A critical analysis of the possible cost savings of translucent networks

Translucent optical networks are considered an interesting option for future optical transport networks instead of opaque optical networks. The translucent architecture does not require an OEO conversion at each optical node, but only when the signal is too degraded. Nevertheless a translucent optical network requires higher performance devices, to ensure a minimum number of OEO conversions. In previous studies, translucent optical networks have always proven to be an economically interesting alternative. But the prices of OEO devices have significantly dropped; so down to which point translucent networks are still economically attractive? Asked in another way, up to which point the extra cost of the high performance devices used by translucent networks is lower than the cost of OEO devices in opaque networks? In this paper it is shown that translucent networks, for current traffic volumes, are not yet very attractive; these networks are advantageous for increasing traffic volume and for system reach covering about half of the connection length distribution. Future evolution of system prices is examined to foresee when translucent networks may become economically attractive.

[1]  J. Livas Optical transmission evolution: From digital to analog to? Network tradeoffs between optical transparency and reduced regeneration cost , 2005, Journal of Lightwave Technology.

[2]  Edsger W. Dijkstra,et al.  A note on two problems in connexion with graphs , 1959, Numerische Mathematik.

[3]  Byrav Ramamurthy,et al.  Translucent optical WDM networks for the next-generation backbone networks , 2001, GLOBECOM'01. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (Cat. No.01CH37270).

[4]  Lunchakorn Wuttisittikulkij,et al.  On the comparison of optical WDM mesh network protection strategies , 2000, MILCOM 2000 Proceedings. 21st Century Military Communications. Architectures and Technologies for Information Superiority (Cat. No.00CH37155).

[5]  R.W. Tkach Terrestrial ULH transmission: How do we get them to buy it? , 2004, The 17th Annual Meeting of the IEEELasers and Electro-Optics Society, 2004. LEOS 2004..

[6]  H. Nakajima,et al.  Impact of the reach distance of WDM systems on the cost of translucent optical transport networks , 2004, 11th International Telecommunications Network Strategy and Planning Symposium. NETWORKS 2004,.

[7]  J.P. Heritage,et al.  Transparent vs. opaque vs. translucent wavelength-routed optical networks , 1999, OFC/IOOC . Technical Digest. Optical Fiber Communication Conference, 1999, and the International Conference on Integrated Optics and Optical Fiber Communication.

[8]  Carl J. Nuzman,et al.  Selective transparency in resilient optical networks , 2002, MILCOM 2002. Proceedings.

[9]  R. W. Tkach,et al.  The evolution of optical networks: the value of transparency and ultra-long reach , 2001, LEOS 2001. 14th Annual Meeting of the IEEE Lasers and Electro-Optics Society (Cat. No.01CH37242).

[10]  A.L. Souza Filho,et al.  Strategies for designing translucent wide-area networks , 2003, Proceedings of the 2003 SBMO/IEEE MTT-S International Microwave and Optoelectronics Conference - IMOC 2003. (Cat. No.03TH8678).

[11]  Gangxiang Shen,et al.  Sparse placement of electronic switching nodes for low blocking in translucentoptical networks , 2002 .