ECOC 2010, 19-23 September, 2010, Torino, Italy Mo.2.D.

Colourless, Directionless, Contentionless ROADM Architecture

Using Low-Loss Optical Matrix Switches
Rich Jensen(1), Andrew Lord(2) and Nick Parsons(3)
(1)
Polatis Inc., Andover, MA, USA, rjensen@polatis.com
(2)
BTI&D, OP8, Polaris House, Adastral Park, Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, UK, andrew.lord@bt.com
(3)
Polatis Ltd., Cambridge Science Park, Cambridge, UK, nparsons@polatis.com

Abstract We show a novel colourless, directionless, contentionless add/drop optical node architecture
using low-loss NxM optical switches which scales to multiple degrees and removes the need for
unnecessary network-wide wavelength assignment restrictions

Introduction networks, without requiring OEO conversions.

Colourless, Directionless (C/D) optical node
architectures have been discussed in recent
publications1-5 and are of great interest to
carriers and equipment suppliers. C/D
architectures allow any express path from any
node direction or degree to connect to any
add/drop transponder. However, many C/D
architectures have some degree of wavelength
blocking. The term “Contentionless” has been
added to separate non-blocking from blocking
architectures. In this paper, we describe a novel
Colourless, Directionless Contentionless
(C/D/C) architecture that we have developed
using low loss optical matrix switches.
Benefits of Colourless, Directionless,
Contentionless Architecture
One often neglected requirement of operators is
to keep network management of the optical
layer simple, with no additional, unnecessary
operational rules. There are so many
operational constraints at higher network layers
that, ideally, the optical layer should provide
simple, flexible, transparent paths between all
nodes in the network with minimal blocking.
Additionally, the growth in access traffic is
resulting in large numbers of wavelengths in the
core, bringing with them the need for increased
flexibility, without which stranded wavelength or
blocking conditions will occur more frequently.
This need for flexibility in the optical layer is
often debated, as well as drivers such as new
wavelength services, but it will be fuelled by
optical mesh protection, unpredictable traffic
growth, and the continued need for planned
maintenance works.
Recent developments in optical switching,
dominated by the Wavelength Selective Switch
(WSS), have solved the problem of how to
remotely configure wavelength bypass of nodes.
They have also provided the functionality to
build multi-degree nodes allowing wavelength
paths to be set up through optical mesh
However, up to now, there have been significant
compromises on the add/drop side:
i. Operators often find it difficult in advance to
predict the percentage of add/drop channels that
will be required as traffic grows at a node.
ii. Operators would prefer colourless operation
to take full benefit of tuneable transponders.
iii. Ideally transponders would be directionless
meaning that a single spare could be used in
any direction.
iv. Operators may need to drop multiple
instances of the same colour arriving from
different nodes. Contentionless node design
would remove a complex wavelength allocation
planning rule as well as improve blocking
performance as the network fills up, delaying
expensive new network build.
Fully non-blocking optical switches have been
previously considered for optical add/drop
applications, but optical NxM switches were too
expensive and had high optical loss. Also the
C/D/C functionality was not previously a hard
requirement whereas it is now becoming more
critical as optical mesh networks and the
supporting technologies become a reality.
Optical switching has also matured in the last
few years and cheaper, lower-loss matrix
switches are readily available. Increased optical
functionality like C/D/C often comes at the ‘cost’
of increased accumulated loss. Here we show a
fully flexible C/D/C architecture with limited total
loss well within the capability of an optical node,
aided by a total fibre matrix switch loss under
2.0 dB.
Detailed description of C/D/C add/drop
architecture
The key requirements for C/D/C are: number of
fibre pairs (node degree), number of waves per
fibre and the percentage of traffic that can be
added or dropped without contention. Keeping
the optical loss as low as possible is also key to
minimize the need for extra amplification. Also

978-1-4244-8535-2/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE


minimizing signal impairments is important since
carriers are looking for technologies that can
work with both 10Gbs and emerging 40/100Gbs
traffic formats.
Generally, the requirements for C/D/C are to
scale from degree 2 to degree 6 or 8 with 96
waves per fibre. The add/drop ratio typically
required is up to 50% of the traffic for larger
nodes and 50 to 100% for smaller nodes. A
fully C/D/C add/drop architecture that meets
these requirements is shown in Fig.1. In this
example we will focus in on a degree 6 node
with 50% add/drop. This architecture can cover
from degree 2 to degree 8 and higher depending
on the add/drop requirements.
Broadcast and Select
Splitters
Express Path
Drop
288 Splitters 4 Add/Drop Modules
First Stage
… …
288x288
OXC #1
… …
Second Stage
2:1
Splitter
#1
RX
Up to 288 Add/Drop Transponders
Fig.1: C/D/C Add/Drop Node Architecture
The architecture is fully C/D/C for a degree 6
node with 96 waves per fibre (up to 576 waves)
and with up to 50% add/drop ratio (up to 288
add/drop waves). This is C/D/C in that any
combination of up to 288 wavelengths can be
connected to any transponder. The architecture
is divided into two independent sections, one for
the express traffic and the other for the add/drop
traffic. To switch waves between the express
paths, a standard Broadcast and Select
architecture is used containing splitters and
WSSs. The WDM traffic signals from each input
fibre to each of the output fibre stages. The
output WSSs combine the signals from the
various input fibres and block unwanted signals.
5
This is a well-known architecture which is being
deployed in advanced networks around the
globe. This architecture is very effective at
switching waves between express paths but not
very effective for switching add/drop traffic.
Mo.2.D.2
The add/drop portion is the novel part of this
architecture. It is built up in two stages: the first
stage containing wavelength multiplexers and
switches, and the second stage containing only
passive 2:1 splitters. The incoming traffic is
shown connecting into the drop path using a 1:2
splitter. The add traffic is connected to the
express via one of the legs of the WSS. The
architecture is symmetric in that the add and
drop do inverse functions.
All incoming traffic (drop and express) first goes
through a wavelength multiplexer to separate
the individual WDM channels which are then
connected to switch ports of an NxM matrix
switch. To simplify the fibre interconnection the
multiplexers can be integrated with the optical
1x9 WSS switch. The waves are routed to transponders
1:6 1:6 1:6 1:6 1:6 1:6
1x9 WSS by makeing optical switch connections. Waves
1x9 WSS that are not being added or dropped then the
1x9 WSS switch simply blocks the wave by not connecting
1x9 WSS
it to an output port. The switch is sized by the
number of input waves per fabric and the
1x9 WSS
potential number of add/drop transponders. The
Add size of switch the express side depends on how
the first stage switches are partitioned. In this
example we use two switch partitions where
each switch handles 3 fibres of 96 waves
… … … … … … … … … …
288x288 288x288 288x288
OXC #3 OXC #2 OXC #4 requiring 288 line side switch ports. Since there
are potentially up to 288 transponders, 288 local
… …
switch ports are required. For the complete
architecture two 288x288 switches are required
2:1 2:1 2:1 2:1 2:1
Splitter
…
… Splitter Splitter Splitter
…… Splitter for both the add and drop sides. By partitioning
the first stage into two switch partitions, the
#2 #288 #1 #2 #288 second stage simply requires a 2:1 splitter or a
RX RX TX TX TX
2x1 switch to enable the transponders to
connect to either of the first stage switch
partitions. In this architecture a transponder can
use different wavelengths for the add and drop
wavelengths.
There are many ways to partition the first stage
switches. In this example we have two switches
each handling 3 fibres worth of traffic. Of course
a single large 576x576 switch could be used
eliminating the need for a second stage. But this
would increase the up front costs for lightly
loaded systems and low-loss fabrics of this size
are not generally available today. Also a single
large switch might introduce an unacceptable
single point of failure reliability risk. By
partitioning the switch into two pieces the initial
hardware costs can be reduced by 50%. At
initial installation only two of the four 288x288
switches (1&2) are required to be installed to
handle the first three fibre degrees. The second
two switches (3&4) can be added hitlessly when
the node degree grows beyond 3. The splitters
in the second stage can be added individually as
transponders are installed. Since the 2:1

splitters are simple passive devices, they could
be integrated onto the transponder line cards
eliminating the need for a separate second
stage. The system could also be partitioned
using more switches, say one for each express
fibre, to reduce initial costs. But as the number
of switch partitions grow more switch ports are
needed per dropped wavelength leading to
higher costs for the fully populated node. Also
increasing the number of switch partitions, M,
beyond two increases the complexity of the
second stage requiring 1:M couplers or 1xM
switches.
Fig.2: C/D/C Add/Drop Node Architecture
Scalability
The architecture can be easily scaled to cover
Degree 2 to Degree 8. The tradeoffs between
switch matrix size, node size and percentage
add/drop are given in Fig. 2 for designs
partitioned with two switches in the first stage
and 96 waves per fibre. The horizontal axis
gives the node degree while the lines on the
graph represent fixed switch matrix size
contours. The vertical axis shows the maximum
C/D/C add/drop ratio that can be achieved for a
given switch size and add/drop ratio. The switch
contour lines shown on the graph are for four
fixed switch sizes 96x96, 192x192, 288x288 and
384x384. The degree 6 node example with 50%
add/drop ratio is shown in Fig.1 requiring a
288x288 switch. Alternatively, the graph shows
that to get 50% add/drop ratio for a degree 8
node would require a 384x384 switch.
The loss budget for the add/drop paths is
summarized in Table 1. One key advantage of
this architecture is that the add/drop losses
remain relatively low and constant as the node
is scaled regardless of the number of dropped
waves.
Mo.2.D.2
Express ‐ Rx Tx ‐ Express
3dB drop coupler 3.0
1x9 add WSS 6.0
Demux/mux 4.0 4.0
Optical Switch Fabric 2.0 2.0
Fiber interconnect 1.0 1.0
2:1 transponder splitter 3.0 3.0
Total optical loss 13.0 16.0
Table.1: C/D/C Add/Drop Node Loss Budget (dB)
Architecture Alternatives
There are many variations on the flexible
architecture shown here. A fully redundant 1+1
architecture is possible by simply adding 1:2
splitters to duplicate the add and drop traffic
then duplicating the first and second add/drop
stages. This 1+1 variation approximately
doubles add/drop costs and adds 3dB to the
optical loss. Also we could replace the 1:2
splitters in the second stage with 2:2 couplers to
provide 1+1 transponder redundancy.
To dramatically reduce costs, the switch fabrics
and multiplexers can be used bi-directionally by
combining the add and drop waves using
circulators or passive couplers. Even factoring
the cost of the additional passive components
the overall add/drop costs would be reduced by
about 40-50%. Although the bi-directional
architecture imposes the extra constraint that
the same wavelength must be added and
dropped to a transponder this is normal practice
in many transmission networks.
Conclusions
The novel optical node architecture shown here
permits contentionless as well as colourless and
directionless network operation, by introduction
of low loss NxM fibre switches. Use of this
C/D/C architecture can greatly simplify the
operation of optical mesh networks, significantly
reducing network blocking. Use of this C/D/C
architecture can significantly reduce blocking
and greatly simplify the management of optical
mesh networks.
References
1. S. Woodward et al., Proc. OFC’10
Postdeadline Paper PDPC8 (2010)
2. X. Zhang et al., Proc. OFC’10 NThA1(2010)
3. G. Prasanna et al., COMSET’09 Session 1-8
Paper 1 (2009)
4. P. Roordra et al., Proc. OFC/NFOEC’08
Pages 1-3 (2008)
5. M. Feuer et al., Optical Fiber
Telecommunications Vol. B: Systems and
Networks, Chapter ROADMs and their
subsystem applications (2008)