Joint Optimization of Bandwidth and Latency in Software-Defined Optical Networks
Keywords:
software-defined optical networks; bandwidth optimization; latency; network control; optical infrastructure; governance; resilience; sustainability; fairnessAbstract
Software-defined optical networks are increasingly positioned as the programmable substrate for cloud computing, artificial intelligence, distributed data analytics, and latency-sensitive applications. Their central promise is not only flexible bandwidth allocation but also coordinated control of latency, resilience, and cost across optical and packet layers. This paper examines the joint optimization of bandwidth and latency in software-defined optical networks from a system-level perspective. It argues that bandwidth and latency cannot be treated as independent variables because capacity provisioning, routing, spectrum assignment, regeneration, buffering, and control-plane signaling create coupled trade-offs. The analysis synthesizes architectural foundations, elastic optical networking, traffic engineering, telemetry, orchestration, energy management, resilience, fairness, and governance. It highlights that joint optimization requires multi-objective control loops that incorporate physical-layer constraints, service-level objectives, policy requirements, and sustainability metrics. The paper also discusses deployment barriers in brownfield infrastructures, the risk of reinforcing market concentration, and the need for transparent governance of programmable optical resources. Case illustrations from cloud wide-area networks, data centers, and research networks show that different domains prioritize bandwidth and latency differently, complicating universal optimization models. The conclusion calls for interdisciplinary benchmarks, policy-aware orchestration, and robust mechanisms that protect fairness and resilience while enabling efficient use of optical infrastructure. Future work should integrate digital twins, open telemetry, and multi-stakeholder governance to ensure that software-defined optical network optimization serves broad social and economic goals rather than narrow efficiency alone.
References
1. McKeown, N., Anderson, T., Balakrishnan, H., Parulkar, G., Peterson, L., Rexford, J., Shenker, S., & Turner, J. (2008). OpenFlow: Enabling innovation in campus networks. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 38(2), 69–74. https://doi.org/10.1145/1355734.1355746
2. Kreutz, D., Ramos, F. M. V., Veríssimo, P. E., Rothenberg, C. E., Azodolmolky, S., & Uhlig, S. (2015). Software-defined networking: A comprehensive survey. Proceedings of the IEEE, 103(1), 14–76. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2014.2371999
3. Simeonidou, D., Nejabati, R., & Channegowda, M. (2013). Software-defined optical networks technology and infrastructure: Enabling software-defined optical network operations. Journal of Optical Communications and Networking, 5(10), A274–A282. https://doi.org/10.1364/JOCN.5.00A274
4. Gerstel, O., Jinno, M., Lord, A., & Yoo, S. J. B. (2012). Elastic optical networking: A new dawn for the optical layer? IEEE Communications Magazine, 50(2), S12–S20. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2012.6146481
5. Jinno, M., Takara, H., Kozicki, B., Tsukishima, Y., Sone, Y., & Matsuoka, S. (2009). Spectrum-efficient and scalable elastic optical path network: Architecture, benefits, and enabling technologies. IEEE Communications Magazine, 47(11), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2009.5307468
6. Tomkos, I., Azodolmolky, S., Sole-Pareta, J., Careglio, D., & Palkopoulou, E. (2014). A tutorial on the flexible optical networking paradigm: State of the art, trends, and research challenges. Proceedings of the IEEE, 102(9), 1317–1337. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2014.2334693
7. Zhou, Z., Wei, J., Luo, Y., Clark, K. A., Sillekens, E., Deakin, C., ... & Liu, Z. (2023). Communications with guaranteed bandwidth and low latency using frequency-referenced multiplexing. Nature Electronics, 6(9), 694-702.
8. Napoli, A., Bohn, M., Rafique, D., Stavdas, A., Sambo, N., Poti, L., Nölle, M., Fischer, J. K., Riccardi, E., Pagano, A., Castoldi, P., & Tomkos, I. (2015). Next generation elastic optical networks: The vision of the European research project IDEALIST. IEEE Communications Magazine, 53(2), 152–162. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2015.7045403
9. Hong, C.-Y., Kandula, S., Mahajan, R., Zhang, M., Gill, V., Nanduri, M., & Wattenhofer, R. (2013). Achieving high utilization with software-driven WAN. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 43(4), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/2534169.2486012
10. Jain, S., Kumar, A., Mandal, S., Ong, J., Poutievski, L., Singh, A., Venkata, S., Wanderer, J., Zhou, J., Zhu, M., Zolla, J., Hölzle, U., Stuart, S., & Vahdat, A. (2013). B4: Experience with a globally-deployed software defined WAN. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 43(4), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/2534169.2486019
11. Al-Fares, M., Loukissas, A., & Vahdat, A. (2008). A scalable, commodity data center network architecture. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 38(4), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1145/1402958.1402967
12. Greenberg, A., Hamilton, J., Maltz, D. A., & Patel, P. (2008). The cost of a cloud: Research problems in data center networks. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 39(1), 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1145/1496091.1496103
13. Benson, T., Akella, A., & Maltz, D. A. (2010). Network traffic characteristics of data centers in the wild. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement (pp. 267–280). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1879141.1879175
14. Kandula, S., Sengupta, S., Greenberg, A., Patel, P., & Chaiken, R. (2009). The nature of data center traffic: Measurements and analyses. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement (pp. 202–208). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1644893.1644918
15. Chiaraviglio, L., Mellia, M., & Neri, F. (2012). Minimizing ISP network energy cost: Formulation and solutions. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 20(2), 463–476. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNET.2011.2161487
16. Sterbenz, J. P. G., Hutchison, D., Çetinkaya, E. K., Jabbar, A., Rohrer, J. P., Schöller, M., & Smith, P. (2010). Resilience and survivability in communication networks: Strategies, principles, and survey of disciplines. Computer Networks, 54(8), 1245–1265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2010.03.005
17. Clark, D. D., Wroclawski, J., Sollins, K. R., & Braden, R. (2005). Tussle in cyberspace: Defining tomorrow's Internet. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 13(3), 462–475. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNET.2005.850224
18. Frischmann, B. M. (2012). Infrastructure: The social value of shared resources. Oxford University Press.
19. Open Networking Foundation. (2014). SDN architecture, issue 1.0. Open Networking Foundation.
20. Ceccarelli, D., & Lee, Y. (2018). Framework for abstraction and control of traffic engineered networks (ACTN) (RFC 8453). Internet Engineering Task Force. https://doi.org/10.17487/RFC8453
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Engineering and Systems
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
