论文部分内容阅读
研究了光分组交换网络中的两种竞争解决方案 结合课题研究的进展 ,基于突发和非突发业务 ,对这两种竞争处理结构进行了深入分析 ,得出了几点重要结论 ,首先 ,在竞争处理上 ,对于非突发业务 ,光纤延迟线比可调谐波长转换器有效 ;而对于突发业务而言 ,可调谐波长转换器比光纤延迟线有效 其次 ,在突发业务下反馈式光纤延迟线结构 (FFA)是一种较为理想的竞争解决结构 ,但对非突发业务而言 ,反馈式光纤延迟线和可调谐波长转换器结构 (FFTA)在成本上和结构尺寸上比FFA要有效的多 随着平均突发长度的增加 ,FFTA中的可调谐波长转换器数目也要增加才能获得合理的分组丢失率。但无论是针对突发业务还是非突发业务 ,FFTA都是一种成本有效的竞争解决结构
Based on the research progress of the two competitive solutions in optical packet-switched networks, this paper analyzes the two competitive processing structures based on burst and non-burst services and reaches some important conclusions. At first, In the competitive processing, the fiber delay line is more effective than the tunable wavelength converter for non-burst services; whereas for the burst service, the tunable wavelength converter is more effective than the fiber delay line. Secondly, in the burst service, the feedback fiber The delay line architecture (FFA) is an ideal contention resolution solution, but for non-burst services, the feedback fiber delay line and tunable wavelength converter architecture (FFTA) are more cost effective and smaller in size than FFA Effectively As the average burst length increases, the number of tunable wavelength converters in the FFTA also increases to achieve a reasonable packet loss rate. However, FFTA is a cost-effective competitive solution structure for both emergencies and non-emergencies