OLI-High Level Objectives

The Open Lambda Initiative High Level Objectives

Abstract Overall description of the Motivation, Vision and Objectives

Disclaimer The contents of this document are the consolidated ideas of many individuals and may not be taken as the definitive opinions of any of those people exclusively or their employers. This paper, and the opinions expressed within, should be considered as part of the emerging consensus on the opportunities for significant technical, economic and social advancement enabled by the content discussed herein.

First published in April 2011

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 1 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

Content
1. 2. 3. Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction.................................................................................................................................. 3 Purpose and scope of the Open Lambda Initiative ........................................................... 7 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 4. Spectrum unbundling and virtualization ...................................................................... 9 Objectives of the OLI Framework ................................................................................... 9 Path to standardization ................................................................................................... 10

Description of an Open Lambda Environment ................................................................. 12 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5. 4.6. Optical Distribution Network ......................................................................................... 13 Physical access interfaces to different services ..................................................... 13 Individual and independent network providers ........................................................ 14 Connectivity administration and management......................................................... 15 Spectrum Assignment Authority .................................................................................. 17 Regulation .......................................................................................................................... 17

5.

Use Case Examples ................................................................................................................. 19 5.1. 5.2. 5.3. 5.4. Long reach PON ................................................................................................................ 20 High speed point-to-point links for business and backhaul ................................. 21 Radio backhauling and local passive optical mesh networks ............................. 21 Open architecture for spectrum unbundling............................................................. 23

6.

Challenges.................................................................................................................................. 26 6.1. 6.1.1. 6.1.2. 6.1.3. 6.2. 6.2.1. Technical Challenges ...................................................................................................... 26 Heterogeneous network architecture.......................................................................... 26 Fiber and infrastructure sharing .................................................................................. 27 Management and maintenance (OAM) ........................................................................ 28 Socio-economic and commercial aspects ................................................................. 29 Management Aspects ...................................................................................................... 31

7. 8. 9.

Survey of Existing Similar Proposal.................................................................................... 33 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 35 References ................................................................................................................................. 36

10. Definitions, Acronyms, & Abbreviations ............................................................................ 37 10.1. Definitions .......................................................................................................................... 37 10.2. Acronyms & Abbreviations ............................................................................................ 38

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 2 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

1.

Abstract

This whitepaper summarizes the ideas and thoughts of a common vision among members of the Open Lambda Initiative (OLI) for an open optical metro-access network architecture. The capability of a metro-access architecture to flexibly adapt to user requirements has become increasingly important as the complexity of the Content Centric cyberspace continues to evolve. The OLI compliant network architecture, from now on referred to as Open Lambda Environment (OLE), describes a method to enable zero-touch, fast re-allocation and reconfiguration of the optical network resources within future multi-gigabit metro-access infrastructures. The key objective of the Initiative is to enable infrastructure sharing to foster a highly competitive landscape in optical metro-access networks by minimizing network duplication. OLI will act to provide a collective agreement amongst stakeholders to optimized optical bandwidth utilization and to provide a set of deliverables the high-level objectives, definition and characterization of an OLI open deployment scenarios and reference configurations, OLI compliant architectures as well as effectiveness as a green technology. facilitate covering network, network

While the paper highlights the fact that a common framework is required to reach the set goal, it does not, at this point in time, provide any detailed methodologies of reaching this goal. Further study is required to determine the best frame to proceed.

2.

Introduction

The ongoing Internet growth has quickly transformed peoples lifestyle, both in their social and professional spaces. To some of todays network architects, it has become increasingly apparent that, even if anybody can imagine the look and feel of human interaction in the future internet, it is no longer easy to keep building scalable network architectures based on evolutionary improvements of previous technologies. Today the fast increasing market of the always on and connected end users, smart mobile phones, the growing bandwidth demands of multi-screen multimedia and interactive content services, as well as the launch of cloud computing business applications, all bear witness to a new wave on the Internet ecosystem. For example, currently, good quality streaming of a HDTV program with MPEG-2 compression typically requires about 12 - 15 Mbps per channel. A triple-play system bandwidth may range from 16 to 48 Mbps depending on the services and compression formats.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 3 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

At the top end, for the upcoming 8k UHDTV, the compressed bandwidth is estimated at 200 Mbps per channel. Combined with the trend of on-demand services across a variety of devices and peer-to-peer applications, it is no longer apparent what the future bandwidth requirements may become and what type of network architecture is needed to accommodate these demands. Nonetheless, it is clear that the future internet ecosystem as a whole will be impacted by the tremendous pace of innovation in key technologies: namely storage, processing, and communication. Furthermore, information and communication technology breakthroughs, soon ubiquitously available in small, and affordable devices (e.g. RFID tags) and terminals, will determine pervasive dissemination of intelligent objects, giving rise to the Internet of Things as shown in Figure 1. As an example, in a network of smart sensors, each of these objects will be collecting raw information from the physical world and exchange it with neighbors thus creating a self-organized cognitive network with some form of autonomic capability. The result could be that the home refrigerator will begin to signal when items placed in it are near their expiration date or that the sensor built into the milk container signals that it has turned stale.

Figure 1: The Internet of Things

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 4 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

Ongoing innovation will continue to develop new media concepts and communications paradigms in the home entertainment, social and professional spaces. These new forms of user generated content need to be catered for by network architectures capable of flexibly adapting to users on-demand requirements - more so than is common today. In the future, what will appear in the cyberspace might very much look like an Internet of Services to which different entities for instance human beings and smart objects, regardless of their location or mobility status, will be always connected through various forms of personto-person, machineto-machine and machine-toperson communications. These entities will have fundamental requirements for some capability of multimedia content creation, consumption and dissemination, empowering the logical concept of Content Centric architecture for the Future Internet 1] as shown in Figure 2. [

Figure 2:

The Logical Future Content-centric Internet Architecture as proposed in 1] [

The path to the future network architecture, as driven by the scenario in Figure 2, would appear to be facing towards an increasingly complex and heterogeneous system constituted of multiple interconnected entities. As a direct consequence, from the point of view of the wired and wireless communication infrastructure, this

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 5 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

ensemble of Networks of Networks will embody a multitude of individual traffic flows with different requirements and QoS dynamics. As a result, the process of allocation of bandwidth resources will be very much challenged, especially in the access and metro/backhauling segment of the physical infrastructure layer. As much as the advances in photonic switching and transmission technologies will allow for an implementation of a full optical metro-access infrastructure, it is becoming evident that the underlying architecture framework needs to be future proof with respect to the fundamental requirement for agility and virtualization of the physical network resources in the Future Internet [2]. Another major challenge the telecom industry faces is the design of future metro access network architectures capable of supporting the coexistence of multiple technologies yet still offering an acceptable migration path for further innovation. This is especially highlighted in the current fiber access segment, where several different architecture approaches are being explored, all of which have their merits and potential but are, in most cases, incompatible with each other. The following chapters of this White Paper describe in detail the purpose and scope of the OLI, the key aspects of an OLE, use case examples, technical and other challenges, as well as a brief survey of related previous proposals addressing the same subject.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 6 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

3.

Purpose and scope of the Open Lambda Initiative

The Open Lambda Initiative was formed in 2010 with the objective to outline an open architecture framework to advance from todays closed networks to an open business model, as well as to create industry awareness of emerging technologies [3][4]. It intends to deliver a comprehensive set of whitepapers to contribute to relevant standards organizations. This chapter describes the background, stakeholders considerations, purpose, scope and direction of the initiative. Several different stakeholder groups are addressed by the initiative, each of them for different reasons. For example, incumbent operators demand a seamless migration to higher capacities when introducing new technologies. At the same time, they require a high flexibility in their choice of technology and associated management platform. Greenfield or alternative operators need an unhindered method of unbundled access to existing metro-access infrastructure with their own technology platforms so that they can focus on end user content service and data link layer performance requirements without replicating large parts of the infrastructure. Component and equipment vendors expect new market opportunities for diverse FTTH products with an overall increased market volume to help maintain volume pricing. Consumers are seeking more freedom when selecting broadband providers as well as the ability to flexibly choose content service and data link layer performance parameters, preferably all in real time. Last but not least, national and international regulatory authorities are trying to foster competition on the same metro-access fiber infrastructure in order to reduce the substantial costs of nationwide rollouts while the promise of unhindered structural access to the fiber medium will ensure fairness and maximum flexibility in introducing new and innovative applications. Todays networks typically consist of a closed, self-contained structure with few, well accepted interfaces to other foreign networks. In many cases, applications are also provided by the same network provider. The advance of the internet has so far changed this structure in that many content services are externally provisioned mostly by exploiting higher layer networking opportunities. For migrating towards an open business model also on the physical layer several topics need to be considered in order to satisfy the requirements of all the stakeholders. These topics, which are intended to be addressed by OLI, are discussed below. Todays optical access systems have adopted few well defined static wavelength assignments for up- and downstream channels, leaving most of the available fiber spectrum unused. Actually only a tiny fraction of the available optical bandwidth of fibers is used in access networks, typically just in the order of a few 10 GHz out of

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 7 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

more than 50 THz (O-band to L-band) offered by silica fibers as deployed today. OLI aims to help exploiting this available spectrum in a more efficient way and migrating from the current static wavelength usage towards the dynamic wavelength allocation for technologies and content and network-layer services in the future. Emerging optical technologies capable of wavelength tuning and switching may play a role in accessing the optical spectrum. One major challenge for realizing this open environment is that such a system, although it offers a great degree of freedom and flexibility, has to take into account existing legacy technologies which may still be present on the same infrastructure during the technology migration period. The slow progress of fiber optic network deployments in the metro and access space globally seems to indicate the associated business case either is not sufficiently compelling or is too risky to support large scale adoption. Local political and regulatory uncertainties further hamper investments often due to perceived risks. At the same time, however, optical networks are being recognized as an important factor for enhancing the economy whenever deployed. This sometimes leads to regional policy decisions that municipalities build the fiber infrastructure and leave it to regional network providers to provision network services. Such expensive investments can only be justified by offering broadband connections not only to residential customers, but also to the local community such as hospitals, schools, police, and industry. This situation is typical for metro- or region-wide backbone supporting differentiated bandwidth and QoS capabilities including backhauling for radio networks. In the long term, fiber optic networks should evolve into a versatile and integral part of the general infrastructure just like roads or supply grids for electricity and water. One of the purposes of OLI is therefore to enable such a heterogeneous infrastructure allowing for a mix of services, while supporting different business models efficiently and economically in an open and shared environment. Several panel discussions held in industry fora such as the recent FTTH Council Europe in Milano in February 2011, concluded that incumbent network providers who open up their existing FTTH infrastructure to potential competitors often profit by increased subscriber take-up without sacrificing their strategic positioning. Additional revenues generated from alternative access network providers sharing the physical infrastructure is of significant benefit to the incumbent operator. To make this strategy work, alternative access network providers must however maximize their subscriber adoption rate and offer new services quickly. The remainder of this chapter further describes the aspects of applying OLI for spectrum unbundling and virtualization, specific objectives of the OLI framework and the path to standardization.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 8 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

3.1.

Spectrum unbundling and virtualization

Figure 3: Unbundling in a directly accessible Optical Distribution Network

The proposed OLE enables a virtualized optical distribution network where it is possible for service and connectivity unbundling at the physical layer. The physical infrastructure is directly accessible by all participating network providers and customers, as illustrated in Figure 3. Several different network providers or content service providers will be able to offer individual and differentiated services to their customers while customers have the ability to switch their service provider by automatic wavelength reconfiguration without manual intervention, as shown by the left arrows in the figure. Benefits resulting from such a shared fiber infrastructure may include stimulation of competition by providing a fair access to the physical marketplace, the reduction in fiber outside plant deployment costs and associated risks, as well as satisfying national and international regulatory authority requirements.

3.2.

Objectives of the OLI Framework

Page 9 of 39

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

OLI-High Level Objectives

The key objective of the Open Lambda Initiative is to enable infrastructure sharing to foster a highly competitive landscape in optical metro-access networks by minimizing network duplication: 1. Define the different functional entities of new metro-access architectures, supporting virtualization 2. Define rules to dynamically manage and reconfigure multiple wavelengths 3. Enable an efficient usage of the complete optical spectrum offered by fiber 4. Outline a clear strategy for co-existence and migration of technologies on a shared medium 5. Allow for a fast and flexible introduction of new services and technologies 6. Enable infrastructure and connectivity unbundling on the physical layer 7. Outline regulatory aspects of infrastructure sharing The Initiative consists of members from communication and network-layer service providers, equipment vendors and component vendors. The scope of OLI includes the following: Provide a collective agreement amongst stakeholders to facilitate optimized optical bandwidth utilization Provide a set of deliverables covering the topics of high-level objectives, definition and characterization of an OLI system, deployment scenarios and reference configurations, OLI compliant network architectures as well as assessing the performance of OLI architectures with respect to energy efficiency.

3.3.

Path to standardization

The OLE is closely coupled to the availability of next generation photonic technologies for tunable and switching devices enabling affordable implementations for the metro-access segments of telecommunication networks. As this segment traditionally constitutes a multi-vendor environment, it is important to consider the OLI approach within a proper standardization path. The OLI proposal should be properly captured by an ongoing technology specification process to adopt the OLI framework within the development of future technology standards. The standards bodies and industry fora may include, for example, FSAN for optical access pre-standards, ITU-T, BBF, IETF, MEF, TMF and possibly others.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 10 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

After all, the intention of OLI is not to replicate established standards organizations, but rather to provide input to them.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 11 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

4.

Description of an Open Lambda Environment

The OLE describes the physical and virtual structure addressed by OLI. Figure 4 provides an abstract view of the environment as a collection of different items (system technology, users, services, management) that need to be brought together to form the OLI vision. The key difference between OLI and existing unbundling approaches lies in the consistent separation of content and network-layer service connectivity from any physical infrastructure connectivity. This concept is referred to as optical trails, which are further discussed in Chapter 5.2.

Figure 4: The Open Lambda Environment

The following sections describe the key parts of an OLE in greater detail: Optical Distribution Network (ODN) Physical access interfaces to different services Individual and independent network providers

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 12 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

Connectivity administration and management Spectrum assignment authority Regulation

4.1.

Optical Distribution Network

The ODN represents the physical infrastructure upon which the OLE is built. OLI aims to support existing architectures including PON trees, ring structures including metro rings, and meshed architectures. Each node can include elements such as passive splitters, filters, reconfigurable optical add-drop multiplexer (ROADMs), wavelength selective switches (WSS), optical amplifiers and others. A variety of technologies including legacy can be used to provide connectivity. It should be understood that OLI does not aim to define specific ODN structures, but to describe a flexible way of using them. Generally, the ODN architecture may be designed to be wavelength specific or transparent to a wide range of wavelengths. However, a tradeoff exists: although limiting the flexibility in spectrum allocation to some degree, a certain level of constraints may help optimize the overall exploitation of the ODN capacity. Depending on the respective ODN architecture the spectrum assignment strategy may be different in different environments. Setting up a connection through an ODN can be described by the optical trail concept [5]. An optical trail is a managed light-path through the ODN (refer to ITU-T recommendation G.872 and G.805). After being assigned a spectral resource the operator / customer is provided access to a certain pipe through the ODN (optical trail) that can be utilized for the respective service offering. This trail is characterized by some physical layer parameters such as wavelength (range), power, OSNR and the like. The details are subject to the service level agreement (SLA) between ODN provider and operator. Suitable management functions must be implemented for ensuring mutual compliance with the SLA. Some use cases are described in Chapter 5 for exemplifying these concepts.

4.2.

Physical access interfaces to different services

Towards the user side, the ODN is generally terminated by a demarcation point. The demarcation point either is a dedicated manageable device or just the optical interface to the ONU, which provides access to the network for private users, for

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 13 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

whole enterprise networks, for local data centers, for mobile backhaul etc. From an end-users perspective, OLI builds upon the central idea of flexible allocation of resources within an optical trail. The goal is to enable all users to adjust their connectivity parameters such as line rate on a dynamic basis. Such flexibility can be provided through selective retuning, wavelength switching technologies and bandwidth allocation. The actual extent to which this flexibility can be supported is subject to further study. For example, whenever high modulation rates, high launched power and long distances are involved, nonlinear effects in fiber are likely to become major limiting factors. Higher symmetric data link layer rates (e.g. 10 - 40 Gbps) may become necessary to support enterprise connectivity (e.g. eHealth, telepresence, telecommuting and cloud networking) or mobile backhaul applications. For near term mobile backhaul, as an example, data rate capacity is expected to be up to 300 Mbps, while in the case of future LTE-Advanced it is up to and beyond 1 Gbps. Variability of user requirements often implies a disparity in traffic demands. OLI aims to define a framework that caters to such traffic variations by allowing for flexible data rates adapted to individual user requirements. To do so, a number of underlying optical parameters need to be taken into account per individual wavelength. The exact extent of such line rate variability will be a further study topic.

4.3.

Individual and independent network providers

Within an OLE, network providers are assumed to be independent entities using their own dedicated hardware, but sharing the same physical medium towards the end user. Within this shared infrastructure, each network provider has his own virtual domain, provisioning network-layer services to his subscribers. Each virtual domain is independent from the operation of other virtual domains on the same infrastructure. This is in contrast to a typical bitstream sharing environment in which network providers are inter-dependent on the access technology provided by the incumbent carrier owning the fiber access infrastructure. Within each virtual domain, network-layer services are provisioned through optical trails which are assigned by a central assignment function referred to as Wavelength Hotel. The Wavelength Hotel concept is described in more detail in the next section. Administration and management of each individual trail is performed separately within its respective domain. The flexibility of an OLE is marked by the ability to add, drop and reconfigure individual access points dynamically. Access points can be added to a virtual domain

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 14 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

provided they satisfy the technical requirements. In particular, OLI will provide efficient processes for the migration of a customer from one operator to another. The optical trail concept aims at providing mechanisms, or protocols, that enable network providers to remotely control their associated ONUs. These mechanisms can also be used to re-provision a new channel if another network provider takes over the ONU. The operation of the mechanism will be detailed in a subsequent technology whitepaper.

4.4.

Connectivity administration and management

An OLE allows spectrum to be viewed as partitions assigned to individual network providers, who are then free to independently use that spectral partition in a highly flexible manner, as illustrated in Figure 5. Every network provider may employ several technologies and offer a variety of services. In the figure, these are illustrated as service and technology spaces within individual network provider packages. Coexisting technologies can be used to carry different data rates and services. One such example for a service and technology combination is IPTV offered by one operator via a new generation technology and via a legacy technology. Optical trails providing connectivity are then allocated to those service and technology spaces.

Figure 5: Fiber Spectrum Usage

Given such a mutual coexistence environment, a neutral spectrum management function must be introduced to control the necessary spectrum assignment

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 15 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

dynamically. This mandates the requirement for a set of regulatory rules analogous to those existing for free space radio transmission and wireless communications. The assignment entity will consist of an electronic database and allocates spectrum partitions based on the OLI principles. This database represents the critical information concerning the pool of all wavelengths accessible in a given fiber system. This database is referred to as the Wavelength Hotel since the wavelengths are being added or removed as required by the network provider. It is important to note that the sum of capabilities of all the Optical Line Terminal (OLT) equipment present on each fiber mandates the wavelength data being tracked in the database. The Wavelength Hotel database consists of a table describing channel assignment and management information. The entries in the table may include, for example, channel identifiers, maximum spectral power density for individual wavelengths as well as channel assignment and management rules. Any network provider requiring a new optical trail with set characteristics requests a wavelength or a waveband allocation from the wavelength hotel. The network provider then assigns his optical trails to the wavelengths provided by the wavelength hotel in order to enable his services. An immediate requirement from all stakeholders in such an open environment is to be able to re-provision with a certain degree of automation in order to simplify the process of matching the right wavelength and associated parameters to the ONU. Note that automation may be achieved by the interaction of the spectrum assignment server with local network providers management systems. One important aspect is that the infrastructure provider needs to publish and maintain the capabilities and performance of its infrastructure for network providers wanting to use it. This information determines which technology and services could be utilized and lets operators check if their current technology setup is sufficient to efficiently access the given facility. Exact mechanisms to enable this degree of automation are a subject of further study. Before the envisioned OLI framework and associated rules are commonly implemented in all metro-access technologies, legacy equipment still needs to be taken into account to ease the migration complexity and associated cost from existing PON deployments. This means that technologies with fixed operating wavelengths (e.g. GPON) must be treated as an inflexible instance in the shared fiber medium. The spectrum assignment function must be capable of recognizing the special characteristics of this instance and understand its inherent limitations. For example,

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 16 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

wavelength blocking filters will need to taken into account to enable spectrum sharing in todays PON systems. Other important optical trail management functions include automated resource management to provide resiliency and redundancy options; automatic channel management to enable traffic protection by allocating associated wavelength protection paths; reach management considering optical channel characteristics associated to line rate and spectral power densities, e.g. 1G, 2.5 or 10G - all of which have different impacts on physical reach on the fiber. In addition, detailed analysis is required to understand security aspects of the OLE.

4.5.

Spectrum Assignment Authority

The required spectrum assignment and management functions are likely to be under control of the infrastructure owner or one of the network providers. The spectrum assignment authority facilitates the communication and interaction amongst the network providers, content service providers, and OLTs. If the physical independence as governed by the OLE is to work, then strict and welldefined rules are needed to ensure that different technologies do not interfere with each other, which could lead to service degradation or total loss of service. In order to minimize the risk of potential interference, the spectrum assignment function must maintain a database with real-time information about its physical environment and be aware of selected technical parameters. Further studies will be required to determine an acceptable form of assignment authority especially taking into consideration neutrality and fairness.

4.6.

Regulation

Regulatory uncertainty over the treatment of FTTH networks is widely acknowledged as one principal factor preventing wider roll-out in some countries. Effective physical layer unbundling is one of the principal regulatory requirements to remove obligations such as cost oriented wholesale (bitstream) access, or to allow greater pricing flexibility for incumbent operators. OLI meets this requirement by its unique concept for sharing optical spectrum. In an OLE the need for any additional regulatory obligations such as functional separation is no longer necessary. Fair competition, product differentiation and strong stimulus to invest in further network upgrades are fostered by the presence of multiple network providers on a shared infrastructure.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 17 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

The OLI framework aims to automate the assignment of optical trails as per defined requirements of the local regulatory bodies. This of course implies that national variations in regulatory requirements will be adequately addressed as well. Note that wavelength assignments could also be local or even across borders.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 18 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

5.

Use Case Examples

For exemplifying some of the aforementioned concepts of infrastructure sharing, we consider a converged fiber based metro-access network, typically consisting of one or multiple rings such as shown in Figure 5. Fiber level connectivity is provided here for three basic services: Fiber-to-the-Home (FTTH) / Fiber-to-the-Building (FTTB), Mobile Backhauling and Enterprise Networks. The network supports not only hierarchical topologies typical of telecom networks, such as PON, but also nonhierarchical mesh-like topologies for offering low latency services and off-loading local traffic from the metro core, in the case shown here for realizing CoMP (Cooperative Multipoint Processing) or Network MIMO in LTE Advanced backhauling networks.
FTTH / FTTB 32 wavelengths (pair) = 32 distribution areas wireless backhauling with CoMP

6 feeder fibers pairs waveband ROADM

working

5k

OLT

100k users per ring in total

dual homing
OLT protection

<2

enterprise network / business access Access point (AP)

Figure 5: Fiber ring network providing residential, backhauling and enterprise services over a converged metro-access infrastructure. Orange boxes: ROADMs.

All three services are provided over a shared optical infrastructure by utilizing multiple fiber cables and multiple wavelength bands per fiber. The key elements providing the desired connection flexibility described in the previous sections are ROADMs (orange boxes). They allow for adding and dropping entire wavelength bands assigned to

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 19 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

different operators or services. The ROADMs are to be designed such that individual bands can be utilized independently from each other. The assignment of the bands to certain services or operators / customers is defined by the spectrum assignment authority, respecting previously defined wavelength ranges for legacy services such as xPON for FTTH/FTTB applications. Within those wavebands there is sufficient spectrum available to operate multiple optical channels in parallel.

5.1.

Long reach PON

Extending the PON reach in a densely populated area results in connecting an increased number of customers to a large main central office. In order to avoid a respectively increased number of fibers and optical ports at this main central office, a hybrid TDM/WDM approach is one viable solution.

Figure 6: Example of a hybrid WDM/TDM approach for establishing multiple long-reach PONs across a metro access area

In this hybrid approach, multiple TDM-PONs, as seen in Figure 6, share a single fiber by applying a DWDM scheme within a reserved waveband. For example, in the PIEMAN demonstrator [6], 32 channel pairs on a 50 GHz DWDM grid had been assigned for up- and downstream, each with a 1:512 split and symmetrical 10Gbps line rate. Multiples of such hybrid PON bundles are implemented over a couple of fibers across the ring shown in Figure 5. Each of those TDM/WDM-PON bundles is implemented within a reserved waveband on a fiber running up to one of the waveband ROADMs. From here each of the DWDM channels (i.e. single TDM-PON) within the band serves a respective distribution area where users are connected via power splitters. In the above example, an area typically 25 km in diameter with more than 100,000 customers is served by a single main central office.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 20 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

5.2.

High speed point-to-point links for business and backhaul

The feeder section of the above long-reach PONs provides one example of an optical trail along the metro ring (cf. section 4.1). Another application of this concept is the provisioning of high speed point-to-point links for business and backhaul applications along the same fiber. A dedicated waveband may be reserved for such service offerings. For instance, the business customer connects with a multichannel DWDM system to the ring via one Access Point including the aforementioned ROADMs and leaves the ring at another Access Point after passing through one or more intermediate nodes (Figure 7). The waveband pipes along the ring are organized and implemented such that they can be operated independently, potentially carrying different optical signals as indicated in the figure.

server trail

Access Point client trail

Access Point

Access Point

Client Terminal

Client Terminal

Figure 7: Example of a waveband trail provided over a section of the fiber ring in Figure 5. Here the client operates a DWDM system within the allocated waveband.

5.3.

Radio backhauling and local passive optical mesh networks

In LTE Advanced wireless networks, the base stations (eNodeB) are connected to a central Access Gateway Switch (AGS) in the core network via the logical S1 interface. This S1 interface traffic may be provided over a long reach PON as in chapter 5.1 or over multiple parallel point-to-point links as in chapter 5.2, in both cases being established as one or multiple optical trails along the ring. For enhancing the capacity of the radio network, CoMP schemes allow for simultaneous processing of the radio signals from multiple nearby antennas. To accomplish this, each antenna

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 21 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

broadcasts its digitized RF signals over the logical X2 interface to its nearest neighbors. In order not to overload the links to a central switch node with multiple Gbps per eNodeB and to keep the latencies low (< 1 msec), this local mesh should be established via direct optical links between neighboring sites. If the eNodeBs are connected to the AGS via a PON or a point-to-point Ethernet system, then with the help of an additional box containing only passive splitters and optical diplexers, this fiber network can also be used for realizing a passive optical mesh around each node (Figure 8). The splitters in the box are interconnected in such a way that together with appropriate transceivers in the eNodeB the desired interconnection pattern is established across the drop fibers already in place for the S1 traffic. Depending on the number N of nearest neighbors per node, N+1 different wavelengths are sufficient to establish a collision-free interconnection of X2 interfaces across the mesh network. The mesh is always constrained to include only a small number N of neighboring nodes, but it can be extended infinitely, even across PON boundaries, by passively interconnecting those splitter boxes via unused ports at their edges. This scheme also works with multiple point-to-point links between AGS and eNodeBs as can be seen by removing the PON splitter and extending the drop fibers towards the AGS.

Figure 8: LTE backhauling via PON. The yellow splitter box (passive optical) on the PON layer allows establishing the meshed topology shown on the LTE layer while re-using the existing PON fiber infrastructure without further modifications.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 22 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

Since this overlay network for the X2 interfaces is designed to be entirely independent from the links establishing the S1 connections over the PON, the S1 backhauling network can be easily combined with conventional FTTx solutions on the same PON by exploiting unused ports of the PON splitters. This establishes an optical network for combined operation of wireless and wireline services across a common fiber infrastructure. What comes in addition to the normal PON wavelengths for down- and upstream transmission is a third waveband in which the new wavelengths for the local interconnects are transmitted. This waveband is again to be assigned by the spectrum assignment authority. The underlying concept of providing local optical mesh networks for relieving the remainder of the network of excess bandwidths may also be useful in other metroaccess areas where local traffic can or should be kept local, e.g. to cope with high bandwidth or low latency requirements. Overlay networks using dedicated wavebands together with extension boxes are particularly suited to meeting these requirements.

5.4.

Open architecture for spectrum unbundling

Figure 9 illustrates an example of an UDWDM-PON system enabling full fiber access for multiple network providers [9]. The proposed network architecture depicts multiple network providers all interacting on the same physical fiber medium through an ODN using only passive power splitters. Devices such as filters, circulators, wavelength selective switches and ROADMs could also be considered to reduce insertion losses of power splitters.

Figure 9: Open Architecture / Virtualized PON

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 23 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

Each network provider is allocated a part of the spectrum to provision its individual services for the customers. The spectrum assignment could be based on the technology used, e.g. the tuning ranges of the ONU or OLT. As long as there is no overlap or drift collision of individual wavelengths on the fiber, each network provider can operate his services in complete separation from other services and providers. The complexity of mutual coexistence becomes apparent when one considers more than just three stakeholders all vying to access the same fiber simultaneously. The complexity increases further if some of the network providers only operate part time on such a system, although this is not common today. An example scenario could be a consumer contacting his network provider, and upon providing a SIM card number or similar ID, the consumer is able to have the data rate dynamically adjusted or even re-allocated to another provider by dynamic channel assignment. In addition, network providers can set up separate charging structures for different network-layer service plans, which may have different linklayer performance, utilizing different technologies. Consumer migration across multiple network providers can be achieved automatically via remotely managed wavelength re-tuning at the ONU within the ONUs capabilities. In the case where the infrastructure is owned and operated by a single network provider, wavelength allocation and control of the spectrum is administered solely within the management domain of this provider. One OLT provides all functionalities for the correct allocation of the wavelengths in the overall system, including multiple OLTs on the same fiber. This function is performed by a management framework running between the OLT and the ONU to manage and identify all the wavelengths per OLT in a typical master-slave configuration. In a multi-operator environment, security aspects would, for example, make interworking between the competing network providers difficult. Operator neutrality can no longer be guaranteed if one of the OLTs manages the available spectrum while all others are slaves to that management system. Therefore a virtualized management approach needs to be considered in multioperator environments. The concept of a wavelength hotel becomes important for open access spectrum management in this scenario. Each operator would then be allocated relevant wavelengths for its own services, adapted to its technology capabilities. Furthermore, the system needs to be aware of the individual capabilities of each OLT and ONU in the fiber system in order to monitor, manage and allocate each wavelength correctly. The UDWDM-PON system as defined above is heavily dependent on wavelength tuneable technology and the optical trail assignment function in order to provide the full functionality in a multi-operator environment. The added flexibility of such a

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 24 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

system is that different stakeholders with their own OLT hardware are able to access the fiber at any convenient point, not just in the collocated space of the infrastructure providers building. Each of the ONUs can tune to any of the OLT services on the fiber such that the fiber may be used for mobile backhaul applications on other allocated wavelengths, all at the same time In summary, UDWDM-PON relies on a dynamic wavelength allocation which is an example of how the OLI management framework can be used to satisfy open access requirements including spectrum unbundling.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 25 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

6.

Challenges

The OLE aims to accommodate a wide variety of technologies as well as a diversity of roles and business models within one infrastructure all under the roof of one management. This chapter outlines its main challenges, which are technical, socioeconomic or commercial in nature.

6.1.

Technical Challenges

6.1.1. Heterogeneous network architecture The use cases in chapter 5 illustrate that an OLE will support a large variety of network architectures. Existing and future technology options have to be accommodated, emerging trends such as metro-access consolidation taken care of, and a variety of usage options such as mobile backhaul, enterprise networks as well as resilience and redundancy options supported. The classical static PON tree is by no means sufficient to address all these cases. The main technical challenge here lies in providing sufficient architectural flexibility while still permitting the infrastructure to be shared, i.e. determining a minimal, but sufficient, set of architectural requirements for OLI. A major OLI design goal is to keep the architecture future proof and to strive for energy efficient solutions wherever possible. For example, the convergence of the currently strictly separated access, metro and core networks mandates that new infrastructures should also support existing ring structures, as illustrated in Figure 5. Often for cost reasons, current PON deployments have not sufficiently considered redundancy and resilience functionalities, however when moving to an OLI infrastructure greater care should be given to that. For most deployments, these two functionalities may not be immediately considered as high priority, but this could change once more subscribers are provisioned over the same fiber infrastructure. The challenge is finding a definition of the OLE supporting redundant architectures, however not mandating them. The optical trails approach described in Chapter 4.1 leverages the protocol and modulation format transparency of fiber optics for providing optical pipes or grids that can be utilized for multiple purposes. One challenge for the OLE is to define conditions on the architecture in order to ensure the network flexibility and versatility required by this concept. Functional elements such as optical repeaters (optical amplifiers or optical-electrical-optical repeaters), switches and filters have to

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 26 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

accommodate signals from different bands and with different formats. Supervision functions are also needed at each access node, for example to limit power in order to control nonlinearities and to avoid crosstalk between neighboring bands. Chapter 5.3 describes how a local optical mesh network can be used to offload local network-layer services from the access network, for example, the backhaul of mobile communication over fixed access networks. Care must be taken to ensure full compatibility of overlay networks such as mesh topologies in an OLE.

6.1.2. Fiber and infrastructure sharing On a given architecture, the OLE aims to support the sharing of the fiber and other infrastructure building blocks by a wide variety of content and network-layer services and different network providers. For example, OLI aims to serve both residential and enterprise customers. Although these two have different service requirements, the OLE will have to account for data link layer performance requirements (i.e. bandwidth, delay sensitivities, jitter, etc), even though the protocol definition is out of scope. This situation is compounded by the possible coexistence of different technologies on the same fiber. Exact interfaces and acceptance parameters should be clearly defined in order for an optical distribution network to be compatible with OLI. A strict mechanism for the management of wavelengths must be applied because there is a possibility that new allocations interfere with existing ones, causing for example unacceptable crosstalk due to wavelength proximity and overlap; therefore, putting the robustness of the whole system at stake. The combined unbundling of fibers, wavelengths and data traffic will also become a reality. Therefore, it is clear that the interfaces should be defined in order to allow multiple levels of unbundling without prejudice to any stakeholder. Considering in more detail the optical trail concept depicted in Figure 7, it is clear that a comprehensive set of rules is needed to define the values or ranges of certain optical parameters such as channel wavelength, optical channel power, noise from optical amplifiers, modulation formats, crosstalk levels etc. This will be crucial for guaranteeing coexistence of different optical trails in heterogeneous networks without mutual distortions. Specifying such values for links designed for a closed network, knowing the optical characteristics of every single channel in advance, can be relatively straightforward. With trails, however, being open for flexible, independent and changing utilization, it is rather more demanding to specify those characteristics. Such rules are therefore one of the key deliverables of the Open Lambda Initiative. Equally important in this particular aspect is to define methods to monitor the
Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011 Page 27 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

adherence to the framework itself. Not only the required monitoring points themselves and the monitor itself, which could be infrastructure provider in its simplest form, need to be clearly defined, but also any of the other stakeholders in an OLE. In addition, redundancy and protection schemes have to be defined to support different data link layer performance requirements on different optical trails sharing the same medium. One further step in that direction is the virtualization of networks, where transport resources are considered as part of a pool from which a network-layer service is put together on demand. While the ODN remains the same, the OLI management system has to be able to enable support to resource virtualization on higher layers. However, the OLI management itself will not handle actual higher layer virtualization. A clear definition of this virtualization aspect in the context of OLI is required. This topic will be further elaborated in a subsequent deliverable. The challenge will be to derive consensus for all technologies, present and future, to interwork.

6.1.3. Management and maintenance (OAM) The management and maintenance of such heterogeneous networks is a crucial part of the OLE in order to support the requirements and responsibilities of various players. It can be subdivided into fiber and spectrum management along with FCAPS (fault, configuration, accounting, performance and security) management. While the optical trail assignment would be executed centrally, in most cases network providers will have their own communication and infrastructure management system. Therefore one of the central deliverables of OLI is the specification of spectrum management and the definition of interfaces with external communication management systems to guarantee interoperability and non-interference. In particular, information hierarchies, precedence levels and visibility rules will have to be defined (refer to chapter 6.2), and the domains of responsibility for those different systems set out. The optical trail assignment function will have to be clearly specified. Finally, automation is a must for fast and precise mass provisioning, easy NMS and EMS integration and related billing aspects. Regarding FCAPS, being able to monitor optical parameters will be of paramount importance both on the network provider and the user sides. If needed, end-to-end test measurements of the link performance can be conducted from the user equipment by using power meters and an optical spectrum analyzer before entering or after leaving the optical trail. More detailed information about the link status can be

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 28 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

deduced from OTDR measurements. These can be performed either on a dedicated wavelength channel inside the allocated wavelength band or by employing an embedded solution which provides OTDR traces during normal system operation. The network provider, on the other hand, also needs to see and maintain the link status without relying on any of the operators testing capabilities (Figure 10). In addition, he must be able to validate compliance of the client signals with the specifications as agreed upon in the Service Level Agreement (SLA) about optical trail utilization. A Demarcation Point (DP) provides means for e.g. inserting an OTDR test signal that does not interfere with the clients optical channels. For ensuring compliance with the SLA (e.g. security) and to cope with technical insufficiencies of an ONU, the demarcation points may also incorporate means for restricting the optical spectrum available to the subscriber by including optical filters, as well as for minimizing noise from optical amplifier and monitoring optical power levels on the trail. To support these requirements, clear role definitions (who does what and which information is passed) for network providers and infrastructure owner FCAPS are needed and an SNMP interface permitting network provider owned FCAPS systems to work in an OLE should be specified.

customer network

provider network

customer network

transparent optical nodes Client Terminal Access Point light trail Access Point Client Terminal

server trail monitoring by provider (AP-to-AP) link monitoring by customer (terminal-to-AP + end-to-end)
Figure 10: Separate optical monitoring levels in an optical trail network, respecting the disjoint responsibility domains of the different players involved

6.2.

Socio-economic and commercial aspects

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 29 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

One major challenge for OLI is to define a complete ecosystem which encompasses not only a technical solution but also management hierarchies and regulatory aspects to enable business models as depicted in Figure 11 without adversely affecting companies to execute their business goals. The Open Access Service Competition model shown in Figure 11 is currently discussed predominantly in Europe. The model offers the opportunity to operate and maintain the entire passive optical infrastructure by one market player. Typically, the active infrastructure is operated by one or multiple operators while the content service is often provisioned by third party players. Multiple network providers or service providers can be active at the same time on the same network. Alternatively, one of the players may offer services on two or on all three of the above layers. The model clearly distinguishes between 'service', 'active' and 'passive' horizontal layers. Here, 'passive' layer means the provision of fiber infrastructure and its management together with potentially active optical components (switches, amplifiers), but excluding any action on the data link or higher layers. 'Active' layer means the provision of network-layer services, namely the sale of bandwidth and connectivity as well as management for that channel. Finally, the 'service' layer includes content services seen by the end user, such as IPTV, internet access, etc.

Figure 11: Layers and potential business models for sharing optical networks. OLIaddressesthePassiveSharingandtheFullSeparationmodel.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 30 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

The OLE decouples the infrastructure owner from the network provider, hence realizes the "Passive Sharing" and "Full Separation" models. Current unbundling methods are typically based on the Active Sharing principle, which is akin to the electronic or bitstream unbundling. A combination of "Passive Sharing" and "Full Separation is also possible, where the network provider provides some content services themselves and third parties provide others. The model described so far may be further extended to cover service provisioning across multiple optical infrastructures (ODNs) in the same area owned and operated by different infrastructure providers, such as incumbent operator and municipality in the same city area. This adds more complexity to the picture and remains for further study.

6.2.1. Management Aspects One of the consequences of an OLE is that, in the medium to long term, todays strictly hierarchical network architectures may become obsolete. However, as exemplified in chapter 5.3, there are options available for realizing non-hierarchical topologies on top of existing, potentially hierarchical fiber architectures, thus avoiding the need for re-cabling. It is one of the major challenges to be addressed by OLI to exploit and enable such virtualization concepts for the physical infrastructure as much as possible. The OLI framework intends to provide a management system, as described in previous chapters, for all the wavelengths in the converged networks. The framework becomes much more complex once sub-domain wavelength-reuse is introduced as can be the case when, for example wavelength selective switching (WSS) or protection switching is considered. An OLI conformant management system should guarantee a smooth introduction or migration of newer optical-based technologies by the provision of a transparent management function of all involved wavelengths in the domain. An OLE therefore needs to constantly monitor its existing resources (wavelengths and optical trails) in the network, and is capable of allocating new resources and prevents any collision of resources even in complex sub-domain scenarios. In addition, it needs to be flexible enough in re-allocating all resources in order to respect the fixed wavelength requirement for legacy technology, for example the typical 1550nm analog video.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 31 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

Equally important are OLI design guidelines with respect to security aspects. The requirement is to reuse as much as possible from existing technologies to keep the solution simple and affordable, while maintaining an overall security level acceptable for years to come. The challenge starts with defining clear boundaries for all stakeholders while maintaining a level of information security for each individual entity, i.e., just how much information and visibility is accessible to all stakeholders. As an example, for an optical trail assignment system, which information about the state of the shared spectrum is available to all stakeholders? This at first seemingly easy question can become quite complex as the dynamics of a network could be used to derive competitive status. The objective for OLI is to carefully select design guidelines to prevent such issues altogether. After all, there should not be a need to publish details of optical trails if the assignment function is completely aware of its entire operating environment. One can therefore conclude that the OLI groups challenge is to come up with a universal framework which will be as much a technical related issue to solve as well as a politically and policy related one.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 32 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

7.

Survey of Existing Similar Proposal

Wireless systems have since inception used the concept of flexible frequency bands for better channel utilization. However, these systems work at significantly lower carrier frequencies and hence data rates, implying that the ability to switch or modify channel bandwidths and make the bands flexible is significantly easier than in the optical domain. Customization of wireless access devices using ASICs and DSPs has realized the flexible frequency use in wireless systems is now a standard phenomenon and is hence commercially viable and easily available. The OLE concept can be thought of as an extension of the flexible frequency bands concepts common in the wireless domain ported into the optical domain. Wireless networks have an inherent need for frequency optimization and many protocols have been proposed to ensure optimal use of the entire spectrum. Spectrum management has also proved a highly complex subject especially when differences in spectrum handling are evident on a country by country basis. Many technical workarounds are in place worldwide to handle the international disparities that exist. The purpose is to learn the lessons from the wireless environment and adapt them towards OLI. However, in contrast to wireless networks, where frequency re-use can only be accomplished in geographically disjoint areas, the optical networks offer an additional degree of freedom: the medium itself. Multiple fibers together with multiple wavelengths (bands) span a 2-dimensional parameter space open for resource allocation even within the same geographical area. OLI represents a new approach for spectrum utilization in optical communications and is particularly useful for the last mile as well as metro access. There have, however, already been approaches that exhibit sub-sets of functionalities as offered by the OLI concept. A few of these approaches are described below. SLICE [10], spectrum-sliced elastic optical path network, was introduced as a spectrum efficient and scalable optical transport architecture to support various data rates with various spectral granularities. SLICE is designed to provide proportional optical bandwidth based on bandwidth requirement or traffic volume. For achieving this it relies entirely on the flexible bandwidth allocation offered by OFDM technologies. This addresses maximum spectral efficiency which is, however, not the major challenge in the metro-access area. More importantly, it imposes too many constraints on the utilization of the network by demanding the OFDM format for all optical channels, thus precluding from offering an open and transparent optical environment.
Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011 Page 33 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

ROAMTS [11] or Reach Optimized Architecture for Multi-Rate Transport System proposes a hardware architecture for a node configuration in the metro area. The ROAMTS node architecture is based on a staged-WSS (wavelength selectable switch) concept and dynamically partitions the fiber bandwidth into multiple contiguous bands, employing control plane signaling. Each band is composed of channels that have a similar spacing, but the spacing of channels in different bands is different. The bands may not be contiguous in the spectrum and hence ROAMTS is different from conventional waveband switching. Similar to ROAMTS and SLICE, concepts for flexible grids [12] are being worked on in the ITU-T SG15 Q6. In this study, the spectral efficiency of future high speed optical signals is considered, having spectral width much greater than state-of-the-art 10-100 Gbps signals. In this case, WDM signals can no longer be accommodated in the currently defined channel frequency spacing. Two approaches are being considered. The first approach is to create new grids with an equal channel spacing or utilize the concept of grouped wavelengths based on fixed grids. The other approach is to define flexible grids, where the width of a channel (or frequency slot) and its position on the frequency grid are determined. Automated control mechanisms, adjustable wavelength and bandwidth assignment, light path set-up and tear down mechanisms are being discussed, all of which are functions somewhat akin to OLI.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 34 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

8.

Conclusion

Fiber infrastructure or parts of it may be owned by an incumbent network provider, an aspiring alternative network provider, regional and even local municipalities, utility companies (private or public) or any other entity that is willing to invest in fiber rollout. Whatever may be the case, ownership in an OLE should no longer be an issue. All fiber access seekers should have unhindered access to the open marketplace and be able to freely provision their services according to their network capabilities. However this vision is very different from todays reality. The suggestion of a dynamic wavelength managed environment (suggesting an unhindered Layer 1 access to a FTTX fiber plant) already raises many concerns, all of which need to be addressed by OLI in turn. For instance the plant owner will have to publish and maintain the performances of its infrastructure for operators wanting to use it to know which type of systems and wavelength or band they could be using. This is a large group of potential stakeholders all of whom need to have their interests covered otherwise the idea wont work. So who owns the spectrum? - After all this is the most important resource in an OLE. It is entirely possible that the owners of the physical infrastructure (whether single or shared) may not hold any rights to the optical trail assignment function whatsoever. The challenge for the OLI group is to identify the different models foreseeable and provide functional models for a fair optical trail assignment amongst those seeking to provide services. One could foresee neutral optical trail assignment authorities (3rd party) which need to provide overall fair balancing, enforcement and conflict management in this dynamic environment. Automation assisted by status feedback from the system will greatly assist these management functions and more importantly helps to improve the overall acceptance of OLI in future network architectures. The dynamic nature of the OLI idea is a new concept to most established stakeholders and has, until recently, not been part of any debate on access or transport architectures. The task for the OLI group will be to clearly support all stakeholders in understanding and realizing the true potential of this advanced network vision. Successful promotion of OLI could substantially help accelerate FTTX deployments by introducing new business opportunities. For more about OLI, please refer to www.openlambdainitiative.org.

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 35 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

9. [1]

References Why do we need a Content Centric Future Internet?, The Future Internet Assembly 2009, Prague May 2009,
www.future-internet.eu/fileadmin/documents/prague_documents/ FIA-FCN_Internet_Architecture_20090507.pdf

[2]

Conference Report of Future Internet Assembly 2010, Valencia April 2010

www.future-internet.eu/fileadmin/documents/valencia_documents/ FIA_Valencia_Report_v3_0__out_final_0306.pdf

[3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]

J. S. Wey et al., ITU-T Kaleidoscope Beyond the Internet - Innovations for future networks and services Pune, India, 2010 J. S. Wey, C. Badstieber, and H. Rohde, Open lambda initiative for ultra high capacity optical access networks, OSA ANIC Conference, June 2010 Th. Pfeiffer, "Converged Heterogeneous Optical Metro-Access Networks", 36th ECOC, paper Tu.5.B.1, Torino, 21.9.2010 (invited paper) The Photonic Integrated Extended Metro and Access Network (PIEMAN) project. www.ist-pieman.org/about.htm The Multi Service Access Everywhere (MUSE) project. www.ist-muse.org/ Scalable Advanced Ring-based Passive Dense Access Network Architecture (SARDANA) Project. www.ict-sardana.eu/ H. Rohde et al., Coherent Optical Access Networks, OTuB1, invited paper, OFC 2011

[10] M. Jinno et al. , "Spectrum-efficient and scalable elastic optical path network: Architecture, Benefits, and Enabling Technologies," IEEE Comm. Mag., vol.47 no.11, pp.66-73, 2009 [11] A. Gumaste and N. Ghani, "Reach Optimized Architecture for Multi-Rate Transport System (ROAMTS): One Size Does Not Fit All", OFC 2009 [12] S. Gringeri et al., Flexible Architectures for Optical Transport Nodes and Netwroks, IEEE Communications Magazine, pp. 40-50, July 2010

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 36 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

10.

Definitions, Acronyms, & Abbreviations 10.1. Definitions

Extracts from ITU-T definitions: Passive Optical Network (PON) system: A combination of network elements in an ODN (ITU-T G.987 (10/2010)) based optical access network that includes an OLT and multiple ONUs and implements a particular coordinated suite of physical medium dependent layer, transmission convergence layer, and management protocols. Optical Distribution Network (ODN): A point-to-multipoint optical fiber infrastructure. In the G.984.6 G-PON series of Recommendations, the term Optical distribution network (ODN) refers a passive point-to-multipoint distribution means extending from the user-facing interface of the OLT to the network-facing interfaces of the ONUs. Optical Line Termination (OLT): A network element in an ODN-based optical access network that terminates the root of at least one ODN. Optical Network Unit (ONU): A network element in an ODN-based optical access network that terminates a leaf of the ODN and provides an OAN UNI.

Open Lambda Initiative definitions: Optical Trail: A trail is a universal path concept applicable to each layer of a transport network. An optical trail can be implemented as an individual wavelength channel, an entire wavelength band or as a dedicated fiber. A trail can be assigned by an infrastructure provider as a service to PON operators or business customers. A set of rules defining optical parameters in different wavebands or for individual wavelengths ensures mutually distortion free transmission. Wavelength Hotel: The Wavelength Hotel is essentially an electronic database which holds all relevant information for all wavelengths present in a given fiber system. The entries of the database may include, for example, wavelength or waveband optical characteristics, channel identifiers, maximum spectral power density for individual wavelengths, reach management rules as well as trail assignment and management rules. This database is referred to

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 37 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

as the Wavelength Hotel since wavelengths are being added or removed as required by the network provider. Network provider: provides the transport/network layer interface to the ODN by supplying ONUs to users and an OLT that connects to network and content services. Infrastructure Owner: owns the ODN. Data link layer performance: bit rate, latency, jitter etc. at the data link layer. Network-layer service: transport/network layer connection from the user to the (retail) content service. Two distinct network-layer services may differ only in the data link layer performance they offer.

10.2. Acronyms & Abbreviations

AP AGS BBF CO CoMP DWDM DP eNodeB FCAPS FSAN FTTH FTTB GPON HDTV ID IETF IPTV ITU-T LTE MEF MIMO MPEG OAM OFDM OLE OLI Access Point Access Gateway Switch Broadband Forum Central Office Cooperative Multipoint (scheme) in mobile backhaul Dense Wavelength Division Multiplex Demarcation Point Base station Fault, Configuration, Accounting, Performance and Security Full Service Access Network Fiber To The Home Fiber To The Building Gigabit Passive Optical Network High Definition Television IDentifier Internet Engineering Task Force Internet Protocol Television International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Long Term Evolution (Mobile network) Metro Ethernet Forum Multiple In Multiple Out Moving Picture Engineering Group Operations, Administration and Maintenance Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiplexing Open Lambda Environment Open Lambda Initiative

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 38 of 39

OLI-High Level Objectives

OSNR OTDR PON QoS RFID ROADM S1 SIM SLA SNMP TDM TMF UD-WDM UHDTV WDM WSS X2

Optical Signal to Noise Ratio Optical Time-domain Reflectometer Passive Optical Network Quality of Service Radio Frequency Identification Reconfigurable Optical Add-Drop Multiplexer Communications Interface between LTE base station & packet core Subscriber Identity Module Service Level Agreement Simple Network Management Protocol Time Division Multiplex Telemanagement Forum Ultra Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing Ultra High Definition Television Wavelength Division Multiplex Wavelength Selective Switch Communications Interface between LTE base stations

Version 1.0 Date: 09.06.2011

Page 39 of 39