On the efficiency of flexible ethernet client architectures in optical transport networks [invited]

The data-center interconnection (DCI) market has been rising sharply for some time, leading to the development of networking solutions tailored specifically for it. On the side of the transport network, DCI devices are characterized by simple, footprint-efficient designs focused on scalability, but still leverage the benefits of flexible-rate transponders on the line-side, to extract the most from costly optical transport infrastructures. Accompanying this evolution arose the need for a technology that could provide a flexible client layer where aggregation was done outside the transport device, but flows could still be efficiently mapped to flexible-rate transponder modules. In this context, the appearance of Flex Ethernet (FlexE) is targeted at decoupling the rates of interfaces connecting routers to transport boxes, from the actual flows traversing them. Through the introduction of an additional mapping/de-mapping layer, the capacity of multiple Ethernet interfaces can be virtualized in a resource pool for different flows. This paper addresses the application of FlexE to dense wavelength division multiplexing (DWDM) transport scenarios. Specifically, it evaluates how agnostic to FlexE a transport box should be, considering the potential trade-off between its complexity and the ability to efficiently fill lightpaths. Through a network simulation handling the provisioning of Ethernet flows in a DCI scenario, we evaluate the various FlexE use cases envisioned for transport networks, and how they affect the efficiency of router port usage and transport box provisioning, as well as their effect on the capacity of the DWDM layer.

[1]  Tad Hofmeister,et al.  FlexEthernet - What is it and how can it be used? , 2016, OFC 2016.

[2]  Junqiang Hu,et al.  Flexible-client: The missing piece towards transport software-defined networks , 2014, OFC 2014.

[3]  Ratul Mahajan,et al.  Elastic Optical Networking in the Microsoft Cloud , 2016 .

[4]  Joao Pedro,et al.  Impact of client- and line-side flexibility in the lifecycle of next-generation transport networks [Invited] , 2016, IEEE/OSA Journal of Optical Communications and Networking.

[5]  Ratul Mahajan,et al.  Elastic optical networking in the microsoft cloud [Invited] , 2016, IEEE/OSA Journal of Optical Communications and Networking.

[6]  Biswanath Mukherjee,et al.  A Practical Approach for Routing and Wavelength Assignment in Large Wavelength-Routed Optical Networks , 1996, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[7]  François Margot,et al.  Symmetry in Integer Linear Programming , 2010, 50 Years of Integer Programming.

[8]  João Pedro,et al.  How much transport grooming is needed in the age of flexible clients? , 2017, 2017 Optical Fiber Communications Conference and Exhibition (OFC).

[9]  Stephen J. Trowbridge Ethernet and OTN - 400G and beyond , 2015, 2015 Optical Fiber Communications Conference and Exhibition (OFC).

[10]  R. Theodore Hofmeister,et al.  How can flexibility on the line side best be exploited on the client side? , 2016, 2016 Optical Fiber Communications Conference and Exhibition (OFC).

[11]  Inder Monga,et al.  Beyond 100 Gb/s: capacity, flexibility, and network optimization [Invited] , 2017, IEEE/OSA Journal of Optical Communications and Networking.

[12]  Maxim Kuschnerov,et al.  Networking aspects for next-generation elastic optical interfaces , 2016, IEEE/OSA Journal of Optical Communications and Networking.

[13]  R. Theodore Hofmeister,et al.  OPTICAL TECHNOLOGIES FOR DATA CENTER NETWORKS , 2022 .

[14]  Vijay Vusirikala,et al.  Scaling Ethernet speeds to 100 Gbits/s and beyond , 2009 .