Optical Fiber Technology 18 (2012) 490–497

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Optical Fiber Technology

www.elsevier.com/locate/yofte

Regular Articles

Traffic grooming in WDM optical network with grooming resources at Max

Connectivity nodes
Partha Paul a, Balbeer Singh Rawat a, S.K. Ghorai b,⇑
a
Department of Computer Science, Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi 835 215, India
b
Department of Electronics and Communication Engg., Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi 835 215, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper, we propose Max Connectivity grooming in WDM mesh networks under static lightpath con-
Received 2 April 2012 nection requests. The grooming and wavelength conversion resources are placed at the nodes having
Revised 23 June 2012 maximum connections. We propose a heuristic genetic algorithm (GA) model to solve grooming, routing
Available online 3 September 2012
and wavelength assignment. The GA algorithm has been used to optimize the cost of grooming and wave-
length conversion resources. The blocking probability has been investigated under different lightpath
Keywords: connections. The performance of Max Connectivity grooming has been compared with other grooming
WDM optical networks
policies. Our results indicate the improvement of resource utilization with minimum blocking
GRWA
Wavelength assignment
probability.
Traffic grooming Ó 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Optical network with wavelength division multiplexing (WDM)
has been an active area of research, as it can meet the huge band-
width requirement of internet and telecommunication data traffic
through WAN, MAN or LAN. In WDM, multiple wavelengths are
transmitted through a single fiber and the transmission capacity
can be achieved as high as hundreds of terabit-per-second. Each
wavelength can support a data rate of several gigabit per second
(e.g. OC-192, OC-768, etc.). However, in practical networks, the
traffic requested by an individual connection is in the range of
megabits-per-second. Hence, a significant portion of transmission
capacity of a wavelength channel would be wasted. For effective
utilization of the bandwidth, traffic grooming mechanism is being
used in the network where low speed traffic streams are multi-
plexed or groomed into high speed wavelength channels [1]. It
minimizes the network cost by reducing the number of ADMs
and the number of wavelengths used in the network. In WDM net-
work, a lightpath must be established to carry traffic using a partic-
ular wavelength and proper route between a source node and a
destination node. Although this routing and wavelength assign-
ment problem (RWA) minimizes the connection blocking, but it
cannot utilize the network resources effectively.
Traffic grooming with RWA resolves the network bandwidth
problem more effectively. It provides provisioning connection re-
quests of different bandwidth granularities on to wavelength chan-
⇑ Corresponding author. Fax: +91 651 2275401.
E-mail addresses: p_india@rediffmail.com (P. Paul), skghorai12@rediffmail.com
(S.K. Ghorai).
nel of high bandwidth. The grooming node includes optical cross
connects (OXCs), demultiplexers (DMUXs), multiplexers (MUXs)
and/or digital cross connects (DXCs) that perform grooming as well
as switching operations. These grooming resources efficiently mul-
tiplex several low speed traffic streams on to high capacity wave-
length channels and also demultiplex those whenever required. In
addition to grooming, these devices add connections, drop connec-
tions and also perform wavelength conversion using add drop mul-
tiplexers (ADMs) and wavelength converters (WCs).
In the beginning, the traffic grooming problems were imple-
mented in ring networks [2–7], and later on, it has been focused
on WDM mesh networks [1,8–12]. In WDM mesh networks, the
traffic scenarios can be static, incremental or dynamic [13]. Also
the traffic grooming can be single hop traffic grooming or multi
hop traffic grooming depending upon the lightpaths used by a con-
nection between source and destination. The traffic grooming
problem has been addressed in WDM mesh networks by several
groups of researchers for different traffic conditions. However,
our work focuses on static traffic grooming in WDM mesh network.
To maximize the network throughput, an integer linear program-
ming (ILP) formulation was proposed in a six nodes irregular mesh
network [1]. All the nodes have grooming capability and heuristic
approaches were used to solve traffic grooming problem in large
networks. A multi-objective evolutionary algorithm was reported
to optimize multiple objectives at the same time in WDM mesh
network [14]. It maximizes the throughput and minimizes the net-
work cost and average hop counts. A decomposition method based
an integer linear programming (ILP) was used in a large WDM
mesh network [15]. It divides the traffic grooming, routing and
wavelength assignment (GRWA) problem into two parts. One part

1068-5200/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.yofte.2012.07.018
 P. Paul et al. / Optical Fiber Technology 18 (2012) 490–497
Fig. 1. (a) 16-Node WDM mesh network where (1, 2, 7, 8, 9 and 16) are edge nodes and (5, 12 and15) are maximum connectivity nodes and (b) 20-node WDM mesh network
where (1, 2, 3, 10, 16, 17, 18 and 19) are edge nodes and (2, 7, 14, 18 and19) are maximum connectivity nodes.
is traffic grooming and routing problem and the other one is wave-
length assignment problem. It produces an optimal solution under
two considerations, one wavelength capacity constraint and the
other one wavelength continuity constraint. Another decomposi-
tion method was reported where a large network is considered
as a group of clusters [16]. A greedy heuristic algorithm has been
used to groom intra-cluster traffic within each cluster. In order to
reduce the network cost without affecting the network perfor-
mance, edge grooming was proposed [17], where grooming re-
sources are placed on the edge of optical networks instead of
distributing throughout the network. The most contiguous heuris-
tic algorithm was used to solve grooming problem without wave-
length conversion resources and the genetic algorithm was used
with wavelength conversion resources. An algorithm based on var-
iant load balancing under the hose uncertainty model was investi-
gated for multi-granularity WDM mesh networks [18]. It has been
shown that minimizing path cost first performs better than maxi-
mize resources utilization first.
A fixed order multi-hop traffic grooming based on fixed alter-
nate routing has been used to address grooming node selection
in WDM optical network without wavelength conversion capabili-
ties [19]. Unlike the previous decomposition approaches, a multi-
level decomposition approach which decomposes traffic at four
different levels has been proposed to evaluate the blocking perfor-
mance. Recently, a heuristic algorithm called waveband grooming
with layered auxiliary graph has been reported in multi domain
optical networks to improve the scalability and to reduce the net-
work cost [20]. The network is divided into two layers. The high
layer is the virtual topology layer which includes inter-domain
routing between the source node and destination node and the
low layer includes the intra-domain routing in each single domain.
A new multi-granularity traffic grooming algorithm based on inte-
491
grated auxiliary graph has been proposed to reduce the cost and
enhance resource utilization in WDM networks [21]. Multi-hop
grooming and waveband switching are integrated to decrease the
blocking probability and to save the network cost.
In the present work, we propose the Max Connectivity groom-
ing in mesh network to solve GRWA problem under static lightpath
request. In most of the previous works, grooming devices were
placed all over the optical network except [17] where grooming re-
sources are distributed at the edges of the network. Our study re-
veals that placing the grooming devices at the nodes having
maximum connection is more cost effective than all grooming
and edge grooming, and results similar blocking performance as
achieved with edge grooming. Earlier, the maximum connectivity
grooming has been used in unidirectional path switch ring network
[22]. In our work, genetic algorithm (GA) has been used to solve
grooming and wavelength assignment (GRWA) problem in WDM
mesh network. The GA procedure is simple and easily applicable
to large networks. It works on a large solution set (search space)
which makes it more efficient than other approaches such as ILP,
greedy heuristics approach, most contiguous heuristic algorithm
and other heuristics proposed in the literature. In ILP, computation
complexity increases with the increase in the size of the network
due to the increase in the number of variables. Also all traffic re-
quests must be known in advance for solving GRWA problem. Heu-
ristic approaches are faster as compared to GA. However those are
based on observations which may be invalid over time. Also, they
are applied to some specific type of networks. Although greedy
algorithm can be used for variety of networks, but it does not pro-
vide optimal solution with added constraints.
In Section 2, the formulation of GRWA problem with static traf-
fic requests has been presented. Section 3 describes the GA ap-
proach to solve GRWA problem with maximum connectivity
492 P. Paul et al. / Optical Fiber Technology 18 (2012) 490–497
grooming. In Section 4, we present performance with different
lightpath requests and cost comparison for three different groom-
ing techniques followed by conclusion in Section 5.
2. Network architecture and problem formulation
To demonstrate GRWA problem with maximum connection
grooming, we have considered two different network architec-
tures: (i) a 16-node WDM mesh network as shown in Fig. 1a, the
nodes 5, 12, and 15 are considered with maximum connection
and the nodes 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, and 16 are considered as edge nodes
for comparison, and (ii) a 20-node mesh network as shown in
Fig. 1b, where 2, 7, 14, 18 and 19 are maximum connectivity nodes,
and 1, 2, 3, 10, 16, 17, 18 and 19 are edge nodes.
We have made the following assumptions for solving the GRWA
problem:
i. All links are bidirectional links.
ii. Grooming and wavelength conversion resources should be
placed on the nodes having maximum connectivity.
iii. Capacity of one wavelength on one fiber is constant ‘C’ (OC-
48).
iv. Traffic demand is static. Connection requests (R) are known
in advance.
v. Number of wavelengths available per fiber is limited (we
have used eight wavelengths per fiber).
vi. Traffic requests may be through any one of speeds: OC-1,
OC-3, OC-12 and OC-48.
2.1. Network cost formulation
The major cost of the optical networks is due to the wave-
lengths used in connections establishment, and grooming and
wavelength conversion devices deployed on the nodes. The con-
nection requests are static, i.e. all the requests are known in ad-
vance. Let N be the number of nodes in the mesh network in
which grooming and wavelength conversion resources are placed,
L be the requested connections, CG be the grooming cost and CW
be the wavelength conversion cost. So the objective function for
cost can be considered as:
X
N X
L
Total cost ¼ fðai  CGÞ þ ðbi  CWÞg þ Hi
i¼0 i¼0
where ai is the number of grooming devices used at the ith node, bi
the number of wavelength conversion resources used at the ith
node, Hi the number of hops used by the ith connection request.
Fig. 2. (a) Grooming devices placed at node 3 and node 5. (b) Grooming devices placed at node 1 and node 4.
The general cost function given by Eq. (1a) also considers that
wavelength conversion devices are used with the grooming
devices.
Eq. (1a) is subject to the following constraints:
i. At most one lightpath can be setup between two nodes using
a single wavelength,
X
w
pw
i;j 6 bði; jÞ ð1bÞ
i;j
where w is the particular wavelength used between node i
and node j, pw
i;j implies that wavelength w has been assigned
to the lightpath from node i to node j, variable b(i, j) shows
whether lightpath from node i to node j exists or not.
ii. Grooming and wavelength conversion capability of each
node is limited to the number of grooming devices placed
on that node.
iii. Grooming state of each grooming device is limited to the
maximum capacity of the fiber link, i.e.
X
yci;j 6 C max ð1cÞ
r;w
where r e L (lightpath requests), c = [1, 3, 12, . . ., Cmax], Cmax is the
maximum capacity of the fiber link, yci;j is the lightpath request be-
tween node i and j with bandwidth c.
In the present work, we have considered that the nodes will be
equipped with both grooming as well as wavelength conversion re-
sources. Without using wavelength conversion, wavelength conti-
nuity constraint is to be fulfilled. As a result more wavelengths are
to be used for establishing the connection requests which is not
cost effective. In our work, we have minimized the objective func-
tion given by Eq. (1a). We can minimize the objective function
either by minimizing the number of devices used (grooming and
wavelength conversion devices) or by minimizing the number of
hop count Hi. We have used max-connectivity grooming and have
succeeded in minimizing the blocking probability and simulta-
neously reducing the cost of the network by minimizing the usage
of grooming and wavelength conversion devices.
2.2. Max Connectivity grooming
ð1aÞ
In this section, we have shown how max-connectivity grooming
can be effective in reducing the cost and improve the blocking per-
formance. Fig. 2a and b displays two optical mesh networks having
two wavelengths available in each link and all the links are bidirec-
tional. The maximum capacity of each wavelength is assumed to be
 P. Paul et al. / Optical Fiber Technology 18 (2012) 490–497 493

OC-12. We have placed grooming devices on the nodes having
maximum connectivity as shown in Fig. 2a. In Fig. 2b we have
placed grooming devices randomly on nodes 1 and 4.
Suppose we have six connection requests of OC-3 as described
in Table 1.
Using the arrangement of grooming devices in Fig. 2a and b, we
have assigned the resources to the connection requests as depicted
in Table1. Two wavelengths (k1, k2) are available per fiber. It may be
seen that using the device arrangement of Fig. 2a all the connection
requests are successfully established. On the other hand using
Fig. 2b device arrangements, connection request 2 ? 6 cannot be
established. Either we can use one more wavelength or we can de-
ploy a grooming device on node 6. This will increase the cost. So, it
may be seen that the proper placement of grooming devices on the
nodes reduces the cost of the optical networks.
3. GA approach to solve the GRWA problem
Genetic algorithms (GAs) [23] are search algorithms based on
the mechanics of natural selection and natural genetics. A GA
works with chromosomes, each of which represents a solution to
the problem. A fitness function is defined in order to estimate
the probability of a solution for being selected. An initial popula-
tion of individuals is created and then evolved by means of genetic
operators, such as crossover and mutation, to form a new popula-
tion (the next generation) that is hoped to be fitter than the last
one. The goodness of the new set of solutions is determined with
the help of the fitness function. The evolution process is repeated
a predefined number of iterations or until some other criterion is
met.
Several researchers have proposed GA solution to GRWA prob-
lem earlier [17,24,25]. Most of them have considered a full groom-
ing network and have decomposed the GRWA problem in three sub
problems: grooming, routing and wavelength assignment. We
have solved GRWA problem as a single problem.
3.1. Description of genetic operators used
c. Mutation operator.
INITIAL POPULATION (chromosomes formation): Initial popula-
tion is formed with the help of all the possible paths for each light-
path requested. For the 16-node mesh network of Fig. 1a the initial
population for lightpath request 1–14 can be as follows (Table 2):
3.1.1. Selection operator
Selection of an individual route is done with the help of a fitness
function. In our research work, the fitness function is inversely pro-
portional to the cost function that we described earlier in Section
2.1 by Eq. (1a).
The fitness function estimates the fitness of each individual
with respect to the cost calculated using the cost function given
by Eq. (1a). The GA procedure calculates the cost associated with
the routes as the sum of the individual costs due to the wave-
lengths and devices used.
Each individual route is selected on the basis of the fitness it
holds. Routes having fitness less than the threshold value would
be discarded.
The cost function described earlier by Eq. (1a) is used for the
optimization. All the chromosomes in the population will have a
fitness value assigned to it and this fitness value is calculated using
the cost function. The fitness value assigned to each chromosome is
based upon the number of devices and the number of wavelengths
used in the connection establishment.
The higher the cost of route, the lower will be the fitness value,
so the route with minimum cost will be selected for connection
establishment. After each iteration of our proposed GA procedure,
all chromosomes (established paths) will have a fitness value as-
signed to them. Let the chromosomes are represented as Chr = Pab
, . . ., Pij where Pij represents the path between the source i and des-
tination j. Suppose GRD(Pij) and WCD(Pij) represent the number of
grooming and wavelength conversion devices used in the path Pij
respectively. Then the cost of each individual chromosome is given
by:
X
n1

The following genetic operators have been used in our GA CðChrÞ ¼ ðWLi;iþ1 Þ þ C½GRDðPij Þ þ WCDðPij Þ ð2Þ
i¼0
procedure:
where n is the number of nodes in the path Pij and WLi,i+1 is the
a. Selection operator. wavelength used between nodes i and i + 1. C[GRD(Pij) + WCD(Pij)]
b. Crossover operator. is the cost of resources used in the path Pij.
Now all the chromosomes are sorted in ascending order with
respect to their cost, so that the chromosome with the least cost
Table 1 is chosen. We have also calculated the cumulative fitness of the
Connection requests and wavelength assignment to each request.
chromosomes after each iteration. This cumulative fitness is given
s–d No. of Wavelength Wavelength by:
connections assignment for Fig. 2a assignment for Fig. 2b
requests X
LPR

1?4 1 k1 k1
CMFðChrÞ ¼ CðChri Þ ð3Þ
5?4 1 k2 k2 i¼0

5?3 2 k1, k1 k1, k2

2?6 1 k2 – where LPR is the number of lightpath requests and C(Chri) is the
2?4 1 k1 k1 cost of ith chromosome.
The cumulative fitness (CMF) is used to restrict the number of
iteration in the GA algorithm. For maximum connection establish-
ment the individual fitness of the chromosomes should be best. So
Table 2 after each iteration of the GA algorithm current fitness is compared
Set of possible paths for connection request 1-14.
with the previous fitness. If the fitnesses are equal then the execu-
1 7 11 12 13 15 14 tion is halted and the result obtained is the optimal result.
1 7 11 12 10 15 14
1 6 5 12 13 15 14
1 2 3 4 8 9 14 3.1.2. Crossover operator
1 2 3 4 8 10 15 14 Crossover operator can only be applied to the routes (chromo-
1 6 5 4 8 10 12 13 15 14
somes) having one or more common nodes except the source
1 7 11 12 5 4 8 9 16 15 14
and the destination node. Taking the mesh network in Fig. 1a the
494 P. Paul et al. / Optical Fiber Technology 18 (2012) 490–497

Fig. 3. Crossover between two routes.

Fig. 4. Formation of new route after mutation.

two routes from node 1 to node 14, P0 and P1 may be used as two
parent chromosomes to perform crossover.
In Fig. 3, parent routes P0 and P1 are used to form two new
routes (offspring) C0 and C1. The crossover point is the common
node in the parent routes, i.e. node 5. The new routes are selected
to form new population on the basis of the fitness value. The higher
is the fitness value, the greater is the chance of getting selected. If
crossover is not performed, the offsprings are the exact copy of the
parent routes.

3.1.3. Mutation operator

A mutation is a permanent change in the sequence of the route.
Mutation is applied to the routes (chromosomes) having fitness va-
lue lower than the threshold value. Threshold value is chosen as
the mean fitness value of all the routes in the population. A random
node is chosen as the mutation point and it must have connectivity
more than two, so that a different path can be discovered.
In the underlying example (Fig. 4), we have used the mesh net-
work as shown in Fig. 1a and taken a route from node 1 to node 9.
The mutation point is selected as node 12. After mutation, the new Fig. 5. Blocking probability vs. traffic grooming and wavelength conversion
route’s fitness is evaluated and if its fitness value is greater than resources.
the threshold then the new route is added to the new population.

3.2. GA procedure

Outline of the procedure used: The blocking probability for a specified number of lightpath re-
quests is determined as follows:
 Create AdjMat(); ðTotal lightpath requests  Successfully established pathsÞ
 Create Load(); Blocking probability ¼  100
Total lightpath requests
 Device Order();
 Creating and initializing Chromosomes:
 For GenLimit > 0 4. Results and discussion
 For LPR > 0
 Path selection and wavelength assignment The performance of our proposed GA based heuristic procedure
 Checking fitness. to solve GRWA problem has been demonstrated in WDM optical
 Cross over() 16-node and 20-node network topologies as illustrated in Fig. 1a
 Mutation() and b. We have compared our results with edge grooming and
 Checking fitness again and adding offspring to the all grooming. We have found that it is efficient and cost effective
population. to deploy grooming and wavelength resources on the nodes having
 Use new generated population for a further run of maximum connectivity instead of placing resources randomly over
algorithm. the network.
 Return number of successful paths. In our work, we have considered that the wavelength conver-
 Calculation of blocking probability. sion devices are only placed on the nodes with grooming capability
(as traffic grooming devices are capable of performing wavelength
 P. Paul et al. / Optical Fiber Technology 18 (2012) 490–497 495

Fig. 6. Blocking probability vs. number of lightpath requests: (a) for 16-node mesh network and (b) for 20-node mesh network.

Fig. 7. Blocking probability vs. traffic grooming and wavelength conversion resources using 150 lightpath requests: (a) for 16-node mesh network and (b) for 20-node mesh
network.

Fig. 8. Total cost vs. number of connections: (a) for 16-node mesh network and (b) for 20-node mesh network.
496 P. Paul et al. / Optical Fiber Technology 18 (2012) 490–497
conversion too). There are eight wavelengths available per fiber in
the network and the algorithm has been executed until the cumu-
lative fitness is found equal for consecutive generations (optimal
result). Single point crossover is done and the mutation probability
is 1/n, where n stands the number of nodes in the chromosome.
In Fig. 5, blocking probability for 75, 100 and 125 lightpath re-
quests is plotted with traffic grooming and wavelength conversion
resources. The results are shown for the 16-node network illus-
trated in Fig. 1a. Initially the blocking probability for each of the re-
quests is very high and it reduces as we increase the resources in
the network.
Fig. 5 shows that as the lightpath requests increase, the blocking
probability of the network also increases. It can be observed from
Fig. 5 that for two grooming and wavelength conversion resources,
blocking probability for 125 lightpath requests is much higher than
100 and 75 lightpath requests.
In Fig. 6, results of three grooming policies are compared and
the results are shown for two different network architectures. In
this evaluation, the resources placed on the nodes are fixed and
then for each grooming policy the results are compared. For 16-
node mesh network, we have used nodes 5, 12, and 15 having max-
Fig. 9. Blocking probability vs. blocked connections: (a) connection failure for all grooming, (b) connection failure for max-connectivity grooming, and (c) connection failure
for edge grooming.
imum connectivity and for 20-node network, we have used nodes
2, 7, 14, 18, and 19 having maximum connectivity. For max-con-
nectivity grooming in 16-node network, we place resources only
on nodes 5, 12, and 15 and for edge grooming, we have assumed
that only nodes 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, and 15 would be equipped with the
grooming and wavelength conversion resources. For max-connec-
tivity grooming in 20-node network, we place resources only on
nodes 2, 7, 14, 18, and 19 and for edge grooming, we have assumed
that only nodes 1, 2, 3, 10, 16, 17, 18, and 19 would be equipped
with the grooming and wavelength conversion resources. The eval-
uation is done for different connection requests, e.g. 50, 75, 100,
125, 150, 200, 300 lightpath requests and for each policy only
two grooming and wavelength resources are used. The result
shows that placing devices on the nodes having maximum connec-
tivity improves the blocking probability than the other policies.
Placing the devices randomly on the nodes results in a high block-
ing probability where as using max-connectivity grooming policy
results in lower blocking probability than the others.
Our results show that max-connectivity grooming policy is bet-
ter than the other policies in terms of blocking probability and also
it is cost effective. Also, it may be observed that the blocking prob-
 P. Paul et al. / Optical Fiber Technology 18 (2012) 490–497
ability for 20-node mesh network is less as compared to 16-node
mesh network. This is due to the presence of more number of links
in the 20-node network as compared to 16-node network.
Fig. 7 shows a comparison between the results obtained for two
grooming policies from our genetic procedure using 16-node and
20-node mesh network architectures. The results shown in Fig. 7
are conducted for 150 lightpath requests.
In our GA based heuristic approach to solve the GRWA problem,
the grooming devices are increased additively and the resultant
blocking probability is examined. As the resources are increased
in the network the number of successfully established paths also
increases and hence improves the blocking probability. Our results
show that the performance of the max-connectivity grooming is
comparable to the edge grooming policy for both the network
architectures.
Fig. 8 shows the comparison of cost for three different grooming
policies using two different network architectures (16-node and
20-node mesh networks). The network cost is measured by the
wavelength link cost, grooming and wavelength conversion de-
vices cost used in the network. The cost shown in Fig. 8 is the nor-
malized cost depending upon the objective function given by Eq.
(1a). The cost is evaluated as:
ðNumber of hopsÞ units of link cost
þ ðNumber of grooming devicesÞ  Cost of single device
þ ðNumber of wavelength conversion devicesÞ
 Cost of single device:
We have evaluated the performance for a constant blocking
probability (i.e. 15%) for all the grooming policies. The result shows
that placing the devices on the nodes with maximum connectivity
improves the cost factor. Here we can see that the cost increases
with the increase in the number lightpath requests. As the connec-
tion requests increases, the resources available over the network
must also be increased to satisfy as much as lightpath requests
possible. As a result the number of wavelengths used is also in-
creased and more importantly it increases the cost factor. In
Fig. 8a and b, it is depicted that to achieve the blocking probability
of 15% for different lightpath requests (50, 75, 100, etc.) max-con-
nectivity grooming policy is most cost effective than the other pol-
icies. The results also indicate that, increasing the nodes in the
network also increases the total network cost.
Fig. 9 shows the failure rate comparison between the different
grooming policies and the bars in the graph represent the blocked
connections. In all grooming, all the 16 nodes will be equipped
with grooming capability where as in max-connectivity grooming
only nodes 5, 12, and 15 will have grooming capability and edge
grooming only nodes 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, and 16 will have grooming capa-
bility. All the plots show nth connection failure for different traffic
grooming techniques for 150 lightpath requests. It can be observed
that most of the initial connection requests are established due to
the availability of the resources. As the resources are limited, more
blocking is observed when lightpath request increases.
In all grooming, the number of failed connections is less as com-
pared to max-connectivity and edge grooming, but the cost is very
high due to the placement of grooming devices in all the nodes. The
max-connectivity and edge grooming shows quite similar perfor-
mance as compared to all grooming using less number of
resources.
5. Conclusions
We have demonstrated traffic grooming, routing and wave-
length assignment in WDM mesh network where grooming and
497
wavelength conversion resources are deployed in the nodes having
maximum connectivity. A heuristic genetic algorithm model has
been used to solve the traffic grooming under static lightpath re-
quests. It has been seen that the Max-Connectivity grooming im-
proves the blocking probability compared to all-grooming
(devices placed randomly) and edge-grooming for a fixed number
of lightpath requests. Also it is more cost effective for a certain
number of connections. Our work can be extended to WDM mesh
networks under dynamic lightpath requests with the distributed
grooming and wavelength conversion resources at the nodes hav-
ing maximum connectivity.
References
[1] K. Zhu, B. Mukherjee, Traffic grooming in an optical WDM mesh network, IEEE
J. Select. Areas Commun. 20 (1) (2002) 122–133.
[2] R. Dutta, G.N. Rouskas, On optimal traffic grooming in WDM rings, IEEE J.
Select. Areas Commun. 20 (1) (2002) 110–121.
[3] A.L. Chiu, E.H. Modiano, Traffic grooming in algorithms for reducing electronic
multiplexing costs in WDM ring networks, IEEE/OSA J. Lightw. Technol. 18 (1)
(2000) 2–12.
[4] J. Wang, V.R. Vemuri, W. Cho, B. Mukherjee, Improved approaches for cost
effective traffic grooming in WDM ring networks: ILP formulations and single-
hop and multi-hop connections, IEEE/OSA J. Lightw. Technol. 19 (11) (2001)
1653–1654.
[5] X. Zhang, C. Qiao, An effective and comprehensive approach for traffic
grooming and wavelength assignment in SONET/WDM rings, IEEE/ACM
Trans. Network. 8 (5) (2000) 608–617.
[6] O. Gerstel, R. Ramaswami, G.H. Sasaki, Cost-effective traffic grooming in WDM
rings, IEEE/ACM Trans. Network. 8 (5) (2000) 618–630.
[7] E. Modiano, P.J. Lin, Traffic grooming in WDM networks, IEEE Commun. Mag.
39 (2001) 124–129.
[8] S. Thiagarajan, A.K. Somani, Capacity fairness of WDM networks with
grooming capabilities, Opt. Networks Mag. 2 (3) (2001) 24–31.
[9] L.A. Cox, J. Sanchez, Cost savings from optimized packing and grooming of
optical circuits: mesh versus ring comparisons, Opt. Networks Mag. 2 (3)
(2001) 72–90.
[10] C. Xin, C. Qiao, S. Dixit, Traffic grooming in the mesh WDM optical network –
performance analysis, IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun. 22 (9) (2004) 1658–1669.
[11] H. Zhu, H. Zang, K. Zhu, B. Mukherjee, A novel generic graph model for traffic
grooming in heterogeneous WDM mesh networks, IEEE/ACM Trans. Network.
11 (2) (2003) 285–299.
[12] C. Xin, B. Wang, X. Cao, J. Li, Logical topology design for dynamic traffic
grooming in WDM mesh networks, J. Lightw. Technol. 24 (2006) 2267–2275.
[13] A.E. Ozdaglar, D.P. Bertsekas, Routing and wavelength assignment in optical
networks, IEEE/ACM Trans. Network. 11 (2) (2003) 259–272.
[14] P. Prathombutr, J. Stach, E.K. Park, An algorithm for traffic grooming in WDM
optical mesh networks with multiple objectives, in: Proceedings of IEEE
International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks, 2003,
pp. 405–411.
[15] J.Q. Hu, B. Leida, Traffic grooming, routing and wavelength assignment in
optical WDM mesh networks, in: Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, 2004, pp.
495–501.
[16] S. Huang, R. Dutta, G.N. Rouskas, Traffic grooming in path, star, and tree
networks: complexity, bounds, and algorithms, IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun.
24 (4) (2006) 66–82.
[17] O. Awwad, A.I. Al-Fuqaha, A. Rayes, Traffic grooming, routing and wavelength
assignment in WDM transport networks with sparse grooming resources,
Comput. Commun. 30 (2007) 3508–3524.
[18] X. Zhang, L. Li, S. Wang, X. Wei, A novel robust routing algorithm for multi-
granularity connection requests in wavelength division multiplexing mesh
networks, Opt. Fiber Technol. 14 (2008) 119–129.
[19] W. Yao, G. Sahin, M. Li, B. Ramamurthy, Analysis of multi-hop traffic grooming
in WDM mesh networks, Opt. Switch. Network. 6 (2009) 64–75.
[20] L. Guo, J. Cao, X. Wang, D. Jiang, T. Yang, Waveband grooming based on layered
auxiliary Graph in multi-domain optical networks, Opt. Fiber Technol. 16
(2010) 162–171.
[21] X. Wang, W. Hou, L. Guo, J. Cao, D. Jiang, A new multi-granularity grooming
algorithm based on traffic partition in IP over WDM networks, Comput.
Networks 55 (2011) 807–821.
[22] Y. Wang, Qian-Ping Gu, Maximizing throughput for traffic grooming with
limited grooming resources, IEEE GLOBECOM (2007) 2337–2341.
[23] David E. Goldberg, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine
Learning, Pearson Education, 2006.
[24] C. Lee, E.K. Park, A genetic algorithm for traffic grooming in all-optical mesh
networks, IEEE Int. Conf. Syst. Man Cybernet. 7 (2002) 6–9.
[25] R.S. Barpanda, A.K. Turuk, B. Sahoo, A new cost function to solve RWA problem
in wavelength routed optical network using genetic algorithms, World Congr.
Nat. Biologic. Inspir. Comput. NaBIC (2009) 1297–1302.