Survivable WDM Mesh Networks, Part I – Protection

S. Ramamurthyt and Biswanath Mukherjee

Department of Computer Science
University of California, Davis, CA 95616, U.S.A.
tCorresponding Author –
Tel: (530) 752-5129 Fax: (530) 752-4767
E-mail: ramu@cs. ucdavis. edu

Abstract may be routed from an input fiber to an output fiber with-

This investigation considers optical networks which em-
ploy wavelength cross-connects that enable the establish-
ment of wavelength- division-multiplexed ( WDM) channels,
between node-pairs. In such and other networks, the fail-
ure of a network element (e. g., fiber link, cross-connect,
etc.) may cause the failure of several optical channels,
thereby leading to large data losses. This study examines
different approaches to protect mesh-based WDM optical
networks from single-link failures. These approaches are
based on two basic survivabildy paradigms: (a) path pr-o-
tection/restora tion, and (b) link pr-otection/res toration. In
path- and link- protection schemes, backup paths and wave-
lengths are reserved in advance at the time of call setup.
Path- and link-restoration schemes are dynamic schemes in
which backup paths ar-e discovered (from the spare capac-
ity in the network) upon the occurr-ante of a failure. In
part 1 of this study presented in this paper, we formulated
Integer Linear Programs to determine the capacity require-
ments for the above protection schemes for a static trafic
demand. In part 2 of this study presented m [1], we anal-
yse the protection-switching times for different protection
schemes, propose distributed restoration protocols, and anal-
yse the restoration-time , and restoration eficiency charac-
teristics of the different restoration protocols.
Keywords and Phrases: Optical network, WDM,
wavelength routing, lightpath, failure, survivability, protec-
tion, restoration, capacity requir-ement, optimization, I.LP.
1 Introduction
Wavelength-division multiplexing (WDM) [2] divides the
tremendous bandwidth of a fiber (potentially a few tens
of terabits per second) into many non-overlapping wave-
lengths (WDM channels). Each channel can be operated
asynchronously and in parallel at any desirable speed, e.g.,
peak electronic speed of a few Gbps. An access station may
transmit signals on different wavelengths, which are coupled
into the fiber using wavelength multiplexer. An optical
signal passing through a wavelength-selective cross-connect
1S. Ramamurthy and B. Mukherjee were supported by NSF
Grant No. NCR-9508239, and by grants from Pacific Bell and
the UC MICRO Program.
out undergoing opt oelectronic conversion. An optical signal
passing through a wavelength-interchanging cross-connect
may be converted from the input wavelength to a different
wavelength at the output port.
The architecture of a wavelength-routed optical net-
work, shown in Fig. 1, consists of wavelengt h cross-connects
(wavelength-selective or wavelength-interchanging) (labeled
1 through 15) interconnected by fiber links. Each network
link consists of a pair of unidirectional fiber links. Techno-
logical constraints dictate that the number of WDM chan-
nels that can be supported in a fiber be limited to W (whose
value is a few tens today, but is expected to improve with
time and technological breakthroughs). An access station is
connect ed to each cross-connect. For clarity of exposition,
we will consider the access-station/cross-connect combina-
tion as an integrated unit which we will refer to as a network
node. In this work, we assume that all cross-connects are
wavelength-selective, and there is no wavelength conversion
in the network.
A connection request is satisfied by establishing a light-
path from the source node of the connection to the destina-
tion node. A lightpath is an all-optical channel which may
span multiple fiber links, to provide a circuit-switched inter-
connection between two nodes. In the absence of wavelength
converters, a lightpath would occupy the same wavelength
on all fiber links that it traverses. Two lightpaths on a fiber
link must be on different wavelength channels to prevent the
interference of the optical signals. Figure 1 shows the follow-
ing wavelength-continuous lightpaths: (a) between Nodes 10
and 6 on wavelength Al, and (b) between Nodes 15 and 9 on
wavelength JZ. In this work, we assume that all connection
requests are unidirectional.
A logical topology consists of a set of Lightpaths set up to
exploit the relative strengths of both optics and electronics -
viz., packets of information are carried by the logical topol-
ogy “as far as possible” in the optical domain using optical
switching, but packet forwarding from lightpath to lightpath
is performed via electronic packet switching, whenever re-
quired. The electronic packet-switching may be performed
by an ATM switch (or an 1P router), in which case the logical
topology is operated as an ATM network (or 1P network).

0-7803-5420-6/99/$10.00 (c) 1999 IEEE

 dynamic restoration, the spare capacity available within the
network is utilized for restoring services affected by a failure.
Generally, dynamic-restoration schemes are more efficient
in utilizing capacity due to the multiplexing of the spare-
capacity requirements, and provide resilience against dif-
ferent kinds of failures, while dedicated-restoration schemes
have a faster restoration time and provide guarantees on the
restoration ability.

Protection/Restoration Schemes

+7
preconfigured
Backup Route and Wavelength
Dynamic Dk.covery of
Backup Route and Wavelength

Figure 1: Architecture of a wavelength-routed optical

net work.

Dedicated Shared Link Path

Backuv Backuv Restorauon Restoration
In such an optical network architecture, the failure of a
network component such as a fiber link can lead to the fail-
ure of all the lightpaths that traverse the failed linkl. Since
each lightpath is expected to operate at a rate of several
AA
Link Path Link Path
Gbps, such a failure can lead to a severe disruption in the Protection Protecuon Protection Protection

network’s traffic. SONET operating over the WDM opti-

cal network provides its own protection schemes (and has
protection times on the order of milliseconds), and higher
protocol layers (such as ATM and 1P) operating over the
optical network may have their own recovery procedures to
recover from link failures. An 1P network, for example, re-
covers from link failures by rerouting data packets around
the failed link. However, the recovery time for higher lay-
ers (such as ATM and 1P) is still significantly Iwge (on the
order of seconds), whereas we expect that restoration times
at the optical layer will be on the order of milliseconds to
minimize data losses [3]. Furthermore, it is beneficial to
consider restoration mechanisms in the optical layer for the
following reasons [4]: (a) the optical layer can efficiently mul-
tiplex protection resources (such as spare wavelengths and
fibers) among several higher-layer network applications, and
(b) survivability at the optical layer provides protection to
higher-layer protocols that may not have built-in protection.
There are several approaches to ensure fiber network sur-
vivability [5, 6]. Survivable network architectures are based
either on dedicated resources, or on dynamic restoration. In
dedicated-resource protection (that includes Automatic Pro-
tection Switching (APS) and Self-Healing Rings), network
service is restored utilizing the dedicated network resources.
The network resources used in dedicated-resource protection
may be dedicated for each failure scenario; alternatively, the
dedicated network resources used for protection against fail-
ures may be shared among different failure scenarios. In
Figure 2: Different schemes for surviving single-link fail-
ures.
This study examines different approaches (illustrated in
Fig. 2) to survive single-link failures in an optical net-
work. These approaches are based on two basic survivabil-
ity paradigms: (a) path protection/restoration and (b) link
protection/restoration.
● Path protection frestoration:
In path protection, the source ancl destination nodes
of each connection statically reserve backup paths on
an end-to-end basis during call setup. In path restora-
tion, the source and destination nodes of each connec-
tion that traverses a failed link dynamically discover a
backup route on an end-to-end basis (such a backup
path could be on a different wavelength channel) after
the link failure.
– Dedicated-path protection: In dedicated-
path protection (also called 71+1 protection), at
the time of call setup for each primary path, a
link-disjointz backup path and wavelength are re-
served, and dedicated to that call. The backup
wavelength reserved on the links of the backup
path are dedicated to that call, and are not shared
with other backup paths.

1we ~sume in this study that a link is unidirectional, and a 2B y link-disjoint we mean that the backup path for a connec-
link failure is the failure of a unidirectional link. Our work can be tion has no fiber-links in common with the primary path for that
generalized to account for the failure of a bidirectional fiber-link connection.

0-7803-5420-6/99/$10.00 (c) 1999 IEEE

 cover a route around the link, for each wavelength that
Primary
___________ traverses the link.

– Dedicated-link protection: In dedicated-link

protection, at the time of call setup, for each link
of the primary path, a backup path and wave-
length are reserved around that link, and are
dedicated to that call. In general, it may not
v Backup - be possible to allocate a dedicated backup path
around each link of the primary call, and on the
(a) Path protection same wavelength as the primary path. For ex-
ample, Fig. 4 shows a bidirectional ring network
with one connection request between Node 1 and
Node 5. The backup path around link (2,3), viz.

SOq+[>
(2,1,8,7,6,5,4,3), and the backup path around link
(3,4), viz. (3,2,1,8,7,6,5,4), share links in common
and hence cannot be dedicated the same wave-
length. Hence, we will not consider dedicated-link
protection in this work3.
:.4.. .. ............... .:5
Backup

(b) Link protection

Figure 3: Protection schemes.

– Shared-path protection: In shared-path pro-

tection, at the time of call setup for a primary
path, a link-disjoint backup path and wavelength
are also reserved. However, the backup wave-
length reserved on the links of the backup path
may be shared with other backup paths. As a re-
sult, backup channels are multiplexed among dif-
ferent failure scenarios (which are not expected to Figure 4: Illustrative example showing that dedicated-
occur simultaneously), and therefore shared-path link protection is not possible in a bidirectional ring
protection is more capacity efficient when com- network.
pared with dedicated-path protection.
– Path restoration: In path restoration, the – Shared-link protection: In shared-link protec-
source and destination nodes of each connec- tion, at the time of call setup, for each link of the
tion traversing the failed link participate in a primary path, a backup path and wavelength are
distributed algorithm to dynamically discover a reserved around that link. However, the backup
backup route and wavelength on an end-to-end wavelengths reserved on the IIinks of the backup
basis (such a backup path could be on a different path may be shared with other backup paths. As
wavelength channel). If no new route (and as- a result, backup channels are multiplexed among
sociated wavelength) are discovered for a broken different failure scenarios (which are not expected
connection, that connection is blocked. to occur simultaneously), and therefore shared-
link protection is more capacity efficient ~hen
● Link protection/restoration: compared with dedicated-link protection.
In link protection/restoration (illustrated in Fig. 3(b)), — Link restoration: In link restoration, the end-
all the connections that traverse the failed link are
nodes of the failed link participate in a distributed
rerouted around that link. The source and destination
algorithm to dynamically discover a route around
nodes of the connections traversing the failed link are
the link, for each wavelength that traverses the
oblivious to the link failure. In link protection, during
call setup, backup paths and wavelength are reserved 31f wavelength
converters are present in the network, then
around eack link of the primary path. In link restora- dedicated-link protection is possible by having the backup paths
tion, the end-nodes of the failed link dynamically dis- around (2,3) and (3,4) on different wavelengths.

0-7803-5420-6/99/$10.00 (c) 1999 IEEE

 link. If no new route (and associated wavelength)
are discovered for a broken connection, that con-
nection is blocked.
In this paper, we examine the wavelength capacity re-
quirements, and routing and wavelength assignment of pri-
mary and backup paths for different protection schemes for
a static traffic demand. In a follow-up paper [1], we exam-
ine the protection-switching time requirements for path- and
link-protection schemes, and propose distributed protocols
for restoration, and study the restoration time requirements,
and restoration efficiency for path and link restoration.
The design of a survivable optical network has been stud-
ied in [7, 8, 9, 4, 3, 10, 11, 12, 20, 21, 22]. In [7], the authors
propose physical protection schemes and a path-restoration
scheme based on 1+1 protection. The work in [8] consid-
ers different approaches for fault-tolerant design of optical
ring networks. The work in [4, 3] addresses the issues in
designing a survivable optical layer. In [10], the authors
propose an algorithm that protects optical mesh networks
from link and node failures. In [9], the authors examine
provisioning algorithms to provision wavelength capacity in
a WDM optical network. In [12], the authors propose an-
alytical methods to estimate capacity utilization in optical
networks that are resilient against single-link failures. In
[20], the authors examine 1+1 protection, and other WDM
network architectures with optical protection.
Path- and link-restoration schemes have been extensively
researched in circuit-switched transport networks [5, 6, 13,
14, 15]. In [13], the authors report that path restoration
provides about 19% improvement in spare-capacity utiliza-
tion over link restoration in circuit-switched transport net-
works. Distributed protocols for restoration have been ex-
tensively researched in circuit-switched transport networks
[16, 17, 19, 18] and in ATM networks [15, 6].
1.1 Out line of Remaining Sections
In Section 2, we develop Integer Linear Program (ILP)
formulations for the routing and wavelength assignment
problem, and wavelength utilization for a static traffic de-
mand, for each of the different protection schemes. Sec-
tion 3 presents numerical results for wavelength capacity
utilization on a representative network topology for differ-
ent protection schemes. Section 4 concludes this work with
a discussion of its main contributions.
2 Problem Formulation
In this section, we develop ILP formulations of path- and
link-protection schemes to protect against all possible single-
link failures. We assume that the network topology and a
demand matrix (consisting of the number of connections to
be established between each node-pair) are given. We also
assume that the set of alternate routes4 (that are used to
satisfy any demand) between each node-pair is precomputed
41n alternate routin~, each network node has a routing
which contains a list of a limited number of fixed routes to each
destination node.A connection request arriving at the node uti-
lizes one of the routes to the destination node from the set of
available routes.
0-7803-5420-6/99/$10.00 (c) 1999 IEEE
and given. Our objective is to minimize the total number of
wavelengths used on all the links in the network (for both
the primary paths and backup paths). The ILP solution also
determines the routing and wavelength assignment of the
primary and backup paths. Generally, capacity efficiency
can be measured in two ways: (a) given a certain capacity,
maximize the protected carried demand [7], or (b) given a
certain demand, and given a 100% restoration requirement,
minimize the total capacity used. In our formulations, we
require that all demands should be protected, and we mini-
mize the total capacity used. ILPs 1, 2, and 3 minimize the
capacity utilizations for dedicated-path protection, shared-
path protection, and shared-link protection, respectively.
2.1 Not at ion
We define the notation employed to formulate the ILPs.
We are given the following: (a) the network topology rep-
resented as a directed graph G, (b) a demand matrix, i.e.,
the number of lightpath requests between node-pairs, and
(c) alternate routing tables at each node. Also given are the
following.
● N: Nodes in the network (numbered 1 through N).
● Node-pairs are numbered 1 through N x (N – 1).
● E: Links in the network (numbere[i 1 through E).
● W: Maximum number of wavelengths on a link.
● Ri: Set of alternate routes for node-pair i.
● M’ = [RI: Number of alternate routes between node-
pair i. Let ill be the maximum number of alternate
routes between any node-pair, i.e., M = Maxi M%.
● R;: Set of eligible alternate routes between node-pair
i after link j fails.
● end-nodes(j): the set of alternate routes between the
node-pair adjacent to link j.
● d,: Demand for node-pair i, in terms of number of
lightpath requests.
We require the ILPs to solve for the following variables:
● Sj: Number of spare wavelengths used on link j.
● wj: Number of wavelengths used by primary lightpaths
on link j.
● ~~r takes on the value of 1 if the rth route between
node-pair i utilizes wavelength w before any link fail-
ure; O otherwise. These variables are employed in all
ILPs.
● o~ takes on the value of 1 if the backup router between
node-pair i utilizes wavelength w; O otherwise. These
variables are employed only in ILP1.
● 6~~~ takes on the value of 1 if wavelength w is utilized
on restoration route r between node-pair i, when link
k fails; O otherwise. These variables are employed only
in ILP2.
table
9 l~r takes on the value of 1 if wavelength w is utilized
on restoration route r between the node-pair that is
adjacent to j, when link j breaks; O otherwise. These
variables are employed only in ILP3.
 ● m~ takes on the value of 1 is wavelength w is utilized Number of channels on each link is bourlded:
by some restoration route r that traverses link j, O
otherwise. These variables are emdoved in ILP2 and Wj+sjsw l~jz;E (9)
ILP3.
Before Fault:
2.2 ILP Formulations Demand between each node-pair is satisfied:
2.2.. 1 ILP1: Dedicated-Path Protection

Minimize the total capacity used: .=1 7JJ=1

E
Definition of the number of primary lightpaths traversing a
Minimize ~(wj + s,) (1) link:
j=l

Number of lightpaths on each link is bounded:

(W, +sj)<w l<j<E (2)

Definition of the spare capacity required on link k:

Demand between each node-pair i is satisfied:

M. W
(12)
“=z 7.=1
z~~” l~i~N(N-l)
W=l
(3)
UJ=l

Number of primary lightpaths traversing link j: Constraints indicating if wavelength w is utilized for some
restoration path on link k:
N(N–1) w

(4) N(N–1) E

(13)
Number of spare channels utilized for link j:
l<k<E,l<w<W
N(N–1) w
(5)

Wavelength-continuity constraint, i.e., only one primary or

backup lightpath can use wavelength w on link j:

N(N–1)

Wavelength-continuit y constraint i.e., only one primary or

backup lightpath can use wavelength w on link j:

When a link j fails, demands between all node-pairs can still

(15)
be satisfied:

After Fault:
Definition of the total number of rerouted lightpaths be-
l<j<E,l<i<iV(iV-1) tween node-pair i when link j fails:

2.2.2 ILP2: Shared-Path Protection

(16)

Minimize the total capacity used:

Minimize ~(wj + Sj) (8)

‘j=]

0-7803-5420-6/99/$10.00 (c) 1999 IEEE

2.2.3 ILP3: Shared-Link Protection 2.3 Example ILP Solutions
In this sect;on, we present worked examples to illus-
trate the problems and understand the solutions provided
Minimize the total capacity used: by the ILPs. Consider the network illustrated in Fig. 1. As-
sume that the demand consists of two lightpaths: (a) the
Minimize ~(w, + s,) first lightpath from Node 10 to Node 6 and (b) the second
(17)
lijzhtpath from Node 15 to Node 9. The routes and wave-
J=l
le;g;hs of primary and backup lightpaths for the dedicated-
Number of lightpaths on each link is bounded: path protection (as solved by ILP1) are illustrated in Ta-
ble 1. The total capacity utilization of this solution is 16
wavelength-links (where 1 wavelength-link is a wavelength
used on a link): 6 wavelength-links for the primary light-
Demand between each node-pair i is satisfied:
paths, and 10 wavelength-links for the backup lightpaths.

Primary Lightpath Backup Lightpath

10+6 (10,11,1,6) - A, (10,9,7,6) - AI
Define the number of primary lightpaths traversing each 15+9 (15,6,7,9) - J, (15,14,12,13,1,11,10,9)
link:
N(N–1) w
Table 1: The routes and wavelengths of primary and
backup lightpaths under dedicated-path protection.

Definition of the spare capacity required on link k:

The routes and wavelength assignments for the primary
and backup lightpaths as produced by for shared-path pro-
tection by ILP2 are illustrated in Table 2. We note that
this solution utilizes 6 wavelength-links for primary paths
and 9 wavelength-links for backup paths for a total of 15
Constraints indicating if wavelength w is utilized for some wavelength-links. We note that the two working lightpaths
restoration path on link j: - (10,11,1,6), and (15,6,7,9) - are link disjoint. As a result,
upon any link failure, at most one of the two lightpaths can
fail, i.e., both lightpaths cannot fail simultaneously upon
any single-link failure. Therefore, the backup lightpaths can
share wavelengths since they will not be activated simultane-
ously. This observation leads to the routes and wavelength
assignments for the working and backup lightpaths illus-
trated in Table 2. We note that wavelength AI is shared by
both of the backup routes on link (10,9).

Primary Lightpath Backup Lightpath

10+6 (10,11,1,6) - AI (10,9,7,6) - A,
Wavelength-continuit y constraint, i.e., only one primary or 15+9 (15,6,7,9) - A, (15,14,12,13,1,11,10,9)
link restoration lightpath can use a wavelength w on link j: — Al

Table 2: The routes and wavelengths of primary and

backup lightpaths under shared-path protection.

The routes and wavelength assignments for the primary

Link restoration demands are met after link j fails for each
and backup lightpaths as produced by ILP3 (shared-link
wavelength w:
protection) are illustrated in Table 3. The solution utilizes
a total of 24 wavelength-links comprising of 6 wavelength-
links for primary paths and 18 wavelength-links for backup
paths. We note that backup wavelength-links aze not dedi-
cated, and hence, for example, the wavelength JZ is shared
by backup paths on links (10,11), (11,1), and (1,7).

0-7803-5420-6/99/$10.00 (c) 1999 IEEE

 for ILPs 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
Primary Lightpath
10-+6 (10,9,7,6) - ~,
I 15 + 9 I (15,6,7,9) - & I Connections No Dedicated Shared Shared
Protection path path link
Failed link Restoration Lightpath 10 29 70 57* 96*
(6,7) (6,1,7) - A, 15 31 82 65* 92*
(7,6) (7,8,6) - AZ 20 45 122 85* 157*
(7,9) (7,1,11,10,9) - Al 25 59 163 99* 189*
(9,7) (9,10,11,1,7) - A-z 30 74 200 116* 243*
(10,9) (10,11,1,7,9) - AZ 35 84 228 126* 254*
(15,6) (15,14,12,13,5,6) - ~,

Table 3: The routes and wavelengths of primary and

backup lightpaths under shared-link protection.
2.4 Solution Approach
The routing and wavelength assignment (RWA) problem
(with no protection for any demands) has been shown to
be NP-complete [23]. We anticipate that the problems for-
mulated in ILPs 1, 2, and 3 are NP-complete as well. We
utilized the CPLEX 4.0 software package to solve the in-
stances of the ILPs generated for a representative network
topology. We note that the number of variables and the
number of equations for the ILPs grow rapidly with the size
of the network; therefore, the ILP formulations are prac-
tical only for small networks (a few tens of nodes). For
larger networks (a few hundreds of nodes), we need to em-
ploy heuristic methods. For a one-time static network de-
sign, it might be feasible to solve larger instances of the
ILPs (over a longer time duration), however for rapid real-
time solutions (as may be required by the network control
and management software to respond to changing network
conditions), solving ILPs may not be practical.
3 Illustrative Examples and Discussion
We performed our studies on an example 16-wavelength
network of interconnected rings illustrated in Fig. 1. This
topology was chosen to be representative of typical mesh
topologies employed in telecommunications networks. We
chose a set of four alternate routes between each node-pair,
ensuring that all link-disjoint routes between the node-pair
are included. For this network topology, we ran ILPs 1, 2,
and 3 on random demands, where each random demand had
between 10 and 35 connection requests.
3.1 Results
We tabulate the results for the interconnected-rings net-
work in Table 4. The first column indicates the number of
connections in the demand. The second column indicates
the capacity utilization of the optimal routing and wave-
length assignment of the lightpaths obtained from the RWA
ILP formulation without any protection [23]. The third,
fourth, and fifth columns indicate the capacity utilization
Table 4: Capacity utilization (in wavelength-links)
for path- and link- protection schemes for the
interconnected-rings network, with a random traffic de-
mand.
4 Conclusion
Optical networks based on WDM technology can poten-
tially transfer several Gbps of data on each fiber link in the
network. However, the high capacity of a link has the draw-
back that a link failure can potentially lead to the loss of a
large amount of data.
This study examined different approaches to survive
single-link failures in an optical network. These approaches
are based on two basic survivability paradigms: (a) path
protection/restoration, and (b) link protection/restoration.
In path- and link- protection schemes, backup paths and
wavelengths are reserved in advance at the time of call setup.
Path- and link-restoration schemes are dynamic schemes in
which backup paths are discovered (from the spare capacity
in the network) upon the occurrence of a failure. We formu-
lated ILPs to determine the capacity utilization for different
protection schemes for a static traffic demand. The numeri-
cal results obtained for a representative network topology
and for random demands indicate that shared-path pro-
tection provides significant savings in capacity utilization
over dedicated-path and shared-link protection schemes, and
dedicated-path protection provides marginal savings in ca-
pacity utilization over shared-link protection.
References
[1] S. Ramamurthy and B. Mukherjee, “Survivable WDM
Mesh Networks, Part II - Restoration” Proc., ICC ’99,
to appear.
[2] B. Mukherjee, Optical Communication Networks, New
York: McGraw-Hill, July 1997.
[3] P. Bonenfant, “Optical Layer Survivability: A Com-
prehensive Approach,” Proc., OFC ’98, San Jose, CA,
vol. 2, pp. !270-271, I?ebrus.ry 1998.
5Numberg that are asterisked indicate the best SOlutiOn re-
portedby CPLEX running for 12 hours on an otherwise unloaded
HP workstation.

0-7803-5420-6/99/$10.00 (c) 1999 IEEE

 [4] O. Gerstel, “Opportunities for Optical Protection and
Restoration,” Proc., OFC ’98, San Jose, CA, vol. 2, pp.
269-270, February 1998.
[5] T. Wu, Fiber Network Service Survivabdity, Norwood,
MA: Artech House, 1992.
[6] T. Wu, “Emerging Technologies for Fiber Network Sur-
vivability,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 33,
no. 2, pp. 58-74, February 1995.
[7] J. Armitage, O. Crochat, and J.-Y. Le Boudec, “Design
of a Survivable WDM Photonic Network,” Proc., IEEE
Infocom ’97, Kobe, Japan, pp. 244-252, April 1997.
[8] O. Gerstel, R. Ramaswami, and G. Sasaki, “Fault
Tolerant Multiwavelength Optical Rings with Limited
Wavelength Conversion,” Proc., IEEE Infocom ’97,
Kobe, Japan, pp. 508-516, April 1997.
[9] M. Alanyali and E. Ayanoglu, “Provisioning Algo-
rithms for WDM Optical Networks,” Proc., IEEE In-
focom ’98, San Francisco, CA, March 1998.
[18] H. Sakauchi, Y. Nishimura, and S. Hasegawa, “A Self-
Healing Network with an Economical Spare-Channel
Assignment ,“ Proc., IEEE Globecom ’90, San Diego,
CA, pp. 438-443, December 1990.
[19] C. E. Chow, J. Bicknell, S. McCaughey, and S. Syed,
“A Fast Distributed Network Restoration Algorithm,”
Proc., IEEE IPCCC ’93, Tempe, AZ, pp. 261-267,
March 1993.
[20] D. Marcenac, “Optical Protection Switching,” WDM
Forum, London, June 1998.
[21] F. Tillerot, “Protection Techniques for WDM Trans-
port Networks,” WDM Forum, London, June 1998.
[22] C. Coltro, “WDM Protection,” WDM Forum, London,
June 1998.
[23] R. Ramaswami and K. N. Sivarajan, “Routing and
Wavelength Assignment in All-Optical Networks,”
IEEE/A CM Transactions on Networking, vol. 3, no.
5, pp. 489-500, October 1995.

[10] S. G. Finn, M. Medard, and R. A. Barry, “A New Algo-

rithm for Bi-Directional Link Self-Healing for Arbitrary
Redundant Networks,” Proc., OFC ’98, San Jose, CA,
vol. 2, pp. 298-299, February 1998.

[11] E. Karasan and E. Goldstein, “Optical Restoration at

the Wavelength-Multiplex Section Level in WDM Mesh
Networks,” Proc., OFC ’98, San Jose, CA, vol. 2, pp.
300-301, February 1998.

[12] E. Limal, S. L. Danielsen, and K. E. Stubkjaer, “Ca-

pacity Utilization in Resilient Wavelength-Routed Op-
tical Networks Using Link Restoration,” Proc., OFC
’98, San Jose, CA, vol. 2, pp. 297-298, February 1998.

[13] R. R. Iraschko, M. H. MacGregor, and W. D. Grover,

“Optimal Capacity Placement for Path Restoration in
Mesh Survivable Networks,” Proc., ICC ’96, Dallas,
TX, pp. 1568-1574, June 1996.

[14] M. Herzberg, S. J. Bye, and A. Utano, “The Hop-Limit

Approach for Spare-Capacity Assignment in Survivable
Networks,” IEEE/A CM Transactions on Networking,
vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 775-784, December 1995.

[15] J. Anderson, B. T. Doshi, S. Dravida, and P. Har-

shavardhana, “Fast Restoration of ATM Networks,”
IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications,
vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 128-138, January 1994.

[16] W. D. Grover, “The Selthealing Network: A Fast Dis-

tributed Restoration Technique for Networks Using
Digit al Crossconnect Machines,” Proc., IEEE Globe-
com ’87, pp.28.2.1-28.2.6, 1987.

[17] H. Komine, T. Chujo, T. Ogura, and T. Soejima,

“A Distributed Restoration Algorithm for Multiple-
Link and Node Failures of Transport Networks,” Proc.,
IEEE Globecom ’90, San Diego, CA, pp. 459-463, De-
cember 1990.

0-7803-5420-6/99/$10.00 (c) 1999 IEEE