Power-Aware Rationale for Using Coarse-Grained Transponders in IP-Over-WDM Networks

Silvia Saldaña Cercós; Leandro C. Resendo; Moisés R. N. Ribeiro; Anna Manolova Fagertun; Idelfonso Tafur Monroy

doi:10.1364/JOCN.7.000825

Journal of Optical Communications and Networking
Vol. 7,
Issue 9,
pp. 825-836
(2015)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/JOCN.7.000825

Power-Aware Rationale for Using Coarse-Grained Transponders in IP-Over-WDM Networks

Silvia Saldaña Cercós, Leandro C. Resendo, Moisés R. N. Ribeiro, Anna Manolova Fagertun, and Idelfonso Tafur Monroy

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Silvia Saldaña Cercós, Leandro C. Resendo, Moisés R. N. Ribeiro, Anna Manolova Fagertun, and Idelfonso Tafur Monroy, "Power-Aware Rationale for Using Coarse-Grained Transponders in IP-Over-WDM Networks," J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 7, 825-836 (2015)

Export Citation
- BibTex
- Endnote (RIS)
- HTML
- Plain Text
Citation alert
Save article

Abstract

Power consumption is becoming one of the most significant limitations while seeking new solutions to cope with the traffic demand increase. 100 Gbps optical transmission technology has the potential to accommodate upcoming traffic demands with improved figures for W/Gbps compared to previous generations. However, the adoption of such coarse-grained bit-rate granularity with lower flexibility for traffic grooming raises important questions: (1) What repercussions do they have on the overall power consumption and thus operational expenditures (OPEX) compared to legacy fine-grained designs (i.e., using 10 Gbps technology)? (2) What is the long-term cost of coarse-grained designs? We define a power-aware mixed integer linear programming (MILP) formulation based on actual modular architectures where modules are upgraded as the network traffic increases. We introduce, for the first time, important practical constraints which were neglected by previous works, so that there is correspondence between interface modules and transponders instead of assuming a single type of interface module per line card, and we use accurate power consumption values instead of using approximations per port. We also present a comprehensive analysis on the trade-off between power consumption and available optical capacity, and power consumption and capital expenditure (CAPEX) for three different scenarios, defining the impact of provisioning the network with higher granularity transmission technology. Regarding the available optical capacity versus power consumption, 37.7% additional optical network capacity is achieved when using exclusively 100 Gbps technology at 13.3%–32.4% power consumption expenses and 15.3% optical network capacity at only a 2.6%–8.8% power consumption penalty when using 40 and 100 Gbps technologies. From a CAPEX perspective, up to 19.4% savings can be achieved by provisioning ahead using coarse-grained designs.

Full Article | PDF Article

More Like This

IP-Over-WDM Network Design Methodology to Improve Efficiency in Overall Expenditure Due to Cost and Energy Consumption

Suman Kr. Dey and Aneek Adhya
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 7(6) 563-577 (2015)

Efficiency of Adaptive and Mixed-Line-Rate IP Over DWDM Networks Regarding CAPEX and Power Consumption [Invited]

Axel Klekamp, Ulrich Gebhard, and Frank Ilchmann
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 4(11) B11-B16 (2012)

Minimizing Energy and Cost in Fixed-Grid and Flex-Grid Networks

P. Papanikolaou, P. Soumplis, K. Manousakis, G. Papadimitriou, G. Ellinas, K. Christodoulopoulos, and E. Varvarigos
J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 7(4) 337-351 (2015)

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Figures (10)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Tables (5)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Equations (16)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Device	Power [W]	Slots	Device	Power [W]	Slots
IP Layer			WDM Layer
Router chassis	5700 [22]	16	Power chassis	55 [23]	12
Fan	334 [14]	0	10 Gbps TXP	50 [24]	−1
Route processor	215 [14]	0	40 Gbps TXP	130 [25]	−2
Line card	446 [18]	−1	100 Gbps TXP	133 [20]	−1
IM	150 [18,19]	−1	CFP line card	84 [21]	−2

Node ID	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14
1	0.00	8.98	12.35	13.64	9.74	32.70	19.34	21.04	14.59	33.68	15.40	12.32	23.74	11.07
2	8.98	0.00	5.76	6.23	4.51	14.19	9.92	10.56	6.59	12.59	6.43	5.13	10.15	4.69
3	12.35	5.76	0.00	12.27	10.90	21.94	11.38	13.34	12.17	17.73	9.33	7.50	15.10	6.88
4	13.64	6.23	12.27	0.00	12.52	24.58	12.48	14.31	18.02	19.54	10.42	8.33	16.96	7.68
5	9.74	4.51	10.90	12.52	0.00	17.29	8.95	10.25	10.46	13.96	7.39	5.92	11.98	5.45
6	32.70	14.19	21.94	24.58	17.29	0.00	28.99	33.09	27.13	47.75	26.20	21.64	27.56	19.88
7	19.34	9.92	11.38	12.48	8.95	28.99	0.00	20.87	13.26	26.42	13.30	10.60	20.84	9.65
8	21.04	10.56	13.34	14.31	10.25	33.09	20.87	0.00	15.16	30.04	14.81	11.94	23.42	10.79
9	14.59	6.59	12.17	18.02	10.46	27.13	13.26	15.16	0.00	20.96	11.22	8.99	18.44	8.30
10	33.68	12.59	17.73	19.54	13.96	47.75	26.42	30.04	20.96	0.00	22.38	18.38	34.50	16.09
11	15.40	6.43	9.33	10.42	7.39	26.20	13.30	14.81	11.22	22.38	0.00	10.82	20.38	10.49
12	12.32	5.13	7.50	8.33	5.92	21.64	10.60	11.94	8.99	18.38	10.82	0.00	16.32	7.82
13	23.74	10.15	15.10	16.96	11.98	27.56	20.84	23.42	18.44	34.50	20.38	16.32	0.00	17.52
14	11.07	4.69	6.88	7.68	5.45	19.88	9.65	10.76	8.30	16.09	10.49	7.82	17.52	0.00

		Node
Year	TXP [Gbps]	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14
2015	T10	14	10	14	14	14	14	11	14	14	12	11	14	14	0
2015	T40	6	3	3	5	2	12	6	9	6	12	6	3	9	6
2016	T10	24	11	28	27	20	28	22	14	13	28	28	9	12	12
2016	T40	6	3	3	3	3	12	6	9	6	9	3	6	12	5
2017	T10	12	14	28	14	8	28	13	12	14	24	12	13	13	11
	T40	12	3	3	9	6	12	12	12	9	12	9	6	15	6
	T100	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0

IP Layer		WDM Layer
Device	Cost	Device	Cost
Router chassis	61.5	Power chassis	5
Interface module + line card	14	10 Gbps transponder	1
		40 Gbps transponder	2.5
		100 Gbps transponder + CFP module	3.75

Device	Power [W]	Slots	Device	Power [W]	Slots
IP Layer			WDM Layer
Router chassis	5700 [22]	16	Power chassis	55 [23]	12
Fan	334 [14]	0	10 Gbps TXP	50 [24]	−1
Route processor	215 [14]	0	40 Gbps TXP	130 [25]	−2
Line card	446 [18]	−1	100 Gbps TXP	133 [20]	−1
IM	150 [18,19]	−1	CFP line card	84 [21]	−2

		Configuration
Traffic Scenario	Traffic Matrix [Gbps]	Node 1	Node 2	Node 3	TXP [Gbps]	Power Consumption (W)
Scenario 1	$[\begin{matrix} 0 & 10 & 10 \\ 0 & 0 & 30 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{matrix}]$	2	4	4	10	2288
		–	–	–	40
		–	–	–	100
		–	–	–	CFP
Scenario 2	$[\begin{matrix} 0 & 40 & 10 \\ 0 & 0 & 30 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{matrix}]$	–	–	–	10	2308
		2	1	1	40
		–	–	–	100
		–	–	–	CFP
Scenario 3	$[\begin{matrix} 0 & 40 & 10 \\ 0 & 0 & 110 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{matrix}]$	–	–	–	10	3598
		–	3	3	40
		1	1	–	100
		1	1	–	CFP

Abstract

Cited By

Figures (10)

Tables (5)

Equations (16)

Journal of Optical Communications and Networking