Power consumption of Next-Generation Passive Optical

Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Power
consumption of
Next-Generation
Passive Optical
Networks
Sofie Lambert (iMinds – Ghent Univ.)
Bart Lannoo (iMinds – Ghent Univ.)
Didier Colle (iMinds – Ghent Univ.)
Mario Pickavet (iMinds – Ghent Univ.)
Julio Montalvo (Telefónica I+D)
José A. Torrijos (Telefónica I+D)
Peter Vetter (Bell Labs)
Outline
An introduction to Next-Generation Passive Optical Networks (NG-PONs)
Power consumption evaluation: methodology
Scope
Technology-dependent characteristics
Model parameters
Results
Power consumption for various technologies
Sensitivity to input parameters
Conclusion
2
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Outline
An introduction to Next-Generation Passive Optical Networks (NG-PONs)
Power consumption evaluation: methodology
Scope
Technology-dependent characteristics
Model parameters
Results
Power consumption for various technologies
Sensitivity to input parameters
Conclusion
3
PONs are a type of optical access networks
Internet
Gateway
Backbone
Network
Access
Network
Local Area
Network (LAN)
Copper/Cable networks
Evolution
towards higher
access speeds
Fiber to the home
• PONs
• AONs
• PtP
•…
4
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Passive optical network (PON) = no active
components between the OLT and the ONU
Central Office (CO)
Optical Distribution
Network (ODN)
Customer premises
Optical Line Terminal
OLT
1 fiber
…
…
…
Core
Aggregation
network
Optical Network Unit
Passive (power)
splitters
OLT shelf
OLT
OLT shelf
shelf
split ratio 1:N
Home
network
ONU
N fibers
5
Various implementations of PONs are possible
OLT
fiber
…
fiber
…
Aggregation
network
…
Core
Passive (power)
splitters
OLT shelf
OLT
OLT shelf
shelf
fiber
ONU
Home
network
Currently standardized
GPON and XG-PON (2.5 Gb/s & 10 Gb/s, to be shared by
users in a PON), Time Division Multiplexing-based
Towards NG-PON2 technologies [FSAN 2012]
Further bandwidth increase (≥ 40 Gb/s downstream, shared)
Potential for node consolidation (long reach, high split ratios)
Power consumption?
6
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
NG-PON2 technologies considered here
XLG-PON
40G Time Division Multiplexing
TWDM-PON
Time and Wavelength Division Multiplexing
(4 overlaid 10G TDM PONs on different wavelengths)
OFDM-PON
40G Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing
Co-UWDM-PON
Coherent Ultra Dense Wavelength Division
Multiplexing (one 1.25G wavelength per customer)
7
Outline
An introduction to Next-Generation Passive Optical Networks (NG-PONs)
Power consumption evaluation: methodology
Scope
Technology-dependent characteristics
Model parameters
Results
Power consumption for various technologies
Sensitivity to input parameters
Conclusion
8
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
How can we make a fair comparison
between different technologies?
Standardized technologies
Next-generation technologies
Realistic deployment scenario
User demand and QoS scenario
Network dimensioning
Power consumption for each technology [W/user]
9
Outline
An introduction to Next-Generation Passive Optical Networks (NG-PONs)
Power consumption evaluation: methodology
Scope
Technology-dependent characteristics
Model parameters
Results
Power consumption for various technologies
Sensitivity to input parameters
Conclusion
10
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Power consumption in the access network
consists of four components
OLT chassis
Passive power
splitters
Uplink
1
OLT shelf
4
ONU
…
Aggregation
…
…
OLT shelf
OLT
OLT shelf
shelf
2
3
1. Optical Network Unit (ONU)
# ONUs x (3.65 W baseline + system-specific power)
Customer side
x 1.25 AC/DC
2. Optical Line Terminal (OLT) PON ports
# OLT ports x power consumption per port
3. Layer 2 switching, packet processing and traffic management
# OLT chassis x PONs/chassis x bandwidth (DS+US) x 1 W/Gbps
4. Uplink ports
# OLT chassis x uplink energy consumption
Operator side
x 1.25 AC/DC
x 1.7 site factor
11
Outline
An introduction to Next-Generation Passive Optical Networks (NG-PONs)
Power consumption evaluation: methodology
Scope
Technology-dependent characteristics
Model parameters
Results
Power consumption for various technologies
Sensitivity to input parameters
Conclusion
12
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Technologies considered
Technology
Max.
budget
(dB)
GPON
XG PON
XLG PON
NG-PON
Bandwidth /
PON DS/US
(Gb/s)
28increasing 2.5/1.25
bandwidth
35
10/2.5
power / OLT
port (W)
increasing
power / port
power /
ONU (W)
2
1.8
5
3.1
31
40/10
17
3.2
38.5
4x10/4x2.5
20
3.4
34.5
40/10 9.5 + 0.5 x Nusers
NG-PON2
Co-UDWDM PON
43 1.25/1.25 x Nusers
6 + 1.2 x Nusers
8.6
TWDM PON
OFDM PON
4.7
Nusers = maximum number of connected users per OLT PON port
OLT port power consumption values based on [Skubic 2012] and GreenTouch
ONU power consumption values provided by GreenTouch
13
Outline
An introduction to Next-Generation Passive Optical Networks (NG-PONs)
Power consumption evaluation: methodology
Scope
Technology-dependent characteristics
Model parameters: user demand and Quality of Service (QoS)
Results
Power consumption for various technologies
Sensitivity to input parameters
Conclusion
14
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Define user demand and QoS parameters to dimension the
network and calculate power consumption
Standardized technologies
Next-generation technologies
Realistic deployment scenario
User demand and QoS scenario
Network dimensioning
Power consumption for each technology [W/user]
15
User demand: probability of activity and
requested bandwidth
Assumption: independent users*
pactive = probability (time) that a user is active
When active, user requests Btarget
Considered scenarios:
pactive = 50%
Btarget = 600 Mb/s, 1 Gb/s
* based on [Segarra 2011]
16
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Quality of Service (QoS): availability and
packet loss
pavail,min
minimum probability (% of time) that users can
get the requested target bandwidth
PLmax
maximum allowable packet loss in the OLT uplink
towards the aggregation network
Best-effort internet service:
pavail,min = 20%
PLmax
= 10-3
17
Outline
An introduction to Next-Generation Passive Optical Networks (NG-PONs)
Power consumption evaluation: methodology
Scope
Technology-dependent characteristics
Model parameters
Results
Power consumption for various technologies – fixed and variable split
Sensitivity to input parameters
Conclusion
18
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Split ratio fixed at 1:64 – Medium demand
(access rate 600 Mb/s)
Power consumption [W/user]
30
20
ONU
OLT uplink
OLT L2 switching/PP/TM
OLT PON ports
ONU
pavail < 20%
= unacceptable QoS
10
OLT
0
GPON
XG
XLG
TWDM
OFDM
Co-UDWDM
19
Split ratio fixed at 1:64 – High demand
(access rate 1 Gb/s)
Power consumption [W/user]
30
20
ONU
OLT uplink
OLT L2 switching/PP/TM
OLT PON ports
ONU
pavail < 20%
= unacceptable QoS
10
OLT
0
GPON
XG
XLG
TWDM
OFDM
Co-UDWDM
20
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
High demand (1 Gb/s) - What if we could
update the ODN and change split ratios?
1:64
1:64
ONU
1:64
1:64
20
10
1:64
Power consumption [W/user]
Fixed split ratio: significantly higher power
consumption for all NG-PON2 technologies
1:64
30
OLT
0
GPON
XG
XLG
TWDM
OFDM
Co-UDWDM
21
Increased split ratio to
reduce power/user, while
maintaining QoS
1:256
Decreased split ratio
to achieve desired
availability (QoS)
1:128
1:128
1:32
20
1:8
Power consumption [W/user]
30
1:128
Impact of optimizing the split ratio – High
demand (1 Gb/s)
ONU
10
OLT
0
GPON
XG
XLG
TWDM
OFDM
Co-UDWDM
22
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Impact of optimizing the split ratio – High
demand (1 Gb/s)
1:128
1:256
Most energy efficient solutions for very
high demands
10
split ratio
too low
1:128
1:128
1:32
20
1:8
Power consumption [W/user]
30
ONU
Additional advantage:
higher split = lower cost
OLT
+ long reach
0
GPON
XG
XLG
TWDM
OFDM
Co-UDWDM
23
Conclusion for variable split ratios: most energy
efficient technology for high future demands?
GPON and XG PON can still be used, but at lower split ratios = not an
attractive option for most operators
NG-PON2 technologies offer higher capacities, and longer reach
allowing higher split ratios
XLG and TWDM PON are most energy efficient options with higher split
ratios
OFDM consumes a lot of power at ONU, making it less energy efficient
Co-UDWDM consumes a lot of power at OLT, but offers PtP access
with high QoS, useful for specific applications
24
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Which PON technology is the most energy
efficient?
Depends on various factors:
To what extent are operators able/willing to modify
existing networks (change split ratio)?
How will user demands evolve in the coming years
(driven by video, wireless backhaul, … )?
Further, validity of the results depends on the reliability
of the input parameters.
25
Outline
An introduction to Next-Generation Passive Optical Networks (NG-PONs)
Power consumption evaluation: methodology
Scope
Technology-dependent characteristics
Model parameters
Results
Power consumption for various technologies
Sensitivity to input parameters
Conclusion
26
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Sensitivity analysis: which input parameters have
the biggest impact on the results?
OFDM
Co UDWDM
XLG
XG-PON1
GPON
OFDM
TWDM
XLG
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0
XG-PON1
0.35
0.03
0.04
0.03
0
GPON
TWDM
Optimized split
Internet takerate
0.54 0.75 0.76 0.77 0.73 0.03
0.05 0.34 0.35 0.73
Btarget
0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03
0.28 0.08 0.03 0.04
0.05 0.04 0.04
0.04 0.04
0.02
0.11 0.04 0.04
act,Internet
Internet takerate =phomes
connected
/ homes
passed
by0.13
fiber
p
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.24 0.05 0.03 0.03
Improve by sharingav,min,Internet
infrastructure:
open
access
is
more
energy
efficient
Ploss,max
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
than multiple networks
for different
TV takerate
0.03 0.04operators.
0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03
0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02
pact,TV
0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03
0.04 0.02 0.03 0.02
PONs per rack
0.04 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04
0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04
optical budget margin
0.22 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03
0.07 0.19 0.52 0.04
general OLT functions power
0.09 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.17 0.39
0.05 0.07 0.06 0.1
site factor
0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.59
0.04 0.08 0.06 0.12
Pport,tech
0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.33
0.04 0.07 0.05 0.08
Puser,tech
0
0energy
0
0 0.1 0.47
0
0 office
0
0
Site factor = overhead
for cooling,
supply,
etc. at central
uplinkenergy
power
0.02
0.03techniques
0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03
Improve by applying
saving
Input parameters
Co UDWDM
Impact on power/user
Fixed split
0.03 0.03
0.03 0.02
0.04
0.48
0.07
0.09
0.06
0.06
0.03
0.04
0.35
0.57
0.26
0.43
0.02 0.03
similar to the ones for data centers.
27
Outline
An introduction to Next-Generation Passive Optical Networks (NG-PONs)
Power consumption evaluation: methodology
Scope
Technology-dependent characteristics
Model parameters
Results
Power consumption for various technologies
Sensitivity to input parameters
Conclusion
28
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
Power saving techniques will need to be included
in standards if we want energy efficient PONs
power for future high-speed optical access
is typically > 10 W per household
=
equivalent of a small new refrigerator!
Power saving techniques are needed to make NG-PON2
technologies more energy efficient, e.g.
 Sleep modes / load proportionality
 Virtualization
 Energy efficient cooling (at central office)
29
Questions?
Contact: [email protected]
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013
Power consumption of Next-Generation PONs
References
[Lambert 2012]
S. Lambert, W. Van Heddeghem, W. Vereecken, B. Lannoo, D. Colle, and M. Pickavet,
“Worldwide electricity consumption of communication networks,” Optics Express, vol. 20,
no. 26, pp. B513–24, Dec. 2012.
[Segarra 2011]
J. Segarra, V. Sales, and J. Prat, “Access services availability and traffic forecast in PON
deployment,” 13th International Conference on Transparent Optical Networks (ICTON),
2011.
[FSAN 2012]
P. Chanclou, A. Cui, F. Geilhardt, H. Nakamura, and D. Nesset, “Network operator
requirements for the next generation of optical access networks,” IEEE Network, vol.26,
no.2, pp. 8–14, 2012.
[Skubic 2012]
B. Skubic, E. In de Betou, T. Ayhan, and S. Dahlfort, “Energy-Efficient Next-Generation
Optical Access Networks,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol.50, no.1, pp. 122–127,
2012.
[refrigerator]
LIEBHERR TP 1410-20 (energy label A++), consumes 93 kWh/year = equivalent of
10.6W continuous energy consumption
31
Final Trend Workshop
Brussels, October 24, 2013