Embedded network design to support availability differentiation

  • Abdulaziz AlashaikhEmail author
  • David Tipper
  • Teresa Gomes


The problem of how to provide, in a cost-efficient manner, high levels of availability and service differentiation in communication networks was investigated in Tipper (Telecommun Syst 56(1): 5–16 2014), Gomes et al. (2014), and Alashaikh et al. (Comput Netw 82:4–19 2015). The strategy adopted was to embed in the physical layer topology a high availability set of links and nodes (termed the “spine”). The spine enables through protection, routing, and cross-layer mapping, the provisioning of differentiated classes of resilience with varying levels of end-to-end availability. Here, we present an optimization model formulation of the spine design problem, considering link availability and the cost of upgrading link availability. The design problem seeks to minimize the cost while attaining a desired target flow availability. Extensive numerical results illustrate the benefits of modifying the availability of a subset of links of the network to implement quality of resilience classes.


Crosslayer mapping Differentiated services Flow availability 



T. Gomes was partially supported by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) under project grant UID/Multi/ 00308/2019 and was financially supported by FEDER Funds and National Funds through FCT under project CENTRO-01-0145-FEDER-029312. This paper is also based upon work from COST Action CA15127 (“Resilient communication services protecting end-user appli- cations from disaster-based failures – RECODIS”) supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology).


  1. 1.
    Tipper D (2014) Resilient network design: challenges and future directions. Telecommun Syst 56(1):5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gomes T, Tipper D, Alashaikh A (2014) A novel approach for ensuring high end-to-end availability: the spine concept. In: 10th International conference design of reliable communication networks (DRCN). IEEE, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alashaikh A, Gomes T, Tipper D (2015) The spine concept for improving network availability. Comput Netw 82:4–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rak J, Pickavet M, Trivedi KS, Lopez JA, Koster AMCA, Sterbenz JPG, Çetinkaya EK, Gomes T, Gunkel M, Walkowiak K, Staessens D (2015) Future research directions in design of reliable communication systems. Telecommun Syst 60(4):423–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cholda P, Mykkeltveit A, Helvik B, Wittner O, Jajszczyk A (2007) A survey of resilience differentiaion frameworks in communication networks. IEEE Commun Surv 9(4):32–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang H, Durresi A (2002) Differentiated multi-layer survivability in IP/WDM networks. IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium NOMS 2002:681–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kantarci B, Mouftah HT, Oktug S (2008) Arranging shareability dynamically for the availability-constrained design of optical transport networks. In: Proceedings - IEEE symposium on computers and communications, pp 68–73Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tornatore M, Lucerna D, Mukherjee B, Pattavina A (2012) Multilayer protection with availability guarantees in optical WDM networks. J Netw Syst Manag 20:34–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhou L, Held M, Member A, Sennhauser U (2007) Connection availability analysis of shared backup path-protected mesh networks. J Lightwave Technol 25(5):1111–1119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xia M, Tornatore M, Sevilla S, Shi L, Martel CU, Mukherjee B (2011) A novel SLA framework for time-differentiated resilience in optical mesh networks. IEEE/OSA J Opt Commun Network 3(4):312–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garbin DA, Knepley JE, Park F, South D, Church F (2009) Design and analysis of high availability networks. In: IEEE Conference on technologies for homeland security, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Verbrugge S, Colle D, Demeester P, Huelsermann R, Jaeger M (2005) General availability model for multilayer transport networks. In: 5th IEEE International workshop on design of reliable communication networks, 2005. DRCN 2005Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu VY, Tipper D (2013) Spare capacity allocation using shared backup path protection for dual link failures. Comput Commun 36(6):666–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Babay A, Wagner E, Dinitz M, Amir Y (2017) Timely, reliable, and cost-effective internet transport service using dissemination graphs. In: IEEE 37th international conference on distributed computing systems (ICDCS), Atlanta, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang J, Modiano E, Hay D (2015) Enhancing network robustness via shielding. In: 11th International conference on the design of reliable communication networks (DRCN), pp 17–24Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang J, Modiano E, Hay D (2017) Enhancing network robustness via shielding. IEEE/ACM Trans Network 25:2209–2222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Botton Q, Fortz B, Gouveia L (2015) On the hop-constrained survivable network design problem with reliable edges. Comput Oper Res 64:159–167MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pacharintanakul P, Tipper D (2009) Crosslayer survivable mapping in overlay-IP-WDM networks. In: Proceedings of the 2009 7th international workshop on the design of reliable communication networks, DRCN 2009. IEEE, pp 168–174Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rausand M, Hoyland R (2003) System reliability theory: models, statistical methods and applications, 2nd edn. Wiley InterscienceGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alashaikh A, Tipper D, Gomes T (2017) Exploring the logical layer to support differentiated resilience classes in multilayer networks. Ann Telecommun, 1–17Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alashaikh A, Tipper D, Gomes T (2016) Supporting differentiated resilience classes in multilayer networks. In: 12th International conference on the design of reliable communication networks (DRCN). IEEE, pp 31–38Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vasseur J-P, Pickavet M, Demeester P (2004) Network recovery: protection and restoration of optical, SONET-SDH, IP, and MPLS. Elsevier, Morgan Kaufmann PublishersGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Grover WD (2003) Failure impacts, survivability principles, and measures of survivability. In: Grover WD (ed) Mesh-based survivable networks: options and strategies for optical, MPLS, SONET and ATM networking. ch. 3. Prentice Hall PTR, pp 103–172Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Crawford D (1993) Fiber optic cable dig-ups: causes and curesGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Snow AP (1997) A reliability assessment of the public switched telephone network infrastructure. PhD thesis, School of Information Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. AAI9812414Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rados I, Sunaric T, Turalija P (2002) Suggestions for availability improvement of optical cables. In: 1st IEEE International conference on circuits and systems for communications, 2002. Proceedings. ICCSC ’02. IEEE, pp 234–239Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chang H-Y, Chen I-K, Chiang W-C (2011) A simple network-engineering approach for improving connection availability in WDM networks. In: 2011 IEEE Workshops of international conference on advanced information networking and applications, pp 805–807Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chang H-Y, Wang P-C (2018) Upgrading service availability of optical networks: a labor force perspective. Int J Commun Syst 31:1–15Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Marcus E, Stern H (2003) Blueprints for high availability, 2nd edn. Wiley PublishingGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nagae T, Wakabayashi H (2015) Differences in network reliability improvement by several importance indices. Transport Res Procedia 10:155–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Franke U (2012) Optimal IT service availability: shorter outages, or fewer? IEEE Trans Netw Serv Manag 1 (9):22–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liberti L, Cafieri S, Tarissan F (2009) Reformulations in mathematical programming: a computational approach. In: Foundations of computational intelligence volume 3: global optimization. Springer, Berlin, pp 153–234Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pašić A, Babarczi P, Kőrösi A (2017) Diversity coding-based survivable routing with QoS and differential delay bounds. Opt Switch Network 23:118–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Karp RM (2010) Reducibility among combinatorial problems. In: 50 years of integer programming 1958-2008: from the early years to the state-of-the-art. Springer, pp 219–241Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hu JQ (2003) Diverse routing in optical mesh networks. IEEE Trans Commun 51:489–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Li C-L, Thomas McCormick S, Simchi-Levi D (1992) Finding disjoint paths with different path-costs: complexity and algorithms. Networks 22(7):653–667MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Beshir A, Kuipers F (2009) Variants of the min-sum link-disjoint paths problem. In: 16th Annual symposium on communications and vehicular technology in the Benelux (SCVT 2009). IEEE/SCVTGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Orlowski S, Pióro M, Tomaszewski A, Wessäly R (2010) SNDlib 1.0–survivable network design library. Networks 55(3):276–286Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Martínez R, Casellas R, Vilalta R, Muñoz R (2015) GMPLS / PCE-controlled multi-flow optical transponders in elastic optical networks [invited]. J Opt Commun Network 7(11):71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Colle D, De Maesschalck S, Develder C, Van Heuven P, Groebbens A, Cheyns J, Lievens I, Pickavet M, Lagasse P, Demeester P (2002) Data-centric optical networks and their survivability. IEEE J Selected Areas Commun 20(1):6–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institut Mines-Télécom and Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUmm Al-Qura UniversityMeccaSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Graduate Telecommunications and Networking Program, School of Computing and InformationUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  3. 3.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal
  4. 4.Institute for Systems Engineering and Computers at Coimbra (INESC Coimbra)CoimbraPortugal

Personalised recommendations