Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) is one technology that is envisioned to increase bandwidth capability and enable bidirectional communications in optical networks. In WDM networks, multiple data signals can be transmitted simultaneously between network elements (NEs) using a single fiber. Specifically, the individual signals may be assigned different transmission wavelengths so that they do not interfere or collide with each other. The path that the signal takes through the network is referred to as the lightpath. One type of WDM network, a wavelength switched optical network (WSON), seeks to switch the optical signals with fewer optical-electrical-optical (OEO) conversions along the lightpath, e.g. at the individual NEs, than existing optical networks.
One of the challenges in implementing WDM networks is the determination of the path for the various signals that are being transported through the network at any given time. Unlike traditional circuit-switched and connection-oriented packet-switched networks that merely have to determine a route for the data stream across the network, WDM networks are burdened with the additional constraint of having to ensure that the same wavelength is not simultaneously used by two signals over a single fiber. This constraint is compounded by the fact that WDM networks typically use specific optical bands comprising a finite number of usable optical wavelengths. Path computations can also be constrained due to other issues, such as excessive optical noise, along the lightpath.
In one embodiment, the disclosure includes an apparatus comprising at least one processor configured to implement a method comprising receiving a path computation request comprising at least one path computation constraint, and determining whether there is a path through an optical network that satisfies the path computation constraints.
In another embodiment, the disclosure includes an apparatus configured to process a data structure comprising a flags field comprising at least one flag having one of an active state or an inactive state, wherein each flag is representative of an optical quality constraint.
These and other features will be more clearly understood from the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and claims.
For a more complete understanding of this disclosure, reference is now made to the following brief description, taken in connection with the accompanying drawings and detailed description, wherein like reference numerals represent like parts.
It should be understood at the outset that although an illustrative implementation of one or more embodiments are provided below, the disclosed systems and/or methods may be implemented using any number of techniques, whether currently known or in existence. The disclosure should in no way be limited to the illustrative implementations, drawings, and techniques illustrated below, including the exemplary designs and implementations illustrated and described herein, but may be modified within the scope of the appended claims along with their full scope of equivalents.
Disclosed herein is a method and system for including one or more path computation constraints in the PCE protocol (PCEP). Specifically, various types of path computation constraints are disclosed, as well as a communication protocol by which the PCE can consider the path computation constraints when performing its path computation for the PCC. Various alternatives are proposed whereby a plurality of PCEs each having authority over a different network communicate with each other and provide a unified path computation to the PCC. Alternatively, one or more PCEs may analyze a network at different layers, such as the service layer and the transport layer, to ensure that the path computation complies with the path computation constraints at each layer.
The WSON 110 may be any optical network that uses active or passive components to transport optical signals. The WSON 110 may implement WDM to transport the optical signals through the WSON 110, and may comprise various types of optical components. For example, the WSON 110 may comprise optical cross connects (OXC), photonic cross connects (PXC), reconfigurable optical add/drop multiplexers (ROADM), wavelength selective switches (WSS), fixed optical add/drop multiplexers (FOADM), and so forth. The WSON 110 may be part of a long haul network, a metropolitan network, or an access network.
The control plane controller 120 may coordinate activities within the WSON 110. Specifically, the control plane controller 120 may receive optical connection requests and provide lightpath signaling to the WSON 110 via Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE) or Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS), thereby coordinating the NEs 112 such that data signals are routed through the WSON 110 with little or no contention. In addition, the control plane controller 120 may communicate with the PCE 130 using PCEP to provide the PCE 130 with information that may be used for the path computation, and/or receive the path computation from the PCE 130 and forward the path computation to the NEs 112. The control plane controller 120 may be located in a component outside of the WSON 110, such as an external server, or may be located in a component within the WSON 110, such as a NE 112.
The PCE 130 may perform all or part of the path computation for the WSON system 100. Specifically, the PCE 130 may determine the routes of Label Switched Paths (LSPs) through the network. As such, the PCE 130 may receive the path computation constraints that may be used for the path computation from the control plane controller 120, from the NEs 112, or both. The PCE 130 may use the path computation constraints when computing the routes, e.g. lightpaths, for the optical signals. The path computation may include at least one route for each incoming signal and optionally at least one wavelength associated with each route. The PCE 130 may then send the path computation to the control plane controller 120 or directly to the NEs 112. To assist the PCE 130 in this process, the PCE 130 may comprise a global traffic-engineering database (TED), a path computation information database, an optical performance monitor (OPM), a physical layer constraint (PLC) information database, or combinations thereof. The PCE 130 may be located in a component outside of the WSON 110, such as an external server, or may be located in a component within the WSON 110, such as a NE 112.
The NEs 112 may be coupled to each other via optical fibers. The optical fibers may be used to establish optical links and transport the optical signals between the NEs 112. The optical fibers may comprise standard single mode fibers (SMFs) as defined in ITU-T standard G.652, dispersion shifted SMFs as defined in ITU-T standard G.653, cut-off shifted SMFs as defined in ITU-T standard G.654, non-zero dispersion shifted SMFs as defined in ITU-T standard G.655, wideband non-zero dispersion shifted SMFs as defined in ITU-T standard G.656, or combinations thereof. These fiber types may be differentiated by their optical impairment characteristics, such as attenuation, chromatic dispersion, polarization mode dispersion (PMD), four wave mixing, or combinations thereof. These effects may be dependent upon wavelength, channel spacing, input power level, or combinations thereof. The optical fibers may be used to transport WDM signals, such as course WDM (CWDM) signals as defined in ITU-T G.694.2 or dense WDM (DWDM) signals as defined in ITU-T G.694.1. All of the standards described herein are incorporated herein by reference.
In some embodiments, the PCE 130 may receive a path computation request from a PCC. The PCC may be any client application requesting a path computation to be performed by the PCE 130. The PCC may also be any network component that makes such a request, such as the control plane controller 120, or any NE 112, such as a ROADM or a FOADM. Generally, the PCC communicates with the PCE 130 using PCEP, although other acceptable communications protocol may be used as well.
There may be many types of path computation constraints that can affect the path computation. In one embodiment, the path computation constraints include optical quality constraints. Examples of such include the optical signal-to-noise ratio (OSNR), amplifier spontaneous emission (ASE), PMD, polarization-dependent loss (PDL), coherent optical crosstalk, incoherent optical crosstalk, effective pass-band, gain non-uniformity, gain transients, and chromatic dispersion. In some embodiments, the path computation constraints may be classified as linear in that their effects are independent of the optical signal power and they affect the wavelengths individually. Alternatively, the path computation constraints may be classified as nonlinear in that their effects are dependent of the optical signal power, generate dispersion on a plurality of wavelength channels, and induce crosstalk between wavelength channels. Regardless, the path computation constraints are communicated to the PCE 130 so that the PCE 130 may consider them when computing a signal's path through the WSON 100.
For example and as shown in
Similarly, the 32nd bit in the OQC object 300 may be the P flag 308. The P flag 308 may be associated with the PMD associated with the path. When the P flag 308 is set to zero in the request, it may indicate that the PMD does not have to be considered in the path computation. When the P flag 308 is set to one in the request, it may indicate that the PMD should be considered in the path computation. In such a case, the OQC object 300 may comprise a TLV 310 that contains further details regarding the PMD, such as a value for the upper limit of the PMD. When the P flag 308 is set to zero in the reply, it may indicate that the computed path does not comply with the PMD constraint, further details of which may be included in a TLV 310. When the P flag 308 is set to one in the reply, it may indicate that the computed path complies with the PMD constraint.
At 712, PCE C calculates a path through network C that meets the path computation constraints and any other network constraints. In some cases, PCE C may be able to calculate a path that meets the path computation constraints for network C. For example, PCE C may determine that a path through nodes 652, 650, 648, and 646 meets the path computation constraints for network C. In such cases, PCE C may add the path and any information related to the path to a reply 714, and sends the reply 714 to PCE B. In other cases, PCE C may not be able to calculate a path that meets the path computation constraints for network C. For example, PCE C may determine that no path through network C meets the path computation constraints for network C. In such cases, PCE C may add one of the error messages described above and an optional explanation to the reply 714, and may send the reply 714 to PCE B. In either case, the reply 714 may comprise the OQC object described above, which may include at least one path, at least one error message, and/or at least one indication whether the requested S-D path satisfies the path computation constraints. Upon receiving the reply 714, PCE B may include the path through network B and any other related information in the reply 716 sent to PCE A. Upon receiving the reply 716, PCE A may include the path through network A and any other related information in the reply 718 sent to the PCC. Thus, upon receipt of the reply 718, the PCC knows whether a path through the networks A, B, and C exists, and if not, the location of and reason for the path computation failure. It will also be appreciated that in some embodiments the various PCEs may add one or more of their paths to the request as it is propagated through the networks, rather than adding their paths to the reply as it is returned through the networks.
In other cases, the path selected at 1004 may not meet one or more of the path computation constraints and any other network constraints for the transport layer. For example, the PCE may determine that a path through nodes 922 and 924 does not meet the path computation constraints for transport layer. In such cases, the PCE will analyze alternative and perhaps less optimal paths through the service layer and the transport layer to determine if there are any paths that satisfy the path computation constraints for both the service layer and the transport layer. For example, the path through nodes 912, 910, and 908 may satisfy the service layer path computation constraints while also satisfying the transport layer path computation constraints for the transport layer nodes 922, 926, and 924. If such a path is found, the PCE may include the path and any other related information in the reply 1008 sent to the PCC. If such a path is not found, the PCE may include one of the error messages described above and an optional explanation in the reply 1008 sent to the PCC. In any event, the reply 1008 may comprise the OQC object described above, which may comprise at least one path, at least one error message, and/or at least one indication whether the requested S-D path satisfies the path computation constraints. Thus, upon receipt of the reply 1008, the PCC knows whether a path through the service layer and transport layer exists, and if not, the location of and reason for the path computation failure.
In other cases, the path selected at 1204 may not meet one or more of the path computation constraints and any other network constraints for the transport layer. For example, PCE B may determine that the path through nodes 1122 and 1124 does not meet the path computation constraints for transport layer. In such cases, PCE B will analyze alternative and perhaps less optimal paths through the transport layer to determine if there are any paths that satisfy the path computation constraints for the transport layer. For example, the path through nodes 1122, 1126, and 1124 may satisfy the transport layer path computation constraints. If such a path is not found, PCE B may include one of the error messages described above and an optional explanation in the reply 1210 sent to PCE A. If such a path is found, PCE B may include the path and any related information in the reply 1210 sent to PCE A. Upon receipt of a reply 1210 with an alternate path, PCE A verifies whether the alternate path selected at 1208 meets the path computation constraints and any other network constraints for the service layer. If the alternate path selected at 1208 meets the path computation constraints and any other network constraints for the service layer, PCE A may adopt the alternate path as the service layer path, and may include the alternate path in the reply 1212 sent to the PCC. If the path selected at 1208 does not meet the path computation constraints and any other network constraints of the service layer, then PCEs A and B can repeat the steps 1204, 1206, 1208, and 1210 until either a path satisfying the path computation constraints for both the service layer and the transport layer is found, or it is determined that there is not a path that satisfies the path computation constraints for both the service layer and the transport layer. After such, the path or an error message is included in the reply 1212 sent to the PCC. In some embodiments, PCE A may add a plurality of paths to the request 1206 so that PCE B can verify each of the paths and indicate such in the reply 1210. If there are multiple valid paths, PCE A can choose to keep one or more of these paths in the reply 1210, and forward the reply 1212 to the PCC. In any event, the reply 1212 may comprise the OQC object described above, which may comprise at least one path, at least one error message, and/or at least one indication whether the requested S-D path satisfies the path computation constraints. Thus, upon receipt of the reply 1212, the PCC knows whether a path through the service layer and transport layer exists, and if not, the location of and reason for the path computation failure.
The network components described above may be implemented on any general-purpose network component, such as a computer or network component with sufficient processing power, memory resources, and network throughput capability to handle the necessary workload placed upon it.
The secondary storage 1304 is typically comprised of one or more disk drives or tape drives and is used for non-volatile storage of data and as an over-flow data storage device if RAM 1308 is not large enough to hold all working data. Secondary storage 1304 may be used to store programs that are loaded into RAM 1308 when such programs are selected for execution. The ROM 1306 is used to store instructions and perhaps data that are read during program execution. ROM 1306 is a non-volatile memory device that typically has a small memory capacity relative to the larger memory capacity of secondary storage 1304. The RAM 1308 is used to store volatile data and perhaps to store instructions. Access to both ROM 1306 and RAM 1308 is typically faster than to secondary storage 1304.
While several embodiments have been provided in the present disclosure, it should be understood that the disclosed systems and methods might be embodied in many other specific forms without departing from the spirit or scope of the present disclosure. The present examples are to be considered as illustrative and not restrictive, and the intention is not to be limited to the details given herein. For example, the various elements or components may be combined or integrated in another system or certain features may be omitted, or not implemented.
In addition, techniques, systems, subsystems, and methods described and illustrated in the various embodiments as discrete or separate may be combined or integrated with other systems, modules, techniques, or methods without departing from the scope of the present disclosure. Other items shown or discussed as coupled or directly coupled or communicating with each other may be indirectly coupled or communicating through some interface, device, or intermediate component whether electrically, mechanically, or otherwise. Other examples of changes, substitutions, and alterations are ascertainable by one skilled in the art and could be made without departing from the spirit and scope disclosed herein.
The present application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/046,557, filed by Lee, et al. and entitled “Optical Impairment Aware Path Computation Architecture in PCE Based Network,” which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/895,283 filed Mar. 16, 2007 by Dunbar et al. and entitled “System for Optical Impairment Aware Path Computation Architecture in PCE Based Network”, both of which are incorporated herein by reference as if reproduced their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
7110363 | Lawrence | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7218852 | Sharma | May 2007 | B1 |
7668135 | Verma | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7769885 | Kompella | Aug 2010 | B1 |
8290366 | Lee | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8346079 | Lee | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8396364 | Lee | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8666246 | Lee | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8718469 | Lee | May 2014 | B2 |
8891382 | Lee | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8923695 | Lee | Dec 2014 | B2 |
20020057691 | Enoki | May 2002 | A1 |
20020093711 | Simmons | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020126343 | Fumagalli et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20030035166 | Zhang et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030043745 | Kano et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030099014 | Egner et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030103449 | Barsheshet | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030145105 | Desineni | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030219198 | Zhou | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040018016 | O'Mahoney et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040022223 | Billhartz | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040037558 | Beshai | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040042404 | Ravindran | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040156316 | Mukherjee | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040171398 | Hanaoka et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040208559 | Krishnaswamy et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050078659 | Ashwood Smith | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050180431 | Kinoshita et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050220054 | Meier | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050259571 | Battou | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060077909 | Saleh | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060117110 | Vasseur | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060176820 | Vasseur | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060203744 | Patel | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060291447 | Siliquini et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070019904 | Bulow | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070133406 | Vasseur | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070217419 | Vasseur | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080205271 | Aissaoui | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080225711 | Raszuk | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080225723 | Lee | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20090034972 | Fiaschi | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090304380 | Sadananda | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100014859 | D'Alessandro et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20120114329 | Lee | May 2012 | A1 |
20120321308 | Lee | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20150037026 | Lee | Feb 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1525768 | Sep 2004 | CN |
1567747 | Jan 2005 | CN |
1710868 | Dec 2005 | CN |
2005341137 | Dec 2005 | JP |
Entry |
---|
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media, Digital Systems and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Optical Fibre Cables, Definitions and Test Methods for Linear, Deterministic Attributes of Single-Mode Fibre and Cable,” ITUT 650.1, Jul. 2010, 76 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media, Digital Systems and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Optical Fibre Cables, Definitions and Test Methods for Statistical and Non-Linear Attributes of Single-Mode Fibre and Cable,” ITUT 650.2, Jul. 2007, 80 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media, Digital Systems and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Optical Fibre Cables, Test Methods for Installed Single-Mode Optical Fibre Cable Links,” ITUT 650.3, Mar. 2008, 22 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media, Digital Systems and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Optical Fibre Cables, Characteristics of a Single-Mode Optical Fibre and Cable,” ITUT 652, Nov. 2009, 22 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission System and Media, Digital Systems and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Optical Fibre Cables, Characteristics of a Dispersion-Shifted, Single-Mode Optical Fibre and Cable,” ITUT G.653, Jul. 2010, 22 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media, Digital Systems and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Optical Fibre Cables, Characteristics of a Cut-Off Shifted, Single-Mode Optical Fibre and Cable,” ITUT G. 654, Jul. 2010, 22 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Optical Fibre Cables, Characteristics of a Non-Zero Dispersion-Shifted Single-Mode Optical Fibre and Cable,” ITUT G.655, Nov. 2009, 26 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Optical Fibre Cables, Characteristics of a Fibre and Cable with Non-Zero Dispersion for Wideband Optical Transport,” ITUT G.656, Jul. 2010, 20 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Components and Subsystems, Definitions and Test Methods for the Relevant Generic Parameters of Optical Amplifier Devices and Subsystems,” ITUT G.661, Jul. 2007, 32 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Components and Subsystems, Generic Characteristics of Optical Anplifier Devices and Subsystems,” ITUT G.662, Jul. 2005, 16 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Components and Subsystems, Transmission Characteristics of Optical Components and Subsystems,” ITUT G.671, Jan. 2009, 44 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Systems, Physical Transfer Functions of Optical Network Elements,” ITUT G.680, Jul. 2007, 68 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Components and Subsystems, Optical Interfaces for Single Channel STM-64 and Other SDH Systems with Optical Amplifiers,” ITUT G.691, Mar. 2006, 50 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Components and Sub-systems, Optical Interfaces for Multichannel Systems with Optical Amplifiers,” ITUT G.692, Oct. 1998, 41 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Components and Subsystems, Spectral Grids for WDM Applications: DWDM Frequency Grid,” ITUT G.694.1, Jun. 2002, 14 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Components and Subsystems, Spectral Grids for WDM Applications: CWDM Wavelength Grid,” ITUT G.694.2, Dec. 2003, 12 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Systems, Multichannel DWDM Applications with Single-Channel Optical Interfaces,” ITUT G.698.1, Nov. 2009, 34 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Transmission Media and Optical Systems Characteristics—Characteristics of Optical Systems, Amplified Multichannel Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing Applications with Single Channel Optical Interfaces,” G.698.2, Nov. 2009, 38 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Digital Networks-Optical Transport Networks, Architecture of Optical Transport Networks,” ITUT G.872, Nov. 2001, 72 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Digital Sections and Digital Line Systems, Optical Interfaces for Equipments and Systems Relating to the Synchronous Digital Hierarchy,” ITUT G.957, Mar. 2006, 38 pages. |
“Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Digital Sections and Digital Line System—Digital Line Systems, Optical Transport Network Physical Layer Interfaces,” ITUT G.959.1, Nov. 2009, 74 pages. |
Series G: Transmission Systems and Media Digital and Networks, Optical Systems Design and Engineering Considerations, ITUT Supplement 39, Dec. 2008, 106 pages. |
Bernstein, G., Ed., et al., “Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks,” draft-bernstein-ccamp-wavelength-switched-03.txt, Feb. 19, 2008, 68 pages. |
Ash, J., et al.; “Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol Generic Requirements”; RFC 4657; Network Working Group; Sep. 2006; 21 pages. |
Augustyn, W., et al.; “Service Requirements for Layer 2 Provider-Provisioned Virtual Private Networks”; RFC 4665; Network Working Group; Sep. 2006; 32 pages. |
Bradner, S., “Key Words for Use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” RFC 2119, Mar. 1997, 3 pages. |
Farrel, A., et. al., “A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture,” RFC 4655, Aug. 2006, 40 pages. |
Mannie, E., Ed., “Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Architecture,” RFC 3945, Oct. 2004, 69 pages. |
Strand, J., et al.; “Impairments and Other Constraints in Optical Layer Routing”; Network Working Group; RFC 4054; May 2005, 24 Pages. |
Lee, Y., et al., “Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks,” RFC 6163, Apr. 2011, 52 pages. |
Foreign Communication From a Related Counterpart Application, PCT Application PCT/CN2008/070504, International Search Report dated Jun. 19, 2008, 2 pages. |
Foreign Communication From a Related Counterpart Application, PCT Application PCT/CN2008/070504, Written Opinion dated Jun. 19, 2008, 4 pages. |
Agrawal, G., “Fiber-Optic Communication Systems Third Edition,” Chapter 2, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2002, pp. 23-76. |
Agrawal, G., “NonLinear Fiber Optics Fourth Edition,” Chapter 2, Elsevier Inc., 2007, pp. 25-50. |
Eppstein, D., “Finding the k Shortest Paths,” 35th IEEE Symposium Foundation of Computer Science, Mar. 31, 1997, 26 pages. |
Eppstein, D., “Finding the k Shortest Paths,” 35th IEEE Symposium Foundation of Computer Science, May 31, 1994, 23 pages. |
Strand, John, et al.; “Issues for Routing in the Optical Layer”; AT&T Laboratories; IEEE Communication Magazine, vol. 2; No. 39; pp. 81-87; Feb. 2001. |
Office Action dated Oct. 2, 2013, 30 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 12/046,557, filed Mar. 12, 2008. |
Office Action dated Jul. 8, 2010, U.S. Appl. No. 12/046,557, filed Mar. 12, 2008, 6 pages. |
Office Action dated Aug. 4, 2010, U.S. Appl. No. 12/046,557, filed Mar. 12, 2008, 9 pages. |
Office Action dated Dec. 6, 2010, U.S. Appl. No. 12/046,557, filed Mar. 12, 2008, 10 pages. |
Office Action dated Apr. 13, 2011, U.S. Appl. No. 12/046,557, filed Mar. 12, 2008, 15 pages. |
Office Action dated Oct. 6, 2011 U.S. Appl. No. 12/046,557, filed Mar. 12, 2008, 19 pages. |
Office Action dated May 21, 2014, 34 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 12/046,557, filed Mar. 12, 2008. |
Fang, L., Ed., “Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS Networks,” Network Working Group, Internet Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework-02.txt, Feb. 2008, 58 pages. |
Oki, E., et al., “Framework for PCE-Based Inter-Layer MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering,” Network Working Group, Internet Draft, draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-frwk-02.txt, Oct. 2006, 17 pages. |
Oki, E., et al., “Framework for PCE-Based Inter-Layer MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering,” Network Working Group, Internet Draft, draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-frwk-03.txt, Mar. 2007, 16 pages. |
Oki, E., et al., “Framework for PCE-Based Inter-Layer MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering,” Network Working Group, Internet Draft, draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-frwk-06.txt, Jan. 2008, 31 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120114329 A1 | May 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60895283 | Mar 2007 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12046557 | Mar 2008 | US |
Child | 13350173 | US |