Experimental Performance Evaluation of High Speed TCPs in Traffic-Driven LOBS Network Testbed

Proposal of dynamic protection/restoration schemes for QoS support in labeled optical burst switching networks

“…However, it is obvious that if we can combine the advantage of MPLS 1+1 path protection and burst clone scheme together in LOBS network, the problem of not only the contention, but also the link or node failure, will be potentially solved and the survivability of LOBS network can be enhanced. Considering the architecture of LOBS network in [3], the 1+1 protection needs to be carried out in two layers: the MPLS layer and the OBS layer. The architecture in [9] discussed the basic design principles of MPLS 1+1 protection on a packet level.…”

“…However, the concept of "session" is not suitable for the JET [11] based LOBS network in [3], which has integrated the MPLS control plane together with the OBS control plane. The "session" functioned similarly as Label Switching Path (LSP) in LOBS network, which was much easier to be implemented in the test-bed than working out a new "session" control scheme.…”

“…the traffic driven e2e LSP establishment [3]). However, in order to improve the link usage in network, it will be beneficial to dynamically establish the E2E LSP as the data channel of the virtual OBS link.…”

“…Furthermore, the different recovery parameter of these two schemes can also be used to provide different resilience levels for the variable traffic requirements, which, in other words, is to say to permit QoR for OBS network. This paper has proposed dynamic protection and restoration schemes by introducing Burst Clone in to a 1+1 protection scheme and Burst Retransmission into a restoration scheme in the Labeled Optical Burst Switching network (LOBS) test-bed [3]. These two schemes inherit different level of priorities and can be dynamically chosen by the ingress node according to the QoS requirements of the traffic.…”