1

Energy-Efficient Resource Allocation for
Elastic Optical Networks using Convex

arXiv:1705.06891v1 [cs.IT] 19 May 2017

Optimization
Mohammad Hadi, Member, IEEE, and Mohammad Reza Pakravan, Member, IEEE

Abstract

We propose a two-stage algorithm for energy-efficient resource allocation constrained to QoS and
physical requirements in OFDM-based EONs. The first stage deals with routing, grooming and traffic
ordering and aims at minimizing amplifier power consumption and number of active transponders. We
provide a heuristic procedure which yields an acceptable solution for the complex ILP formulation of the
routing and grooming. In the second stage, we optimize transponder configuration including spectrum
and transmit power parameters to minimize transponder power consumption. We show how QoS and
transponder power consumption are represented by convex expressions and use the results to formulate a
convex problem for configuring transponders in which transmit optical power is an optimization variable.
Simulation results demonstrate that the power consumption is reduced by 9% when the proposed routing
and grooming algorithm is applied to European Cost239 network with aggregate traffic 60 Tbps. It is
shown that our convex formulation for transponder parameter assignment is considerably faster than
its MINLP counterpart and its ability to optimize transmit optical power improves transponder power
consumption by 8% for aggregate traffic 60 Tbps. Furthermore, we investigate the effect of adaptive
modulation assignment and transponder capacity on inherent tradeoff between network CAPEX and
OPEX.

Index Terms
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

2

Convex optimization, Green communication, Elastic optical networks, Resource allocation, Quality
of service.

I. I NTRODUCTION
Energy consumption of equipments in telecommunication networks has been recognized as
one of major contributors in overall future energy consumption. Traditional fixed grid optical
networks are not adaptive and therefore, they can not efficiently use system resources such as
transmit optical power and spectrum to minimize network energy consumption. Elastic Optical
Networks (EON) can provide an energy-efficient network configuration by adapting the allocated
resources to the communication demands and physical conditions. It has been shown that the
cost and energy savings of migration to an energy-efficient EON outweigh the added cost of the
equipments [1]. Higher energy efficiency of Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplex (OFDM)based optical networks has been demonstrated in [2] while the outstanding features such as
scalability, compatibaility and adaptation which nominate OFDM as the enabling technology of
EONs have been reported in [3].
Many variants of optimization formulations and algorithms have been proposed for resource
assignment in optical networks [4]–[7]. Optimized Routing and Wavelength Assignment (RWA)
in nonlinear Wavelength Division Multiplex (WDM) networks has been studied in [8]–[11]
which is not applicable to EON with variable assignment of spectrum width and optical carrier
frequencies. Some of the proposed solutions for resource allocation in EONs do not consider
the Quality of Service (QoS) requirements in their optimization analysis [7], [12], [13] which
is a necessary parameter for practical network planning. Some of the researchers have proposed
a general nonlinear expression to include QoS requirement as a fundamental constraint of the
resource assignment optimization problem [14]–[17] but several of them have focused on energyefficiency [18], [19]. Khodakarami et al. have proposed a Mixed-Integer NonLinear Program
(MINLP) for energy-efficient resource allocation in EONs which is decomposed into three subDRAFT

May 22, 2017

3

problems with heuristic solutions [19]. Their general formulation selects the best configuration
for transponders and grooming switches such that the total network power consumption is
minimized. Although they consider QoS requirement, they do not take into account the transmit
optical power as an optimization variable. Traffic grooming is employed to reuse active physical
components in the network and thereby increase the energy efficiency [19], [20]. However, there
is no comprehensive work that simultaneously considers traffic grooming along with adaptive
assignment of spectrum and transmit power variables and investigates their effect on different
network elements.
A convex optimization is a type of mathematical optimization problems characterized by
convex objective and constraint functions. Because of their desirable properties, convex optimization problems can be solved with a variety of efficient algorithms. There are software
packages that can be used to solve large scale convex optimization problems [21], [22]. Using
Geometric Programming (GP) convexification techniques, communication optimization problems
can be converted to convex form to allow us to use fast and efficient convex optimizer software
packages [17], [23].
The introduction of OFDM-based EONs, as a promising solution for developing green core
optical networks, has raised new networking challenges and increased resource provisioning
complexity. This mandates designing efficient and fast algorithms to utilize network adaptation
capabilities for reducing power consumption. In this paper, we consider the energy-efficient resource allocation in OFDM-based EONs and following the approach of [15], [19], we decompose
it into two interconnected optimization sub-problems 1) Routing, Grooming and Ordering (RGO)
2) Transponder Parameter Assignment (TPA). RGO is responsible for routing the traffic along
the best possible path while minimizing the number of assigned lightpaths and used transponders
by aggregating traffic partitions into a traffic segment closer to the information bit rate of the
optical transponders. It also defines the orders of traffic routes on each link. In TPA, transponder
variables such as transmit optical power, modulation level, coding rate, number of sub-carriers
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

4

and location of optical carrier frequency are optimally configured such that total transponder
power consumption is minimized, QoS requirements are guaranteed and physical constraints
are satisfied. We formulate RGO as an Integer Linear Program (ILP) and provide a heuristic
approach which yields its near-optimum solution in a reasonable time. Long and high volume
traffic requests are more susceptible to transmission impairments and have considerable power
consumption and spectrum usage. In RGO, we mainly focus on such long and high volume
traffic requests and groom them over shorter lightpaths to reduce their high amount of power
consumption and spectrum usage. TPA is conventionally formulated as a complex MINLP which
is an NP-hard problem. A key contribution of this paper is that we have proposed a method
to covert the complex MINLP to a convex problem which can be solved with readily available
convex optimization algorithms [22]. In the proposed convex formulation, joint optimization
of power and spectrum variables are addressed. We consider Optical Signal to Noise Ratio
(OSNR) as an indicator of QoS and show how the required levels of QoS can be expressed by
a convex inequality constraint. We also provide a convex expression for power consumption of
transponders. Simulation results show that the proposed convex formulation provides the same
results as its MINLP counterpart but in a much shorter time. Simulation results also demonstrate
that optimizing transmit optical power considerably improves the power consumption of different
network elements compared to the fix assignment of the transmit optical power. As another result,
we demonstrate that it is not required to have a complex transponder supporting high number
of different modulation levels and coding rates. We also show that how transponder capacity
affects the expected power saving of our proposed algorithm for RGO. Furthermore, we reveal the
inherent tradeoff between CAPital EXpenditure (CAPEX) and OPerational EXpenditure (OPEX)
as the transponder capacity increases and show that increasing transponder capacity increases
CAPEX while results in lower amount of OPEX.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. System model is introduced in Section II. In
Sections III, we propose our two-stage resource allocation algorithm. Section IV is devoted to
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

5

RGO sub-problem while in Section V, we show how TPA sub-problem is formulated as a convex
optimization problem. Simulation results are included in VI. Finally, we conclude the paper in
Section VII.
Notation. Optimization variables are shown in lower case letters. Bold letters are used to
denote vectors and sets. We use calligraphic font to show constants. Functions are also shown
by capital letters and their arguments are given by lower indexes. Optical fiber characterizing
parameters are shown by their typical notations.

II. S YSTEM M ODEL
Consider an optical network and assume that V and L denote its sets of optical nodes and
directional optical fiber links. Optical fiber l begins at node B(l), ends at node E(l) and has
length Ll . The optical fiber bandwidth B is assumed to be gridless. Q is the set of traffic requests.
Each traffic request originates from source node S(q), terminates at destination node D(q) and
has volume of Rq bit per second. As shown in Fig. 3, each optical node has a bank of transmit
and receive transponders and an electronic grooming switch. Input/output traffic requests and
added/dropped traffics can be merged in grooming switch to reduce the unused capacity of
transponders and number of active transponders [19]. There are at most T pairs of transmit and
receive transponders in each bank which are indexed by T = {1, · · · , T }. f(v,t,q) shows the
part of qth traffic request that may be added at tth transmit transponder of node v, i.e. transmit
transponder (v, t). Similarly, c(v,t,q) denotes the part of qth traffic request that may be dropped
at receive transponder (v, t). x(v,t,l) is a binary variable that shows if link l is used for routing
the traffics added by transmit transponder (v, t). Furthermore, binary variable d(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) shows
that if the added traffic of transmit transponder (v, t) is dropped at receive transponder (v 0 , t0 ).
Each transmit transponder is given a contiguous spectrum bandwidth ∆(v,t) around optical carrier
frequency ω(v,t) . The assigned contiguous spectrum bandwidth includes 2b(v,t) OFDM sub-carriers
with sub-carrier space of F so, ∆(v,t) = 2b(v,t) F. To facilitate optical switching and remove the
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

6

TABLE I: Available modulation levels and coding rates along with their corresponding minimum required OSNR
Θ(c, r) to achieve a pre-FEC BER values of 1 × 10−4 .
r/c
2/3
3/4
8/9

1
1.5
1.7
3.6

2
2.3
2.9
4.6

3
5.9
7.8
12.9

4
9.1
12.0
20.9

5
17.4
24.0
42.7

6
28.8
40.7
75.8

high cost of spectrum conversion [24], we assume that the assigned spectrum bandwidth to each
transponder is continuous over its routed path. The added traffic of transponder (v, t) passes
N(v,t) equal-length fiber spans along its routed path and has N(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) shared fiber spans with
transmit transponder (v 0 , t0 ) 6= (v, t). Each fiber span has fixed length Lspn and is equipped
with its own optical amplifier to compensate for the attenuation. Hl shows the set of transmit
transponders that share optical fiber l on their allocated routes. There are pre-defined modulation
levels c and coding rates r where each pair of (c, r) requires minimum OSNR Θ(c, r) to get a
pre-Forward-Error-Correction (FEC) Bit-Error-Rate (BER) value of 1 × 10−4 , as shown in Tab. I
[15]. The optical transponder (v, t) is given a modulation level c(v,t) and a coding rate r(v,t) and
fills its assigned optical bandwidth ∆(v,t) with optical power p(v,t) . Transponders have maximum
information bit rate C and fill both of the polarizations with the same power. The configuration
of each receive transponder is the same as its corresponding transmit transponder. According to
filtering and switching constraints in optical nodes, we consider a guard band G between any
two adjacent spectrum bandwidths of a link.
Transponders, grooming switches and optical amplifiers are the main sources of network power
consumption [12], [19] so, total network power consumption is given by:
X
v,t

X(v,t) +

X
v

G(v) +

X

A(l)

(1)

l

where X(v,t) is total power consumption of each linked pair of transmit and receive transponders,
G(v) is power consumption of grooming switch v and Al shows the total power consumption of
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

7

IP Router

Groom Switch

Fiber
Fiber

RX Transponder

TX Transponder

Drop

Add

Optical Switch

Fiber
Fiber

Optical Node

Fig. 1: Optical node block diagram which has a bank of transmit and receive transponders and an electronic
grooming switch.

optical amplifiers over link l. Considering the architecture of Fig. 2, X(v,t) can be calculated as
follows:
X(v,t) = Ptxb +

Penc Pf f t b(v,t)
Pdec
Pf f t b(v,t)
+
2
b(v,t) + Prxb +
+
2
b(v,t) + 2b(v,t) Pdsp
r(v,t)
2
r(v,t)
2

(2)

where Ptxb and Prxb are transmit and receive transponder bias terms (which includes the power
consumption of bit interleaver, laser, A/D converter, D/A converter, Mach–Zehnder modulator,
serial/parallel, parallel/serial), Penc and Pdec are the scaling coefficient of encoder and decoder
power consumptions, Pf f t denotes the power consumption for a two point FFT operation and
Pdsp is the power consumption scaling coefficient of the receiver DSP operations. The electronic
grooming switch consumes Egrm per each switched bit [19]. Considering the total groomed traffic
at node v, we can write [19]:
G(v) = Egrm

X
X
[f(v,t,q) + c(v,t,q) ] − Egrm
Rq [δ(v − S(q)) + δ(v − D(q))]
t,q

(3)

q

where δ() is discrete impulse function. Each optical amplifier also needs Pamp input power,
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

To Fiber
From Fiber

Iy
Qy

Polarization Diversity
Optical Hybrid

Qx

A/D A/D A/D A/D

Synchronization

Serial/Parallel

FFT

Ix
Equalization

Symbol Demapping

Parallel/Serial

Decoder

Output Stream

Sy

Polarization Beam Splitter

Sx

Oscilator

IQ Modulator

Laser

Qx

D/A

Parallel/Serial

Prefix/ Pilot

IFFT

Symbol Mapping

Serial/Parallel

Encoder

Input Stream

Ix

D/A

8

Fig. 2: Block diagram of a pair of OFDM-based transmit and receive transponders.

therefore the total power consumption of optical amplifiers over an active link is [19]:
A(l)

ih
i
h L
X
l
+ 1 1 − δ(
x(v,t,l) )
= Pamp
Lspn
v,t

(4)

III. R ESOURCE A LLOCATION P ROBLEM
To have a green EON, we need a resource allocation algorithm to determine the values of
system model variables such that the network consumes the minimum power while physical
constrains are satisfied and desired levels of QoS (or equivalently desired levels of OSNR) are
guaranteed. In general, such a problem is modeled as an optimization problem and it is shown
to be NP-hard [15]. Therefore, we propose a two-stage algorithm in which the complex resource
allocation problem is decomposed into two sub-problems which are named RGO and TPA. The
pseudo code of this algorithm is shown in Alg. 1. Solving RGO sub-problem, the connection
requests are routed, the grooming switches are configured and the order of traffics on links are
determined. Transponder parameters such as transmit optical power, modulation level, coding
rate, number of sub-carriers and optical carrier frequency are optimized during TPA sub-problem.
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

9

The power consumption of optical amplifiers and grooming switches are respectively related to
the traffic routes and configuration of the grooming switches which are mainly addressed in RGO
sub-problem. On the other hand, total transponder power consumption are minimized by solving
TPA sub-problem. Usually the search for a near optimal solution involves iterations between
these two sub-problems. To save this iteration time, it is of great interest to hold the run time
of each sub-problem at its minimum value.
In the coming sections, we formulate RGO problem as an ILP and then provide a heuristic
solution for it. We also introduce an MINLP formulation for TPA sub-problem and show how
this complex formulation can be converted to a convex optimization problem.

IV. ROUTING , G ROOMING AND O RDERING S UB -P ROBLEM

In this section, an ILP is formulated for routing and traffic grooming and then a heuristic
approach is proposed to solve it.

A. ILP Formulation

Generally, traffic grooming aims at minimization of active transponders to save transponder
power consumption while shortest path routing is usually used to minimize the length of routes
and consequently the number of used optical amplifiers [19]. Routing and traffic grooming can
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

10

Algorithm 1 Resource Allocation Algorithm
Input: network topology, traffic matrix, link parameters, noise and nonlinearity parameters, transponder parameters
Output: routes, groomed traffics, number of subcarriers, optical carrier frequencies, modulation levels, coding rates,
transmit optical powers
Stage 1: Routing, Grooming, Ordering
for all connection requests q do
while Rq > C do
add a new full load transmit transponder at node S(q);
add a new full load receive transponder at node D(q);
use shortest path for the added transponder pair;
Rq ← Rq − C;
end while
end for
sort traffics q = 1, · · · ,|Q| decreasingly according to the product of shortest path length and rate;
for all traffics q do
MSPL ← ∞;
MATC ← 0;
for all groom scenarios on qth traffic shortest path do
MSPLt ← MSPL of the current path decomposition;
MATCt ← MATC of the current path decomposition;
if MATCt < Rq then
continue;
end if
if MSPLt < MSPL then
MSPL ← MSPLt ;
MATC ← MATCt ;
end if
end for
groom qth request to the scenario having MATC and MSPL;
update sub-paths traffic volumes;
remove the groomed path;
end for
assign transmit and receive transponder pairs to the remaining traffic requests;
route the remaining connection requests over their shortest path;
order all the assigned paths according to the product of shortest path length and rate;
Stage 2: Transponder Parameter Assignment
31: do
use convex TPA to optimize transponder parameters;
32:
33:
I ← 0;
34:
do
35:
for all transmit transponders (v, t) do
for all spectral efficiency values c of Tab. I do
36:
37:
if if c(v,t) falls in I-neighborhood of c then
38:
round and fix c(v,t) to c;
39:
break;
40:
end if
41:
end for
42:
for all coding rate values r of Tab. I do
43:
if if r(v,t) falls in I-neighborhood of r then
44:
round and fix r(v,t) to r;
45:
break;
46:
end if
47:
end for
48:
end for
49:
I ← I +J;
50:
while there is no valid value in c and r
51:
remove fixed values of c and r;
52: while there is an inacceptable value in c and r

1:
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
21:
22:
23:
24:
25:
26:
27:
28:
29:
30:

DRAFT

May 22, 2017

11

be formulated as the following ILP:
X

min

x,d,f ,c

f(v,t,q) + δ(v − D(q))Rq =

t∈T

X

d(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) + K2

v,v 0 ∈V,t,t0 ∈T

v∈V,l∈L,t∈T

X

s.t.

X

x(v,t,l) Ll + K1

X

X

(C −

v∈V,t∈T

X

f(v,t,q) )

(5)

q∈Q

c(v,t,q) + δ(v − S(q))Rq , ∀v ∈ V, ∀q ∈ Q

(6)

t∈T

f(v,t,q) 6 C, ∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

(7)

c(v,t,q) 6 C, ∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

(8)

q∈Q

X
q∈Q

c(v0 ,t0 ,q) − f(v,t,q) 6 K(1 − d(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) ), ∀v, v 0 ∈ V, ∀t, t0 ∈ T, ∀q ∈ Q
X

f(v,t,q) 6 K

q∈Q

X
l∈L:E(l)=v 0

X

(9)

x(v,t,l) , ∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

(10)

X

(11)

l∈L:B(l)=v

x(v,t,l) 6

X
l∈L:B(l)=v 0

x(v,t,l) +

d(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) 6 1, ∀v, v 0 ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

t0 ∈T

where K is a large positive number. Each transmit transponder is assigned a route to its destination
so, minimization of used link lengths automatically results in simultaneous shortest path routing
and minimum number of active transponders. This is the main cost of the goal function. The
second term of the goal function is a penalty term to prevent unnecessary add/drop of the
traffic paths in grooming switches. Furthermore, we add another penalty term to incur a cost for
transponders with unused remaining capacity and therefore, force the transponders to be fully
utilized. Constraint (6) is KCL law for added, dropped, input, output and groomed traffic of
qth connection request at node v. Constraints (7) and (8) hold the information bit rate of the
transmit and receive transponders below their capacity. Constraint (9) states that all the traffics
of a transmit transponder should be dropped at its assigned receive transponder. Constraint (10)
specifies that if a transponder has no allocated route, it should be inactive. Finally, constraint
(11) is the optical switching constraint which states that if a traffic arrives to a node, it should
be dropped to a receive transponder or switched to a neighbor node. This optimization problem

May 22, 2017

DRAFT

12

has 2|V||T||Q| +|V||T||L| +|V|2 |T|2 integer variables and its number of constraints has the
order of |V|2 |T|2 |Q|. Although the problem is ILP, its number of variables and constraints is
very large for practical values of |V|, |T| and |Q|. Therefore, a heuristic approach is required to
provide a fast-achievable near-optimum solution for routing and traffic grooming problem.

B. Heuristic Solution
Long and high volume traffic requests are more susceptible to amplifier noise and nonlinear
interference effects and need low level modulations, low coding rates, high transmit optical
powers and therefore consume a lot of power. If such traffics are groomed to short traffic
segments, each segment can be routed using high modulation levels and coding rates and
consequently consumes lower spectrum and power. Merging long and high volume traffics to
existing short traffic requests also reduces the number of required transponders and assigned
links by utilizing the unused remaining capacity of the transponders which is our goal in ILP
of (5)-(11). It is conventionally stated that if the path length is reduced by a factor of 0.5,
modulation level can be doubled [4]. This in turn reduces the assigned spectrum width by a
factor of 0.5 and results in lower transponder power consumption according to (2). Consider
the sample scenario of Fig. 3 in which transmit transponders are shown by rectangles below
the nodes. For each transponder, the used capacity is highlighted by dark color and the number
below each transponder shows its destination node. Assume we should route an input traffic with
rate

C
2

from source 1 to destination 4 over its shortest path which is 1 → 2 → 3 → 4. There are

four grooming scenarios over this path which are summerized in Tab. II. Minimum Available
Transponder Capacity (MATC) is defined as the remaining capacity of the transmit transponder
that has the maximum load over sub-paths of the grooming scenario. For example in scenario
3, we should use transponder 3 of node 1 and transponder 4 of node 3 which both of them
have remaining capacity of C2 , therefore MATC = C2 . Maximum Sub Path Length (MSPL) is the
maximum length of the sub-paths along the grooming scenario. For example in scenario 3, the
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

13

1

1500

2 3 4

2

3 4

2000

3

4

1000

4

Fig. 3: An example for traffic grooming.

TABLE II: Grooming scenarios for example of Fig. 3
Scenario Number
1
2
.
3
4

Grooming Scenario
1→4
1→2→4
1→3→4
1→2→3→4

MATC
C
0
C
2

0

MSPL
4500
3000
3500
2000

sub-path 1 → 3 has the maximum length which is 3500. As the value of MSPL decreases, there
are more chances to partition the path to shortest sub-paths and save power. As reported in Tab.
II, 1 → 3 → 4 has the minimum MSPL and its MATC is enough to accommodate the required
load and therefore, it is our chosen grooming scenario. Note that at worst case the traffic is
routed over its shortest path without grooming to sub-paths.
During RGO stage of Alg. 1, traffic volumes are partitioned such that no traffic volume is
greater than transponder capacity C. Then, we choose partitioned traffic volumes with full load
of C and route them over their shortest paths. The remaining traffic volumes are descendingly
sorted according to the product of traffic volume and shortest path length. Next, we groom the
sorted traffics using the procedure explained above, as written in Alg. 1. Finally, we use the
metric of rate-length product to order traffics over links as explained in [17].

V. T RANSPONDER PARAMETER A SSIGNMENT S UB -P ROBLEM
In this section, we provide an MINLP formulation for TPA and then show how it can be
converted to a convex optimization problem.
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

14

A. Nonlinear Formulation

A MINLP formulation for TPA is as follows [15]:
X

min

c,b,r,p,ω

X(v,t)

Ψ(v,t) > Θ(v,t) ,

s.t.

(12)

v∈V,t∈T

∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

∆Υl,j+1
∆Υl,j
+ G 6 ωΥl,j+1 −
, ∀l ∈ L, j = 1, · · · ,|Hl | − 1
2
2
∆(v,t)
6 ω(v,t) 6 B −
, ∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T
2

ωΥl,j +

∆(v,t)
2
X
f(v,t,q) 6 2r(v,t) c(v,t) ∆(v,t) ,

∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)

q

where c, b, r, p and ω are variable vectors of transponder configuration parameters i.e. modulation level, number of sub-carriers, coding rate, transmit optical power and central frequency. The
goal is to minimize the total transponder power consumption where X(v,t) is obtained using (2).
Constraint (13) is the QoS constraint that forces Ψ(v,t) , the OSNR of transponder (v, t), to be
greater than its required minimum threshold Θ(v,t) . Ψ(v,t) is a nonlinear function of b, p and ω
[16], [17] while the value of Θ(v,t) are picked up from Tab. I. Constraint (14) is nonoverlappingguard constraint that prevents two transmit transponders share a same frequency spectrum. Υl,j
is a function that shows which transponder occupies j-th spectrum bandwidth on link l and
its values are determined during ordering part of RGO sub-problem. Constraint (15) holds all
assigned central frequencies within the acceptable range of the fiber spectrum and finaly the
P
last constraint guarantees that the transponder can convey the input traffic rate q f(v,t,q) . In
fact, this MINLP is an extension of the formulation of [19] in which transmit optical powers
also contribute to the optimization and QoS constraint is specified by the general and nonlinear
expressions of [15].
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

15

80

#(c,r)

60

40

20

0
0.9
0.85

6
0.8

5
4

0.75

3
0.7

r

2
1

c

Fig. 4: 2D curve fitting for (c, r, Θ) data samples given in Tab. I.

B. Convexification Technique

We first provide a generalized posynomial expression [21] for the optimization and then
define a variable change to convexify the problem. A posynomial expression for OSNR has
been proposed in [17]:
Ψ(v,t) =
ζN(v,t) ∆(v,t) + κ1 ςp(v,t)

p(v,t)
P
p2(v0 ,t0 ) N(v,t,v0 ,t0 )
v 0 ∈V,t0 ∈T
(v 0 ,t0 )6=(v,t)

∆(v0 ,t0 ) d(v,t,v0 ,t0 )

where κ1 = 0.4343, ζ = (eαLspn − 1)hνnsp , ς =

3γ 2
2απ|β2 |

, ∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T (17)
+ ςιN(v,t) p3(v,t)

and ι =

π 2|β2 |
.
2α

nsp is the spontaneous

emission factor, ν is the light frequency, h is Planck’s constant, α is attenuation coefficient, β2
is dispersion factor and γ is nonlinear constant. Furthermore, d(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) is the distance between
carrier frequencies ω(v,t) and ω(v0 ,t0 ) and equals to d(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) = ω(v,t) − ω(v0 ,t0 ) . Similar to [17],
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

16

we use a posynomial curve fitting for date samples of Tab. I:
Θ(c, r) ≈ rκ2 (1 + κ3 c)κ4 , 1 6 c 6 6, 0.6 6 r 6 1

(18)

where κ2 = 3.37, κ3 = 0.21, κ4 = 5.73. Fig. 4 shows data samples and the posynomial expression
for data curve fitting.
Following the same approach as [17], we arrive at this new representation of the optimization
problem:
min

c,b,r,p,ω,t,d

X

X

X(v,t) + K3

d−1
(v,t,v 0 ,t0 )

(19)

v,v 0 ∈V,t,t0 ∈T
(v,t)6=(v 0 ,t0 )

v∈V,t∈T

N(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) 6=0

s.t.

h
κ2
b(v,t)
4
r(v,t)
tκ(v,t)
ζFN(v,t) p−1
+ ςιN(v,t) p2(v,t) + κ1 ςF −1
(v,t) 2

X

p2(v0 ,t0 ) N(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) 2−b(v0 ,t0 ) d−1
(v,t,v 0 ,t0 )

i

v 0 ∈V,t0 ∈T
(v 0 ,t0 )6=(v,t)

6 1,

∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

(20)

−1
−1
−1
−1
ωΥl,j ωΥ
+ 0.5F2bΥl,j ωΥ
+ GωΥ
+ 0.5F2bΥl,j+1 ωΥ
6 1,
l,j+1
l,j+1
l,j+1
l,j+1

∀l ∈ L, j = 1, · · · ,|Hl | − 1
(21)

0.5F2b(v,t) B −1 + ω(v,t) B −1 6 1,

∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

−1
0.5F2b(v,t) ω(v,t)
6 1,

∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

−1 −1 −b(v,t)
0.5F −1 r(v,t)
c(v,t) 2

X

f(v,t,q) 6 1,

(22)
(23)

∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

(24)

q
−1
t−1
(v,t) + κ3 c(v,t) t(v,t) 6 1,

∀v ∈ V, ∀t ∈ T

(25)

−1
−1
d(Υl,i ,Υl,j ) ωΥ
+ ωΥl,j ωΥ
6 1, ∀l ∈ L, j = 1, · · · ,|Hl | − 1, i = j + 1, · · · ,|Hl |
l,i
l,i

(26)

−1
−1
d(Υl,i ,Υl,j ) ωΥ
+ ωΥl,i ωΥ
6 1,
l,j
l,j

(27)

∀l ∈ L, j = 2, · · · ,|Hl | , i = 1, · · · , j − 1

Ignoring constraints (25), (26), (27) and the penalty term of the goal function (19), the above
formulation is equivalent GP of the previous MINLP in which expressions (17) and (18) have
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

17

been used for QoS constraint (20). Constraints (25) and (26) and the penalty term are added to
guarantee the implicit equality of d(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) = ω(v,t) − ω(v0 ,t0 ) [17]. Constraint (25) is also needed
to convert the generalized posynomial QoS constraint to a valid GP one, as explained in [21].
Now, consider the following variable change:
x = eX : x ∈ R>0 −→ X ∈ R,
x = X : x ∈ R>0 −→ X ∈ R>0 ,

∀x ∈ c ∪ r ∪ p ∪ ω ∪ t ∪ d
∀x ∈ b

(28)

If one applies this variable change, the new representation of the problem is convex. As an
example for the goal function we have:
X

[Ptxb + Prxb + (Pdec + Penc )e−r(v,t) + b(v,t) 2b(v,t) Pf f t + 2b(v,t) Pdsp ] + K

v∈V,t∈T

X

e−d(v,t,v0 ,t0 )

v,v 0 ∈V,t,t0 ∈T
(v,t)6=(v 0 ,t0 )
N(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) 6=0

(29)
Clearly, e−d(v,t,v0 ,t0 ) and e−r(v,t) are convex over R while 2b(v,t) and b(v,t) 2b(v,t) are convex over
R>0 . Consequently, function (29) which is a nonnegative weighted sum of convex functions is
also convex. The same statement can be applied to show the convexity of the constraints under
variable change of (28) (for some constraints, we need to apply an extra log to both side of the
inequality to have a convex constraint).
The original MINLP has 5|V||T| variables and at most 4|V||T| +|V||T||L| constraints while
its convex representation requires 6|V||T|+|V|2 |T|2 variables and at most 5|V||T|+3|V||T||L|.
Also the new convex representation of the problem has more variables and constraints than its
MINLP counterpart but it can be quickly solved using fast convex optimization algorithms. In
the second stage of Alg. 1, a relaxed continuous version of the proposed mixed-integer convex
formulation is iteratively optimized in a local loop [21]. At each epoch, the continuous convex
optimization is solved and obtained values for relaxed integer variables (here, c(v,t) ’s and r(v,t) ’s)
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

18

TABLE III: Simulation constant parameters.
|β2 |
fs2 /m
20393

α
dB/km
0.22

L
km
80

ν
THz
193.55

nsp
1.58

γ
1/W/km
1.3

G
GHz
20

B
THz
2

J
0.1

Ptxb
W
16

Prxb
W
20

Penc
W
0.2

Pdec
W
3

Pf f t
mW
4

Pdsp
mW
10

Egrm
pJ/bit
400

Pamp
W
12

are rounded by precision I. If none of the rounded variables is valid based on Tab. I, the precision
is increased by J and the rounding is again applied. This process continues until at least one
valid element is found for relaxed integer variables. Then, we fix the acceptable rounded values
and solve the relaxed continuous convex problem again. The local loop continues until all the
integer variables have valid and acceptable values. Note that the number of iterations in the
heuristic algorithm is at most equal to the number of integer variables (here, at most 2|V||T|).
The number of iterations is usually lower than its maximum. Furthermore, a simpler problem
should be solved as the number of iteration increases because of fixing some of the integer
variables during each loop.

VI. N UMERICAL R ESULTS
In this section, we use simulation results to demonstrate the performance of the proposed
formulations and algorithms. The European Cost239 optical network is considered with the
topology of Fig. 5 and the normalized traffic matrix given in Tab. IV. One can scale the
normalized traffic values of Tab. IV to get 2017 west Europe aggregate traffic value of 16.8
EByte/month [19], [25]. The optical link parameters and other simulation constants are reported
in Tab. III. We use MATLAB software for programming and simulation [26]. YALMIP [27]
and CVX [28] optimization applications are also used for modeling and solving the proposed
optimization problems. Simulations run over a computer equipped with Intel Core i7-472HQ
CPU and 8 GB of RAM.
Fig. 6 compares total power consumption versus aggregate network traffic with and without
traffic grooming procedure of Alg. 1. Clearly, traffic grooming reduces the consumed power and
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

19

1

390

1310

760
660

4

740

3
550
210

2

340

390 1090

390
5

220

450

7

660

730

300
6
400

565

350

8
600

9

320
730

10

930
820

320

820
11

Fig. 5: European Cost239 optical network with 11 optical nodes and 26 bi-directional links. Digits on each link
shows its length in km.

TABLE IV: European Cost239 optical network normalized traffic matrix.
Node
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11

01
00
01
01
03
01
01
01
35
01
01
01

02
01
00
05
14
40
01
01
10
03
02
03

03
01
05
00
16
24
01
01
05
03
01
02

04
03
14
16
00
06
02
02
21
81
09
09

05
01
40
24
06
00
01
11
06
11
01
02

06
01
01
01
02
01
00
01
01
01
01
01

07
01
01
01
02
11
01
00
01
01
01
01

08
35
10
05
21
06
01
01
00
06
02
05

09
01
03
03
81
11
01
01
06
00
51
06

10
01
02
01
09
01
01
01
02
51
00
81

11
01
03
02
09
02
01
01
05
06
81
00

the amount of saved power is improved for higher aggregate traffic values where more traffic
grooming scenarios are available. As an example, the power consumption is reduced by a factor
of 9% when aggregate traffic is about 60 Tbps.
Alg. 1 partitions the input traffic streams according to the capacity of transponders C and uses
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

20
40
Without Tra/c Grooming
With Tra/c Grooming
35

Total Power Consumption (kW)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0
5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

Aggregate Tra/c (Tbps)

Fig. 6: Total power consumption versus aggregate traffic with and without applying Alg. 1 for traffic grooming.

the proposed traffic grooming procedure to fill transponders with remaining unused capacity.
We define Transponder Utilization Ratio (TUR) as the ratio of the aggregate traffic to the total
capacity offered by all transponders. TUR = 1 means that all the transponders work at full
capacity. Traffic Grooming Ratio (TGR) is defined as the ratio of the number of unloaded
transponders by traffic grooming to the number of unfilled transponders when no traffic grooming
is applied. TGR shows how traffic grooming reduces the number of required transponders.
Fig. 7 shows TUR and TGR versus transponder capacity C. As C increases, there are more
transponders with unused remaining capacity that can be used for traffic grooming and therefore,
TGR is improved. On the other hand, we need more traffic volumes to use full capacity of the
transponders when C is increased and therefore, TUR goes down. Higher values of TUR reduces
the required CAPEX for network deployment while higher values of TGR reduces the power
consumption and consequently reduces the OPEX. Fig. 7 shows that there is a tradeoff between
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

21
1
Transponder Utilization Ratio
Tra/c Grooming Ratio
0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2
100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Transponder Capacity (Gbps)

Fig. 7: Transponder utilization and traffic grooming ratios versus transponder capacity C.

TUR and TGR or equivalently CAPEX and OPEX for higher values of C.
Fig. 8 shows TGR versus aggregate network traffic for different values of transponder capacity.
As the aggregate traffic increases, more traffics are groomed and we save more power due to
unloaded transponders. The improvement is more for transponders with higher capacity. As an
example, when the aggregate traffic is 67 Tbps and C increases from 200 Gbps to 400 Gbps,
TGR is improved by a factor of 1.51.
Fig. 9 shows how our proposed TPA convex formulation runs faster than its MINLP counterpart. We use MINLP formulations of (12)-(16) as a test bench in which QoS constraint is replaced
by the nonlinear and general expression of [15]. Results show that the convex formulation is
much faster than the MINLP formulation. As an example, it can be about 20 times faster at
aggregate traffic of 18 Tbps. Simulation results also show that for higher values of aggregate
traffic, the nonlinear optimizer package may fail to provide a feasible solution while the convex
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

22
0.35
C = 200 Gbps
C = 400 Gbps
C = 600 Gbps

0.3

Tra/c Grooming Ratio

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Aggregate Tra/c (Tbps)

Fig. 8: Traffic grooming ratio versus aggregate network traffic for different values of transponder capacity.

optimizer software still yields a feasible solution in a reasonable run time.
The effect of adaptive assignment of coding rate and modulation level on power consumption
has been investigated in literature [19]. We also analyze this issue and evaluate the complexity of
transponders. Fig. 10 shows total power consumption of different network elements in terms of
the number of available modulation formats. The power consumption values are normalized to
their corresponding values for the scenario with two available modulation formats c = 1, 2. An
interesting observation in Fig. 10 is that increasing the number of modulation levels decreases
the power consumption of various network elements with the DSP power consumption showing
the highest level of power reduction. Clearly, as the number of modulation levels increases,
the amount of power consumption decreases but there is no considerable gain if the number of
modulation levels be more than 6. On the other hand, increasing the number of modulation levels
in a transponder may have an important effect on the complexity of the receiver architecture
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

23
104
Mixed Integer Nonlinear Formulation
Convex Formulation

Run Time (s)

103

102

101

100

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Aggregate Tra/c (Tbps)

Fig. 9: Run time in terms of aggregate traffic for MINLP and convex formulations of transponder parameter
assignment problem.

and its signal processing requirements. Therefore, one should choose the number of modulation
levels in a transponder to have a balance between complexity (CAPEX) and power consumption
(OPEX).
The effect of adaptive assignment of coding rate and modulation level on power consumption has been studied in the literature. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no
comprehensive investigation for the effect of adaptive transmit optical power assignment on
power consumption of different network elements. The total power consumption of different
network elements in terms of aggregate traffic with and without adaptive transmit optical power
assignment has been reported in Fig. 11. We have used the proposed expression of [29] for fixed
assignment of transmit optical power. Clearly, for all the elements, the total power consumption
is approximately a linear function of aggregate traffic but the slope of the lines are lower when
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

24
1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3
Normalized
Normalized
Normalized
Normalized

0.2

Total
Total
Total
Total

Encoder+Decoder Power Consumption
Transmit+Receive Transponder Power Consumption
IFFT/FFT Power Consumption
DSP Power Consumption

0.1
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Number of Available QAM Modulations

Fig. 10: Normalized total power consumption of different network elements in terms of the number of available
modulation formats.

transmit optical powers are adaptively assigned. As an example, adaptive transmit optical power
assignment improves total transponder power consumption by a factor of 8% for aggregate traffic
of 60 Tbps.

VII. C ONCLUSION
Energy-efficient resource allocation and quality of service provisioning are two fundamental
problems of green elastic optical networks that are conventionally formulated using complex
mixed-integer nonlinear optimization problems. To address the complexity of the problem and
provide a fast-achievable near-optimum solution, we propose a two-stage resource allocation
algorithm in which the main problem is decomposed into two inter-connected sub-problems
named routing, grooming and ordering, and transponder parameter assignment. We introduce
a heuristic approach for routing, grooming and ordering sub-problem that determines trafDRAFT

May 22, 2017

25
40
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total

35

30

Encoder+Decoder Power Consumption (Adaptive Transmit Power)
Encoder+Decoder Power Consumption (Fixed Transmit Power)
DSP Power Consumption (Adaptive Transmit Power)
DSP Power Consumption (Fixed Transmit Power)
FFT+IFFT Power Consumption (Adaptive Transmit Power)
FFT+IFFT Power Consumption (Fixed Transmit Power)
Transmit+Receive Transponder Power Consumption (Adaptive Transmit Power)
Transmit+Receive Transponder Power Consumption (Fixed Transmit Power)

kW

25

20

15

10

5

0
5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

Aggregate Tra/c (Tbps)

Fig. 11: Total power consumption of different network elements in terms of aggregate traffic with and without
adaptive transmit optical power assignment.

fic routes, active transponders and grooming switch configuration to reduce amplifier power
consumption and number of active transponders. To have an efficient transponder parameter
assignment, we formulate a convex optimization problem in which joint optimization of power
and spectrum resources constrained to physical and quality of service requirements is addressed.
We use geometric convexification techniques to provide convex expressions for transponder
power consumption and optical signal to noise ratio as a metric of quality of service. The
performance of the proposed resource allocation procedure is validated through simulation results.
We demonstrate the improved performance of our presented routing and grooming procedure in
terms of network power consumption, transponder utilization ratio and traffic grooming ratio.
Furthermore, numerical outcomes show that the proposed convex formulation for configuring
the transponders yields the same results in a considerable lower run time compared to its
mixed-integer nonlinear counterpart. The improved effect of the joint optimization of power and
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

26

spectrum variables on power consumption of different network elements is also demonstrated by
simulation. According to the results, adaptive assignment of transmit optical power considerably
reduces total transponder power consumption. Furthermore, we analyze the inherent trade-off
between CAPEX and OPEX as the capacity and/or design complexity of the transponders change.
R EFERENCES
[1] E. Palkopoulou, M. Angelou, D. Klonidis, K. Christodoulopoulos, A. Klekamp, F. Buchali, E. Varvarigos, and I. Tomkos,
“Quantifying spectrum, cost, and energy efficiency in fixed-grid and flex-grid networks [invited],” Journal of Optical
Communications and Networking, vol. 4, no. 11, pp. B42–B51, 2012.
[2] A. Nag, T. Wang, and B. Mukherjee, “On spectrum-efficient green optical backbone networks,” in Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM 2011), 2011 IEEE.

IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–5.

[3] J. Armstrong, “Ofdm for optical communications,” Journal of lightwave technology, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 189–204, 2009.
[4] B. C. Chatterjee, N. Sarma, and E. Oki, “Routing and spectrum allocation in elastic optical networks: A tutorial,” IEEE
Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 1776–1800, 2015.
[5] F. S. Abkenar and A. G. Rahbar, “Study and analysis of routing and spectrum allocation (rsa) and routing, modulation
and spectrum allocation (rmsa) algorithms in elastic optical networks (eons),” Optical Switching and Networking, vol. 23,
pp. 5–39, 2017.
[6] N. Sambo, G. Meloni, F. Cugini, A. D’Errico, L. Potı̀, P. Iovanna, and P. Castoldi, “Routing code and spectrum assignment
(rcsa) in elastic optical networks,” Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. 33, no. 24, pp. 5114–5121, 2015.
[7] M. Hadi and M. R. Pakravan, “Improved routing and spectrum assignment formulations for optical ofdm networks,” pp.
1–6, 2016.
[8] I. Roberts, J. M. Kahn, and D. Boertjes, “Convex channel power optimization in nonlinear wdm systems using gaussian
noise model,” Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. 34, no. 13, pp. 3212–3222, 2016.
[9] D. J. Ives, P. Bayvel, and S. J. Savory, “Physical layer transmitter and routing optimization to maximize the traffic throughput
of a nonlinear optical mesh network,” in Optical Network Design and Modeling, 2014 International Conference on. IEEE,
2014, pp. 168–173.
[10] ——, “Adapting transmitter power and modulation format to improve optical network performance utilizing the gaussian
noise model of nonlinear impairments,” Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. 32, no. 21, pp. 3485–3494, 2014.
[11] ——, “Routing, modulation, spectrum and launch power assignment to maximize the traffic throughput of a nonlinear
optical mesh network,” Photonic Network Communications, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 244–256, 2015.
[12] A. Fallahpour, H. Beyranvand, and J. A. Salehi, “Energy-efficient manycast routing and spectrum assignment in elastic
optical networks for cloud computing environment,” Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. 33, no. 19, pp. 4008–4018,
2015.
DRAFT

May 22, 2017

27

[13] É. Archambault, N. Alloune, M. Furdek, Z. Xu, C. Tremblay, A. Muhammad, J. Chen, L. Wosinska, P. Littlewood, and
M. P. Bélanger, “Routing and spectrum assignment in elastic filterless optical networks,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on
Networking, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 3578–3592, 2016.
[14] J. Zhao, H. Wymeersch, and E. Agrell, “Nonlinear impairment-aware static resource allocation in elastic optical networks,”
Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. 33, no. 22, pp. 4554–4564, 2015.
[15] L. Yan, E. Agrell, H. Wymeersch, and M. Brandt-Pearce, “Resource allocation for flexible-grid optical networks with
nonlinear channel model [invited],” Journal of Optical Communications and Networking, vol. 7, no. 11, pp. B101–B108,
2015.
[16] L. Yan, E. Agrell, M. N. Dharmaweera, and H. WymeerschP, “Joint assignment of power, routing, and spectrum in static
flexible-grid networks,” Journal of Lightwave Technology, no. 99, 2017.
[17] M. Hadi and M. R. Pakravan, “Resource allocation for elastic optical networks using geometric optimization,” arXiv
preprint arXiv:1705.01191, 2017.
[18] H. Khodakarami, B. S. G. Pillai, and W. Shieh, “Quality of service provisioning and energy minimized scheduling in
software defined flexible optical networks,” Journal of Optical Communications and Networking, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 118–
128, 2016.
[19] H. Khodakarami, B. S. G. Pillai, B. Sedighi, and W. Shieh, “Flexible optical networks: An energy efficiency perspective,”
Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. 32, no. 21, pp. 3356–3367, 2014.
[20] M. M. Hasan, F. Farahmand, J. P. Jue, and J. J. Rodrigues, “A study of energy-aware traffic grooming in optical networks:
Static and dynamic cases,” IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 161–173, 2013.
[21] S. Boyd, S.-J. Kim, L. Vandenberghe, and A. Hassibi, “A tutorial on geometric programming,” Optimization and
engineering, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 67, 2007.
[22] S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex optimization.

Cambridge university press, 2004.

[23] M. Chiang et al., “Geometric programming for communication systems,” Foundations and Trends R in Communications
and Information Theory, vol. 2, no. 1–2, pp. 1–154, 2005.
[24] M. Hadi and M. R. Pakravan, “Spectrum-convertible bvwxc placement in ofdm-based elastic optical networks,” IEEE
Photonics Journal, no. 99, pp. 1–7, 2017.
[25] A. Muhammad, G. Zervas, N. Amaya, D. Simeonidou, and R. Forchheimer, “Introducing flexible and synthetic optical
networking: Planning and operation based on network function programmable roadms,” Journal of Optical Communications
and Networking, vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 635–648, 2014.
[26] MathWorks Inc., “Matlab,” https://www.mathworks.com, 2017.
[27] J. Lofberg, “Yalmip: A toolbox for modeling and optimization in matlab,” in Computer Aided Control Systems Design,
2004 IEEE International Symposium on, 2005, pp. 284–289.
[28] M. Grant, S. Boyd, and Y. Ye, “Cvx: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming,” 2008.
May 22, 2017

DRAFT

28

[29] G. Gao, X. Chen, and W. Shieh, “Analytical expressions for nonlinear transmission performance of coherent optical ofdm
systems with frequency guard band,” Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. 30, no. 15, pp. 2447–2454, 2012.

DRAFT

May 22, 2017

