nobel wp2 meeting
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
NOBEL WP2 Meeting

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 7

NOBEL WP2 Meeting - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

NOBEL WP2 Meeting. CR3 Alcatel CIT Contributions D15 results and D31 continuation Issy-les-Mlnx, 08-10.02.05. D15 main activity. Metro access study case (Milan wide area metro reference network) See reference network in section 6.1.1 Study case description section 6.2.1

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'NOBEL WP2 Meeting' - tocho

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
nobel wp2 meeting

NOBEL WP2 Meeting

CR3 Alcatel CIT Contributions

D15 results and D31 continuation

Issy-les-Mlnx, 08-10.02.05

NOBEL WP2 Feb 05 1

d15 main activity
D15 main activity
  • Metro access study case (Milan wide area metro reference network)
    • See reference network in section 6.1.1
    • Study case description section 6.2.1
      • Aim is to find the “optimum” solution for DSLAM traffic backhauling comparing different network archiectures
    • Solution description & Dimensioning results
      • SONET/SDH aggregation ring
      • RPR aggregation ring
      • Star Ethernet
      • Dual Bus Optical Ring Network (DBORN)
      • Dimensioning on different sub-areas comprising different numbers and size of DSLAMs

NOBEL WP2 Feb 05 2

high level view of compared solutions
High Level view of compared solutions



Star Ethernet

NOBEL WP2 Feb 05 3

high level view of compared solutions 1
High Level view of compared solutions (1)


  • Very similar to existing metro solutions, except:
    • Optical transparency via passive Optical Ethernet A/D
    • Upstream/downstream resource separation
    • Burst Mode equipment for Upstream
  • Very similar to access PONs, except:
    • Ring topology (Protection and Traffic Engineering features)
    • Up to 40km ring
    • « coloured »: WDM/CWDM capacity compatible with metro-access constraints

NOBEL WP2 Feb 05 4

highlight of results e g ua2 8 remote dslams
Highlight of Results:e.g. UA2, 8 remote DSLAMs
  • Star Ethernet with GE i/f is efficient in terms of net capacity, not in terms of # of i/f. Upgrade less flexible
  • SONET/SDH (A/D @ STM-1, transport @2.5G): not bad in terms of # of i/f, but not efficient in Net. Capacity as no stat. Mux between nodes.
  • RPR (A/D @ GE, transport @2.5G): efficient in terms of # of i/f and net. Capacity when the total traffic is limited. Less efficient in upgrade due to the lack of transparency.
  • DBORN: more flexibility to choose transport granularity wrt A/D granularity as transparent transit. Surprisingly, 1G transport i/f seems the best trade-off in the study cases. Better support of asymmetric traffic.

NOBEL WP2 Feb 05 5

global conclusions
Global conclusions
  • Point-to-multipoint/Multipoint-to-point solutions seems more adapted than point-to-point solutions:
    • sharing of Metro-core (Mc) Node interfaces to avoid strong threshold effects and mismatching of the node capacity with interface granularity
    • packet add/drop multiplexing between DSLAMs and of broadcasted packets for Video services allows saving transport resources
  • Optical transparency is interesting when traffic is increasing:
    • GE granularity gave better results mainly due to the asymmetry of the traffic (2.5G would be fine for down but overdimensioned for up)
    • flexible out-of-the-line optical interfaces to allows efficiently changing the wavelength allocation during the time for a better sharing of transport resources between the DSLAMs in the time

NOBEL WP2 Feb 05 6

next studies continuation for d31
Next studies. Continuation for D31
  • We planned to use as much as possible the CAPEX NOBEL model for a cost comparison of the solutions
    • Most of equipment/infrastructure costs already exist in the current model. Few new costs to be considered (Burst Mode???)
  • No plan for OPEX comparisons but could be foreseen in collaboration with an interested partner
  • Improvement of dimensioning tool to be able to quickly change some network parameters and see the impact in the network comparison
    • Today, global dimensioning of DSLAM resources is automated but wavelength allocation is still done manually !!!
    • Other architectures to be considered
  • Interaction with other partners could enable to enlarge the study case and make it more interesting for the NOBEL community?



NOBEL WP2 Feb 05 7