1 / 12

Ramanathan S Thinniyam

Effect of Maintaining Wavelength Continuity on Minimizing Network Coding Resources in Optical Long-haul Networks. Ramanathan S Thinniyam. Approaches to Minimize Network Coding Resources. 2-Stage approach

mayda
Download Presentation

Ramanathan S Thinniyam

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Effect of Maintaining Wavelength Continuity on Minimizing Network Coding Resources in Optical Long-haul Networks Ramanathan S Thinniyam

  2. Approaches to Minimize Network Coding Resources • 2-Stage approach • Minimize link cost (i.e. # of wavelengths) required to maintain given connection through Integer Programming to obtain subgraph. • Minimize coding cost (i.e. # of coded wavelengths) in subgraph obtained from stage 1 using a Genetic Algorithm(GA). • Multi-Objective Evolutionary Approach(MOEA)- Obtain a Pareto front of tradeoffs between link cost and coding cost. Specifically, we use the NSGA –II algorithm* * K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, and T. Meyarivan, "A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II",IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput.,6(2):182–197(2002).

  3. Wavelength Continuity Case 2 Case 1 • Assume routing- dashed lines not routed, solid lines routed. • In optical networks, O/E/O equipment can be used for both wavelength conversion as well to enable network coding. • If case 2 uses O/E/O equipment at node 1 to maintain wavelength continuity, we can also code at this node if coding is allowed. 1 1

  4. Simulation Results • We perform experiments based on two different assumptions: • Hardware allowing wavelength conversion present at every node, cost of such conversion is zero (i.e. cost-free conversion). • O/E/O equipment present when conversion is needed (i.e. O/E/O based conversion). The cost of one or both coding and conversion at a node (or of a wavelength) is the same.

  5. Results for O/E/O Based Continuity • The fitness criterion is changed from number of coded wavelengths to number of wavelengths requiring O/E/O. • # of wavelengths requiring O/E/O = # of solely converted wavelengths + # of coded wavelengths (coded wavelengths may or may not be converted). • Results from 2 stage approach • never reduce O/E/O requirement to 0, • the number of O/E/O wavelengths on average is much higher than the number of coded wavelengths in cost-free conversion. • The cost of continuity is more O/E/O equipment

  6. 2-Stage Approach Result 1- Average Network Coding Requirement • Fraction of nodes where O/E/O equipment is required is much larger than fraction of wavelengths, when optimizing using number of wavelengths as criterion.

  7. 2-Stage Approach Result 2 - Coding vs Conversion • Conversion fraction=(Number of converted wavelengths)/(number of O/E/O wavelengths) • Most problem instances show low conversion fraction < 1/3

  8. 2-Stage Approach Result 3 -Distribution of Number of O/E/O Wavelengths

  9. 2-Stage Approach Result 3 -Distribution of Number of O/E/O Wavelengths

  10. 2-Stage ApproachResult 4a- Comparing Cost-free vs O/E/O

  11. 2-Stage Approach Result 4b - Comparing Cost-free vs O/E/O

  12. 2-Stage ApproachResult 5- High Frequency Nodes Nodes which were O/E/O nodes in the solution obtained in more than half the problem instances indicated in red. ARPANET NSFNET NJLATA

More Related