IP and Optical domains?

Wed Jun 22 22:23:30 UTC 2016

Mark Tinka wrote:

>> I think you mean IPoDWDM something so much different from
>> usual ways to have IP over something.
>>
>> Do you have any reference to it?
>
> I said "visbility" due to what IPoDWDM can offer.
>
> But I also said IP has no real "awareness" about the physical
> infrastructure. It just knows it can't send/receive packets anymore.
>
> With IPoDWDM, one could infer that the IP layer will quickly re-route
> due to DWDM characteristics (related to fibre conditions).

Wrong. There is no room for such reroute with IP just over DWDM.

You are saying something IP over sublayer1 over sublayer2
over sublayer3 over sublayer4 over sublayer5 over DWDM IPoDWDM.

Of course, each sublayer has additional inefficiency and obscurity.

That you call it IPoDWDM means that you accept the obscurities
and though you think IPoDWDM 60% efficient, it is actually that
IP over sulayer1 is 60% efficient and if efficiencies between
other layers are 60%, actual efficiency of IPoDWDM is 4.7%,
which is "heavily underutilized".

> However, in
> actual fact, what IP really sees is the link going away, and thus,
> triggering an IGP reconvergence.

And, with properly designed IGP, that's fine.

> There is no difference if IP is running directly over fibre (in
> Ethernet).

Ethernet is already too complex to be "directly over fiber".

Point to point Ethernet may barely be.

 > The difference with IPoDWDM

Never call something a lot more complicated than Ethernet between
IP and DWDM IPoDWDM.

						Masataka Ohta