Decoupled Line System + Coherent Terminal Optics Link Design & Commissioning
Transcription
Decoupled Line System + Coherent Terminal Optics Link Design & Commissioning
Decoupled Line System + Coherent Terminal Optics Link Design & Commissioning ECOC 2014 Workshop on “Can we still trust our test protocols?” Vijay Vusirikala, Valey Kamalov, Vinayak Dangui & Tad Hofmeister Outline ● Architecture : Decoupled Line Systems and Terminal coherent optics ○ Terrestrial and Subsea ● Design, specification and commissioning of a decoupled system ○ Link Budget Tables ● Evolution of test protocols from static to dynamic optical layer Google Confidential and Proprietary Decoupled Line System and Coherent Optics - Terrestrial Vendor A Vendor A Vendor B Vendor B Terminal Optics Open Line System (OLS) Terminal Optics Amps, Mux/demux, ROADM, Gain equalizer Benefits: ● ● ● Best-of-breed technologies No vendor lock-in Coherent optics makes this decoupling a lot easier compared to dispersion managed plants for non-coherent optics Google Confidential and Proprietary Decoupling Wet Plant from Dry Plant SLTE Submarine Systems Vendor A Vendor A Photonic commons Photonic commons Vendor B Transponders Vendor B Mux, WSS, Upgrade couplers, Noise loading, Monitoring Dry Plant ● ● ● Repeaters, Branching Units, Gain equalizers Open Wet Plant Different expertise needed for wet plant (marine operations, cabling, repeaters) vs. dry plant (coherent modems) Faster time to market and better pricing using terrestrial driven coherent optics Refresh cycles and longevity are different between wet plant and dry plant Google Confidential and Proprietary Transitioning from Coupled Systems to Decoupled Systems Coupled / Closed Line System Decoupled / Open Line System System Design: System Design: Cost-optimized to close the link for a specific transponder type / generation Optimized for maximizing OSNR Terrestrial - Raman, NF optimized amps Subsea - Shorter repeater spacing, Higher repeater power, ULL fibers System Commissioning: System Commissioning: Q based commissioning with validation of margin OSNR commissioning for line system + validation of Q for transponders Link / Power Budget: Link / Power Budget: B2B OSNR performance with Q penalties for aging, loading, transmission penalties Link / Power Budget: Hybrid OSNR / Q based power budget tables SNR / OSNR based power budget tables with Q thresholds and penalties mapped to SNR Google Confidential and Proprietary Link / Power Budget Table for Decoupled Line Systems Thoughts Ideal Approach ? Currently Used Methodology SNR / OSNR based power budget tables 1. Baseline OSNR from simulation or measurement (factor in line system aging) 2. Map nonlinear impairments and penalties to effective OSNR reduction 3. Derive link margin in OSNR relative to required Rx OSNR (for specific modulation format / vendor) Hybrid OSNR / Q based power budget tables 1. Baseline OSNR from simulation or measurement (factor in line system aging) 2. Extract expected Q from B2B measurement for that baseline OSNR 3. Factor in Q propagation penalties, transponder aging, time variation, loading, manufacturing variations etc. 4. Derive margin by comparing to FEC limit Advantages: Cleaner decoupling of line system and terminal optics in a multi-vendor scenario Enables ability to generate real time OSNR & power budget tables for dynamic optical layer Google Confidential and Proprietary OSNR-Based Link Budgeting Q OSNR Mapping as per back-to-back ● ● ● Q penalties: dependent on exact link details OSNR penalties: can be expressed as absolute noise quantities NL penalty has simple scaling vs. launch power in the perturbative regime Launch OSNR Link ASE Mapping as per back-to-back Transmission impairments Received OSNR Final OSNR Link Margin Minimum OSNR Extra Margin Required OSNR Mapping as per distorted Q vs. OSNR Google Confidential and Proprietary OSNR Commissioning for New Subsea Systems Average, Tilt and Gain Shape Pre-Tilt OSNR (dB) Gain shape ripple Average OSNR Wavelength (nm) ● Average OSNR : Goal is to maximize this (till nonlinear roll-off) by efficient cable plant engineering (low loss fiber, large core fiber, shorter repeater spacing, higher power repeaters). ● Tilt: Some pre-tilt is needed to compensate for ageing effects (additional loss due to fiber repairs). Trade-off between Q performance penalty from high tilt vs. future proofing for cable repairs ● Gain shape ripple: Manufacturing variations and imperfect equalization from preset equalizers. Goal is to Google Confidential and Proprietary minimize Decoupled Systems - Evolution ● Real-time, In-service OSNR ○ ○ Are interferometric techniques practical, stable and accurate? Loading channel based measurement is feasible but becomes impractical at high link load ● Coherent transponders - Enhanced diagnostics ○ ○ Electrical SNR Self electrical noise loading to generate Q vs. SNR curve ● Real-time power budget table to determine which link can close at which modulation format Google Confidential and Proprietary Transition from Static to Dynamic optical layer ● Value ○ ○ Optical restoration for system availability improvement Faster service provisioning and response to demand variability ● Necessary hardware: ○ ○ ○ CDC-Flex ROADMs Coherent Transponders with flexible modulation support Flexible client layer ● Real-time Power Budget Tables ○ Ability to combine information about coherent transponders and link OSNR to determine which paths close and at which modulation format Google Confidential and Proprietary Questions? Contact : [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
Similar documents
A Monolithic One-sample/bit Partial-Response Maximum Likelihood SiGe Receiver for Electronic Dispersion
More information