gateway” service that would be operated by telcos
and cablecos
 They would define and deliver the services to the end used
 But then came along the Internet…
 Internet was built by research and education community as
set of independent peering networks that exchanged
information by a mutually agreed upon set of protocols –
TCP/IP
 There was no hierarchy or gateways as in the traditional carrier
centric view of the world
 The Internet empowered the end user not only to be a consumer of
services but also an originator of services
Where are we going?
 Today the Internet is “virtual” network riding on top of a traditional
“connection oriented” network of cooper and fiber
 With optical technology such as customer owned dark fiber,
customer owned wavelengths, 10GbE etc we can extend the model
of the Internet as tool to empower the user to build networks
autonomous peering optical
 The future telecommunication’s world may be dominated by
thousands of customer owned networks that peer at the physical as
well as at the virtual level, “Optical Networks for the Rest of Us”
 A national or provincial K-12 network with its own wavelengths and dark
fiber
 A national bank network with its own wavelengths and dark fiber
 A national health network with its own wavelengths and dark
fiber
 A radical departure from the “carrier centric” view of the universe
3 Different Views
SONET access ring
Telco Network
99.999% reliability only in the SONET
Ring for the telco, no guarantees for the
customer
CO
Cableco Network
99.999% reliability only in the SONET
Ring for the cableco, no guarantees for the
customer
ISP B
Customer Empowered Network
99.999% reliability to the customer but
no guarantees for the ISP
ISP A
2 separate dark fiber builds
ISP C
Customer Empowered Networks
Dark fiber Network
City C
Dark fiber or CWDM Network
City A
ISP B
ISP D
ISP C
ISP A
Dim Wavelength
Long Haul DWDM
Optical Label
Switched Router
ISP C
ISP A
First Dark fiber Network
City B
Customer achieves 99.999
reliability by multi-home
to different ISPs
ISP B
Second Dark Fiber Network
New Challenges and Opportunities
 “Customer empowered networks” present a whole new set
of research challenges:
 Peering and topology protocols in the optical domain –
what will be the equivalent to BGP and OSPF in the optical
domain
 Multi Protocol Lambda Switching?
 Defining LSP attributes such as power level, wavelength,
encoding, etc?
 Interdomain optical MPLS?
 Customer controlled establishment of wavelengths, routing
and service delivery
 Auto discovery of wavelengths?
 Management and interface systems, etc, etc