A management architecture for IP over WDM integration

Dr. Fotis Karayannis

1
, Mr. Lampros Raptis
2
, Dr. Joan Serrat
3
, Mr. Giorgos Chatzilias
2
, Mr.
Dimitris Chronis
4

1
OTE Consulting
2
National Technical University of Athens
3
Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya
4
Hellenic Telecommunications Organisation SA

Abstract
Most trends in IP-WDM integration exhibit the volition to extend the distributed Internet
network control approach to the Optical Layer using signalling mechanisms either in an
Overlay model or a Peer model. This paper proposes an alternative approach for providing
Internet services over the Optical Transport Network by extending the telecom-style network
management approach to the IP layer with the cooperation of MPLS Internet protocol. The
appropriate synergy and integration of the two layers is performed with management
functions capable of performing integrated provisioning of Label Switched Paths (LSPs) over
optical channels, as well as integrated multi-layer fault and performance management. This
approach is a mid-term solution, followed by a transition period where the control and
management plane will interact with each other, till the signalling mechanisms gradually
dominate the IP over optical area. The proposed management solution has been adopted and
is being investigated by WINMAN
1,
an ongoing European research and development project,
whose aim is to offer an integrated network management solution for the provisioning of end-
to-end IP connectivity services derived from Service Level Agreements (SLAs).

Keywords:
Integrated Network Management System (INMS), CORBA, TMN, IP, MPLS, LSP,
WDM, Och, ASON, MPlambdaS, Overlay, Peer
1 Introduction

Todays efforts in the telecom industry and the Internet community are characterised by the
trend to automate the provisioning of connectivity in terms of Optical Channels (OCh) in the
WDM layer or Label Switched Paths in the MPLS layer through the use of the control plane
using signalling protocols. The frameworks working in this direction are the ASON/ASTN
towards the first and MplambdaS and GMPLS towards the latter. ASON is pursued among
other standardisation bodies by the ITU-T SG 13 and 15, while MPLambdaS and GMPLS are
more related to the IETF technical groups like IP over Optics (IPO). One of the basic reasons
for using the control plane is to speed up circuit provision, which otherwise can take up to
months in the case of OChs. However, this is not the case with the network operators that
have developed their own management systems, either WDM or IP/MPLS that allow
hundreds of OChs or LSPs to be up or taken down each day by means of autorouting and
network configuration tools. WINMAN is based on the latter approach, i.e. using the
management plane for fast and efficient establishment of MPLS LSP or Optical Channels not
only separately for each layer, but in an integrated way for both layers, providing integrated
configuration, performance and fault management functionality.

1 The "WDM and IP Network Management (WINMAN)" project http://www.telecom.ntua.gr/winman, started on
July 2000, and is co-funded by the European Community under the IST Programme. The partners of the WINMAN consortium
are: Lucent Technologies Nederland, Ellemedia Technologies Ltd., Telefnica I+D, Portugal Telecom Inovaao, Hellenic
Telecommunications Organization (OTE) SA, OTE Consulting, National Technical University of Athens, University College of
London, Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya and TTI Telecom. The views presented in this paper reflect the authors opinions.

The concept of Control Plane and Management Plane has been introduced in the B-ISDN
Reference Model [1]. The control-based scheme is a real-time approach using signalling
distributed protocols among network elements for service provisioning and traffic engineering
and it is the approach that is used in the Internet. On the other hand, the management based-
scheme is a near-real-time approach for managing the network through appropriate external
interfaces that the network devices offer towards the operator. This approach is fostered by
the Telecom Operators community. In parallel, IP and WDM technologies provide distinct
services to its customers, and their interaction is kept under the plain encapsulation of IP
client layer packets in lower order server technologies. What has been proposed by most
researchers is to extend the signalling mechanisms of the Internet to the WDM layer and
control in an integrated way the two layers with the Internet style. This paper proposes not
only preserving the telecom style approach in the Optical Layer, but also extending it into the
IP layer for the provisioning of integrated Internet services using management functions.

2 Control vs Management Approaches for Multi-layer
Integration

2.1 Control Plane Approach
Control plane is used in the literature to refer to the set of real-time mechanisms and
algorithms needed for call or connection control. It deals mainly with the signalling to set-up,
supervise and release calls and connections [1]. Although, a detailed de-composition of the
control plane and a description of each component is not the purpose of this paper, we can
safely assume that the signalling protocol for connection set-up and the routing protocols
supporting network discovery are the most significant features of the control plane. In that
respect, it is significantly easier to follow all the recent advances and proposals about the
integration of multiple layers such as IP/MPLS, ATM, SDH, WDM, but focusing in the
integration of IP-electrical world and the WDM-Optical ones.

Different business models [2] have been identified for the Multi-layer integration, each one
imposing different requirements, mainly in the areas of security and dissemination of
topology information. In [13] and [14] three inter-working scenarios are described:
- The Overlay model, where the routing algorithm, topology distribution and
connection set-up signalling protocols of the IP and the WDM networks are independent
- The Peer model, where the IP network has full topological view of the optical
network and just a single routing algorithm instance is running in both the IP and the WDM
network
- The Augmented model, being a combination of the previous two models. Each layer
has its own protocols, however routing information exchange is allowed between the two
layers.
The overlay model is the one that allows an easy migration from the existing situation to the
deployment of optical network elements (ONEs) for the transport of the IP directly over
WDM. However, the implementation complexity of this model is a burden and it does not
promote the integration of the control plane of the IP and the WDM networks. Only a formal
request is passed from the client layer to the server layer. On the other hand, the peer model,
which promotes the integration of the control plane of the IP and the WDM networks, is
simpler in implementation, but its operation is far more complex than the overlay. In addition,
the separation of the IP and WDM administrative domains (Internet Service Provider versus
Lambda Service Provider), which usually is desirable, is not straightforward. Finally, the
augmented model is the golden mean, combing the advantages of the peer and overlay model
and minimizing their disadvantages at the same time.
In our opinion, such an automatic provisioning of end-to-end IP services cannot yet be
provided by signalling means in a real network environment, since all the above-mentioned
proposals are still in an early stage. Since standards are in their definition phase, the
interoperability of ONEs belonging to different manufactures is an open issue and is not
foreseen in the instant future. Additionally, the different approaches or proposals are currently
implemented and evaluated in field trials and have not been deployed in real network
environments, which are much more complex than the lab environments.
Many standardization bodies as well as international fora have addressed the issue of
integrating the control plane of the MPLS-capable IP and the WDM network elements (NE).
The ITU-T study groups 13 and 15 are working on the direction of Automatic Switched
Optical Networks (ASON)/Automatic Switched Transport Networks (ASTN) framework. In
parallel ASON is being investigated by multiple European research projects such as IST and
EURESCOM and is being closely followed by the different vendors. [2]
ASON extends the Optical Transport Network (OTN) idea [3], having the capability of
provisioning in an automatic and fast way end-to-end Optical Channel connections via the
control plane as the outcome of a request of any client layer called User such as IP/MPLS,
ATM, SDH etc. through a User to Network Interface (UNI) interface, where the Network is
the enhanced OTN, and a Network to Network Interface (NNI). In other words the UNI is the
interface between the control planes of the client layer such as MPLS and the ASON, while
the NNI is the interface between the control plane of the ASON ONEs or Optical
Subnetworks, either of the same administrative domain called Internal NNI (I-NNI) or of
different administrative domains called Exterior NNI or (E-NNI). In addition, ASON
promotes the interaction between the management plane and the ASON control plane through
a corresponding management interface called NMI-A, that is capable of triggering and
monitoring the request instead of the UNI, and in this case the latter request is further
propagated through the NNIs. The connections that are foreseen in the ASON framework are
the switched optical channels through the UNI/NNI and the soft permanent optical
channels through the NMI-A/NNI. ITU-T will try to push the soft permanent schema first,
because of its easier and faster deployment as opposed to the switched ones, whose
standardisation will require much more effort and time.
ASTN has generalised the framework and the control/management architecture also to cover
the SDH layer, while ASON now focuses on the detailed functional requirements for each
transport layer. Nevertheless, ASTN/ASON deals up to now with the automating provisioning
of connectivity in the WDM and SDH layers, and not the IP/MPLS layers. ASON supposes
the overlay model, which as mentioned has different advantages in its Business Model, such
as the separation of the client and server layer administrative domains. Besides ITU
initiatives, the OIF and the ODSI forums have made one step towards the definition of the
appropriate UNI signalling messages ([5], [6]), which will allow the dynamic set-up of end-
to-end connections between IP routers spanning the optical network. The latter has suspended
its operation as announced in their official site [reference to OIF].
On the other hand, the IETF has proposed the MPLambdaS framework [4], which extends
the MPLS ideas to the optical domain, allowing the re-usability of the existing Internet
protocols with the appropriate extensions. The OSPF as well as the IS-IS routing protocols
have been enhanced to disseminate information relevant to the optical domain ([7] , [8]).
Furthermore, [10] and [9] present the mapping between the signalling messages defined in [5]
and existing IP/MPLS signalling protocols, namely RSVP-TE and CR-LDP. MplambdaS was
based on the peer model, enabling the direct interaction and integrated routing among the two.
IEFT extended the MPLambdaS framework with Generalised MPLS or GMPLS [11], which
was limited to MPLS/WDM interaction to multiple layers. In this sense, Label Switch Routers
(LSR) can take forwarding decisions based not only on packets and cells but also on time
slots, wavelengths and physical ports. In [11] four classes of interfaces on LSRs are being
defined, namely the Packet-Switch Capable (PSC), the Time Division Multiplex Capable
(TDM), the Lambda Switch Capable (LSC) and finally the Fibre Switch Capable (FSC).
Using label stacking, a forwarding hierarchy can be built, where at the top of the hierarchy
FSC interfaces are present, incorporating LSC interfaces, which in turn incorporate TDM
interfaces, followed by PSC interfaces. GMPLS is not restricted by the Peer model, but is
extended to cope with the overlay or augmented models. MPLambdaS, in contradiction to
ASON/ASTN, focused in the provisioning of MPLS LSPs, but it was extended through
GMPLS to multiple layers, thus becoming a superset of ASON as far as the context is
concerned.
It is obvious that one of the main reasons for the above control plane frameworks is the
acceleration of the connectivity provisioning. Nevertheless, this is not the case for some of the
equipment vendors or telecom operators that through their sophisticated management systems
can do a series of functions covering the control plane functionality. In the next section this
view is being described, which as a medium-term solution is proposed by this paper.

2.2 Management Plane Approach

The term management plane is used in the literature to refer to the set of near real-time
management mechanisms and algorithms related to the system as a whole and to the OAM
[1]. It deals mainly with the procedures related to five functional areas, namely Configuration,
Fault, Accounting, Performance and Security (FCAPS). The three main management
functions of the FCAPS, which have similar functionality with the control plane functions,
thus competing each other, are path provisioning with routing and QoS support, in the
Configuration Management Area, and automatic recovery of failures or performance
degradations in the Fault and Performance Management Areas. Network Management
functionality mainly exists independently for the IP-electrical world and the WDM-Optical
world rather than for the integration of the two worlds. In this direction we will first deal with
the advances and proposals for IP layer and WDM layer separately and then we will provide
the limited efforts on their integration.
The appearance of the MPLS protocol makes the IP network resemble a connection-oriented
network. This paves the way to extend network and service management to the IP layer. On
the other hand, the paradigm of Policy Based Network Management (PBNM) enters also into
the arena with the Common Open Policy Service (COPS) ([15], [16]). The motivation is to be
able to automate the management of the network devices and hence to allow scalable network
management solutions. Very recently, the IETF has already provided policies and mapping
mechanisms for networks based on MPLS. The opportunities of MPLS and PBNM will be
further investigated in our research work.
On the other hand, Management is dominant in the Optical Layer. WDM equipment
manufacturers have adopted the SDH-style Management Systems although standardisation
efforts are not yet paving very fast. They provide TMN-layered sophisticated management
systems in the Element Management Layer (EML) -Element Managers- and Network
Management Layer (NML) -Network Managers. Service Management Layer (SML)
functionality, although still limited in commercial products, is complementary to the Network
Layer providing end-to-end path provisioning services specialised per customer (optical
channels, optical VPNs) and limited fault or performance management to identify service
impact for client signals, mainly ATM and SDH.
In addition some lightweight integration is performed by including the WDM management
functionality inside the SDH management systems. Real multi-technology management
integration in terms of configuration, fault or performance is still under development in
commercial product releases. Efforts have been reported on SDH/WDM, which are now
commercially available, providing integrated end-to-end SDH paths over WDM OChs. As a
next step ATM/SDH/WDM or even IP/ATM/SDH/WDM integrated management systems
will appear, capturing the strong demand for IP oriented services.
Tele Management Forum (TMF) has launched a series of programs along with the supporting
catalyst projects to capture the needs of network operators and service providers to enable the
technology integration and the end-to-end process automation of telecommunications and
data services operations [17]. The Telecom Operations Map (TOM) is one of the main
frameworks for accomplishing the above mission. The TOM defines the business processes
and their interactions used by Service Providers in the Customer, Service and Network
Management areas. In this context, TMF has adopted and started specifying a transport-
technology-independent common management interface from the EML towards the NML and
from the NML towards the SML, sometimes called the Open CORBA interface. The
transport technologies under consideration are ATM, SDH and WDM domains with the focus
of attention given to WDM, being soon the new dominant in transport networks. As a next
step, the technology neutral management interface will be adapted to an IP connection-
oriented model characterised by MPLS technology. In this view, the necessity of an
Integrated or Inter-technology-domain NMS (INMS) is pointed out by most manufacturers
serving as an umbrella on top of the single technology domain management systems,
providing southbound IDL interfaces towards the technology-domains and northbound
interfaces to the Service Management Systems (SMS).
3 Proposed Management Architecture
Such an Inter-technology Management Architecture is proposed by this paper. The
management architecture is obviously based on an overlay model and identifies a
management system for each technology i.e. IP/MPLS, ATM, SDH and WDM accompanied
by one Inter-technology management system [18]. This paper focuses only on the INMS and
on the MPLS-capable-IP and WDM management systems, since ATM and SDH have been
dealt extensively in the past. The proposed system architecture is composed by one INMS and
several NMSs devoted to the specific network technologies. The main focus will be the
implementation of the INMS for Configuration, Fault and Performance Management with
open interfaces to the Service Management and the Network Management Systems of the
WDM and IP technologies complemented with a Graphical User Interface. The work done by
TMF will be used as a starting point with the appropriate extensions to support the IP
technology. Our intention is to define and implement a standard connection-oriented
technology neutral interface supporting IP and WDM technologies. In addition, the WDM
and IP NMS will be designed and implemented from scratch, following a technology-neutral
internal architecture and providing in turn open interfaces towards the vendor-specific WDM
and IP EMSs.

3.1 Business Model
Figure 1 depicts the elements of the corresponding business model, the involved actors and
the services or facilities they can get through their interaction. The proposed management
solution is intended for two broad categories of users. The first category consists of network
operators or ISPs (with or without their own network infrastructure). These users will make
use of such management architecture to increase revenues by offering improved and more
efficient services to their customers. The second category of users are third parties interested
in building sophisticated management solutions for their own services (i.e. Virtual Private
Networks subscribers). Both categories of users will shape the system requirements.

In the field of the services, two types are considered. The first type includes connectivity
services that support real-time data transport over IP, like voice and multimedia applications
(Voice over IP-VoIP, Multimedia over IP-MoIP). The second type embraces connectivity
services for the establishment of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs).

The proposed architecture, which is derived from the enterprise model, is depicted in figure 2.
This approach is independent of the transport network technology. This means that, although
the lowest transport network layer equipment will always be the WDM, the equipment
between IP and the WDM layer could be ATM and SDH, or SDH only (IP/SDH/WDM), or
none, with just a thin adaptation layer realized by the IP equipment (Packet over SDH,
Gigabit Ethernet etc.) The solution will add value by integrating the management of the above
mentioned transport layers as opposed to the independent management of each of them
individually. The emphasis will be on the operational aspects of these scenarios. The overall
problem of designing, deploying, managing and controlling an IP Optical Network
encompasses several areas including: network design and configuration, Performance
Monitoring, Fault Management, IP/WDM routing and Topology management.

Figure 1 Proposed Business Model

Classification and characterisation not only of the current, but also of the upcoming and future
IP-based applications is considered another research goal in order to get an open and flexible
approach. Service requirements derived from pre-determined Service Level Agreements
(SLAs) will be converted into policies, which in turn will be enforced by management
systems.

3.2 System architecture
The proposed management systems will be designed by applying mainly Open Distributed
Processing (ODP) principles taking also into consideration the Telecommunications
Management Network (TMN) framework. The TMN architecture structures the management
complexity by layering the management applications, defining a common data model,
enabling re-use of management data, and specifying system interfaces. ODP goes one step
further, enabling the design of management applications that are independent of distribution,
the underlying infrastructure and management protocols.


VPN Business
User
VoIP Business
User
VoIP Residential
User
PSTN Business
User
PSTN Residential
User
VPN Business
Customer
VoIP Business
Customer
VoIP Residential
Customer
PSTN Business
Customer
PSTN Residential
Customer
VPN Service
Provider
VoIP Service
Provider
Other
VASP
N MS Network
and Service
Provider
IP Network
Provider
ATM Network
Provider
SDH Network
Provider
WDM Network
Provider
IP Network
Management
Provider
SDH Network
Management
Provider
WDM Net work
Management
Provider
ATM Network
Management
Provider
VPN Business
User
VoIP Business
User
VoIP Residential
User
PSTN Business
User
PSTN Residential
User
VPN Business
Customer
VoIP Business
Customer
VoIP Residential
Customer
PSTN Business
Customer
PSTN Residential
Customer
VPN Service
Provider
VoIP Service
Provider
Other
VASP
N MS Network
Management
Provider
IP Network
Provider
ATM Network
Provider
SDH Network
Provider
WDM Network
Provider
IP Network
Management
Provider
SDH Network
Management
Provider
WDM Network
Management
Provider
ATM Network
Management
Provider
M oIP Business
User
M oIP Business
Customer
VPN Business
User
VoIP Business
User
VoIP Residential
User
PSTN Business
User
PSTN Residential
User
VPN Business
Customer
VoIP Business
Customer
VoIP Residential
Customer
PSTN Business
Customer
PSTN Residential
Customer
VPN Service
Provider
VoIP Service
Provider
Other
VASP
N MS Network
and Service
Provider
IP Network
Provider
ATM Network
Provider
SDH Network
Provider
WDM Network
Provider
IP Network
Management
Provider
SDH Network
Management
Provider
WDM Network
Management
Provider
ATM Network
Management
Provider
VPN Business
User
VoIP Business
User
VoIP Residential
User
PSTN Business
User
PSTN Residential
User
VPN Business
Customer
VoIP Business
Customer
VoIP Residential
Customer
PSTN Business
Customer
PSTN Residential
Customer
VPN Service
Provider
VoIP Service
Provider
I N MS Network
Management
Provider
IP Network
Provider
ATM Network
Provider
SDH Network
Provider
WDM Network
Provider
IP Network
Management
Provider
SDH Network
Management
Provider
WDM Network
Management
Provider
ATM Network
Management
Provider
M oIP Business
User
M oIP Business
Customer
ISP Service
Provider
Other VASP
Provider
VASP
Provider
The project is implementing an Inter-technology Network Management System (INMS) for
Configuration, Fault and Performance Management with an open interface to the Service
Management and the Network Management Systems of the different domains (WDM, IP,
ATM, and SDH) complemented with a GUI. These open interfaces will support applications
from different users (e.g. third parties that want to manage by themselves the capacity that
they hire from a transport network operator), and will run in a multi-vendor environment.

Figure 2: Proposed Management Architecture

The components of the above systems can be distributed over a number of nodes connected
by the Data Communication Network. The components have a published interface, over
which they can request and send information. The degree of distribution in that case is
transparent to the components of the proposed solution. The components do not have
knowledge on the location of the other components, whether they are collocated on the same
node or running on a node thousands of kilometres away. The maximum degree of
distribution is to have one node for every management component. These concepts are
depicted in the figure 3.

The following identif ied functional requirements have been considered per management area:
Configuration Management
The Configuration Management application enables single point access to provisioning tasks
and to end-to-end views of connections and their underlying infrastructure and facilities,
independent of the technology. The main function is:
The Provisioning of end-to-end Label Switched Paths (LSPs) over Optical Channels
using MPLS technology with QoS support. In this context the Inter Technology
Management System should be capable of calculating (routing), designing and creating
MPLS LSPs over the corresponding OChs in the optical layer.
Fault Management
The Fault Management application collects faults across different technology NMSs and
determines the root cause and the layer responsible for the fault. Topology information and
IP ATM SDH WDM
IP
NMS
ATM
NMS
SDH
NMS
WDM
NMS
SERVICE LEVEL
Integrated Level
Technology
Dependent Level
NETWORK LEVEL
NETWORK-ELEMENT
LEVEL
Network
Operator GUI
THIRD PARTIES API
INTER-TECHNOLOGY NMS
CM FM
PM
Systems will
not be
implemented
WWW
user-defined rules are applied to faults received from the NMSs fault managers. The main
function is:
The report and recovery of faults in the IP or Optical layer in an intelligent and integrated
way. Reporting of primary faults should be supported after the corresponding filtering,
analysis and correlation of the multiple alarms that are propagated in case of a single
fault. The report should include all the attributes of the anticipated alarms together with
the list of affected LSPs. An automatic fault restoration mechanism should apply to
restore all the affected LSPs triggered by the inter- technology management system after
the integrated analysis and correlation of the propagated alarms.

IP
EMS
Domain
Manager
NMS
SDH
EMS
Domain
Manager
NMS
ATM
EMS
Domain
Manager
NMS
End-to-End
Design
Manager
Inter-Domain
Configuration Manager
Design
DB
Implementa
tion
Manager
Perfroma
nce
Manager
PM data
DB
Inter-Domain
Performance Manager
Fault
Topology
DB
Fault
Correlation
Manager
Inter-Domain
Fault Manager
WDM
EMS
Domain
Manager
NMS
Inventory
DB
Physical
Inventory
Manager
Published CORBA API
Service Management Layer
Published CORBA API
WDM SDH ATM
Systems will
not be
implemented
IP
Network
Element
Level
Network
Management
Level
Network
Element
Management
Level
Network
Operator
GUI
Service
Management
Level
Service Management
Trouble
Manager
Customer
Service
Manager
Service
Level
Reporter
Billing
Manager
Order
Manager

Figure 3: WINMAN System Architecture

Performance Management
The Performance Management application collects data from the technology NMSs and
processes these data in order to assess the performance of the network and the usage of the
resources. Based on these assessment results, the operator is able to perform pro-active
management of transport capacity across their multi-layer network and is able to perform pro-
active management in order to prevent congestions (hot-spots) affecting the service in the
network. The main function is to:
Monitor, filter and report performance data. The INMS shall monitor the basic traffic and
QoS network parameters of the LSPs and report service degradations in case of
performance gauges or counters threshold crossings.
The above functionality is currently being designed in the WINMAN research project [18]
and will be implemented, tested and demonstrated in a field trial.

4 Evaluation and field trials
Consistent with the main objective of this project, the WINMAN solution, in essence a
management software product, will be validated on a trial infrastructure, equipped with
appropriately interconnected Network Elements (NEs), the corresponding management
platforms and one or more data connection networks (DCNs).





Figure 4: WINMAN Trial Configuration

Partners in the consortium will provide test sites or even public networks [19] for the
validation and verification of the WINMAN management solutions. These sites offer different
types of networks (IP/WDM, IP/ATM/SDH/WDM, and other combinations) and different
types of IP applications running on these networks. The project will investigate these sites and
will determine, based on pre-defined criteria, sites suitable for WINMAN deployment.

Optical ADM
OpticalADM
Optical ADM
Hub
Gigabit
Ethernet
switch
LAN
(10/100 Mbs
IP/Ethernet)
Gigabit Ethernet
switch/
IProuter
DPE Platform
WDM IP ATM SDH
InterDomain Performance Management (PM)
InterDomain Fault Management (FM)
InterDomain Configuration Management(CM)
LAN
(10/100 Mbs
IP/Ethernet)
Optical ADM
Optical ADM
OpticalADM
Hub
Gigabit
Ethernet
switch
Gigabit
Ethernet
switch
LAN
(10/100 Mbs
IP/Ethernet)
Gigabit Ethernet
switch/
IP router
Internet
IP WDM
EMS CM, FM, PM
ENCAPSULATION
CM, FM, PM NMS
IP WDM
EMS CM, FM, PM
ENCAPSULATION
CM, FM, PM NMS
ATM SDH
EMS
encapsulation
CM, FM, PM
NMS
CM, FM, PM
ENCAPSULATION
DCN
The selected sites may be interconnected through the Internet. This will create the WINMAN
Infrastructure that will allow the project to validate and verify the Inter-Domain Network
Management solution for provisioning and maintenance of end-to-end IP connections
traversing hybrid transport networks. A possible instance of this trial configuration is depicted
in figure 4.
5 Conclusions
This paper gives an overview of the work carried out in the IST Project WINMAN whose
main task is to develop and validate an open and flexible integrated management of IP over
WDM networks. The project will contribute to the establishment and operation of worldwide
IP over WDM networks. The trials envisaged in the WINMAN project would demonstrate
inter-connectivity across a worldwide network management infrastructure in a multi-provider
and multi-domain environment.
The proposed architecture and enterprise model of the initial WINMAN specifications makes
possible the development, provision and validation of a novel Integrated Network
Management architecture for future IP networks.

During its two-year and a half life span, the WINMAN project will develop and validate
innovative solutions in the field of integrated management of IP over WDM networks.

6 Acknowledgements
This paper describes work undertaken and in progress in the context of the WINMAN IST
13305, a two and a half years research and development project during 2000-2002. The IST
programme is partially funded by the Commission of the European Union.

7 References
[1] ITU-T Recommendation I.321 (1991), B-ISDN Protocol reference model and its
application
[2] Workshop of the IST Project LION (Layers Interworking in Optical Networks)
Roadmap towards Next Generation Optical Networks, Turin 3-4 May, 2001
http://www.telecomitalialab.com/congressi_e.htm
[3] ITU-T Recommendation G.872 (02/99), Architecture of Optical Transport Networks
[4] D. Awduche et al. "Multi-Protocol Lambda Switching: Combining MPLS Traffic
Engineering Control With Optical Cross-connects", draft-awduche-mpls-te-optical-02.txt
[5] OIF contribution #2000.125.2: User Network Interface 1.0 Proposal, 31/10/2000
[6] Y. Cao, Y.Xu, ODSI Signalling Specification Optical Gateway Protocol, version
1.0, July 2000
[7] K.Kompella et al, OSPF Extensions in support of MPLambdaS, draft-kompella-
ospf-ompls-extensions-00.txt
[8] K.Kompella et al, IS-IS Extensions in support of MPLambdaS, draft-kompella-isis-
ompls-extensions-00.txt
[9] OIF contribution #2000.171.0, LDP Extensions for UNI 1.0, November 2000
[10] OIF contribution #2000.140.1, RSVP Extensions for Optical UNI Signalling,
August 2000
[11] P.Ashwood-Smith et al., "Generalized MPLS Signalling Functional Description",
draft-ashwood-generalized-mpls-signaling-00.txt
[12] M. Lazer et al, Requirements on the ASON UNI, draft-lin-mpls-ipo-ason-uni-00.txt
[13] B. Rajagopalan et al, IP over Optical Networks: A Framework, draft-many-ip-
optical-framework-01.txt
[14] R.Jain et al, IP over Optical Networks: A Summary of Issues, draft-osu-ipo-mpls-
issues-01.txt
[15] RFC 2748, Boyle, J., Cohen, R., Durham, D., Herzog, S., Rajan, R., Sastry, A., "The
COPS (Common Open Policy Service) Protocol", January 2000.
[16] Chan et al., "COPS Usage for Policy Provisioning," draft-ietf-rap-cops-pr-02.txt,
March 2000.
[17] Telemanagement Forum, http://www.tmforum.org
[18] J.Serrat et. Al., Integrated Management for IP end-to-end Transport Services over
WDM Networks IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management
IM 2001, 14-18 May 2001, Seattle
[19] Greek Research and Technology Network (GRNET),
http://www.grnet.gr/grnet2/ne_genia.htm