03-CS Space Division Switching 1pps

Switching, Part I
Circuit-Switching
Chapter 5:
Space-Division
Switching
David Larrabeiti
Jos Flix Kukielka
Piotr Pacyna
Mnica Corts
Space-Division Switches
Basic
Rectangular N x M matrix of crosspoints

9 Nx:
Number of crosspoints
9 Special
case:
M = N: Square matrix
N inputs
Scheme:
Crosspoint:
set (1,..3) of electronic
contacts which are activated
/ deactivated simultaneously
NX = M N
N X (square matrix) = N 2
Configuration
(control)
M outputs (N)
Switching, Chapter 5
Basic Structure for

Two-/Four-Wire Switches I
Using
a square matrix for four-wire

transmission:
Connection between i and j requires:

9 Activation
of two crosspoints: (i, j) and (j, i)

1
2
3
4
N
Example: Square matrix
for four-wire transmission
(j,i)
....
N-1
....
....
(i,j)
....
1 2 3 4
....
i
....
j
N-1 N
Basic Structure for

Two-/Four-Wire Switches II
For two-wire transmission
Only a single crosspoint necessary

Cost of implementation for a square matrix:
9
Roughly proportional to the number of crosspoints
Nx = N2
Highly inefficient scheme

9
E.g. if N = 1.000, Nx = 1.000.000
At maximum: only 1.000 points in use simultaneously
More efficient schemes necessary

Solution: Reduce the number of crosspoints
Tradeoff: Increased control complexity
Tradeoff: Scalability more complex to achieve
Important for electromechanical switches
Example: Two-Wire Switch
Requires activating only one

crosspoint (by definition,
e.g., the one of the source
row)
Square Matrix for two-wire
switches
(SIMPLE CONTROL)
1
2
3
4
i
j
N-1
N
123 4
N-1N
Improving Utilization: Folding
Remove crosspoints for (i, i) connections

Remove crosspoints for (j, i) connections
If j > i
Need more control logic
Test whether i < j

External cabling
1
2
3
4
Triangular or folded matrix for twowire switching

N2
N ( N 1)
< O N 2
NX =
= O
2
2
( )
No matter if the call

is originated by i or
j, the same
crosspoint is
activated
i
j
N-1
N
1 23 4
N-1 N
Extension of Basic Switches I

Easy
extension of square matrices
High scalability
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
N-1
N-1
1 2 3 4
j
N-1
N
1 2 3 4
N-1 N
Extending NxN
switch to a
(2N)x(2N) switch
N-1 N
1 2 3 4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
N-1
N-1
N
1 2 3 4
N-1 N
1 2 3 4
N-1 N
N-1 N
Extension of Basic Switches II

Difficult
extension of triangular matrices
9 Used
in switching centrals which are assumed not
to be extended (e.g., PBX)
1
2
3
4
Extending a NxN switch

to a (2N)x(2N) switch?
i
j
N-1
N-1
1 2 3 4
3
4
N1
N
1 2 3 4
N-1 N
Must re-cable all

connections and build
a new triangular
(2N)x(2N) matrix
N-1 N
??
N-1
N-1
N-1 N
N-1 N
1 2 3 4
N-1 N
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1
Reduction of Crosspoints
in Transit Switches
Assumption: In transit switches, not necessary that
each incoming link can be connected to each
outgoing link
1. Grading
2.
Construction of a switch with limited access to save

crosspoints
Sharing of links within the matrix
Division and tradeoff crosspoints vs. link
Increase the number of matrices at the expense of

requiring more links
With / without sharing links between matrices, which

makes control and extension of switches more complex
Example: Grading
Here:
50% reduction of number of

crosspoints
A well-chosen selection of the paths can
minimize access restrictions (= internal
blocking)
1
2
3
Input
4
5
6
7
8
Output
10
Example: Multiple Matrices I

200 subscribers, A0 = 10 erlang
Target GoS = 0.2%
How many crosspoints in the local central?
Simple solution: rectangular matrix
Advanced solution: Two matrices with 100 subscribers each
B = 0.002 = E(m, 5) m = 13 (26 in total)

Nx = 2 * (100 * 13) = 2600
More advanced solution: Four matrices with 50 subscribers

each
B = 0.002 = E (m, 10) m = 20

Nx = 200 * 20 = 4000
B = 0.002 = E(m, 2,5) m = 8 (32 in total)

Nx = 4 * (50 * 8) = 1800
Tradeoff: Number of crosspoints vs. number of links

11
Example: Multiple Matrices II

Number
Inputs per Traffic per Output per
of
matrix
matrix (erl)
matrix
matrices
10
5
2,5
1,25
20
13
9
6
Total
number of
crosspoints
Total
number of
output links
0,0019
0,0013
0,00086
0,0015
4000
1300
450
150
4000
2600
1800
1200
20
26
36
48
4.500
60
4.000
50
3.500
3.000
40
2.500
30
2.000
1.500
20
1.000
10
Total # crosspoints
500
Total links
200
100
50
25
Crosspoints
1
2
4
8
E(m,A)
Crosspoints
per matrix
Total number output links
0
1
Number of matrices
12
Sharing Links between Matrices

If
free links are used in a

sequential search:
Last links have low probability of

being busy
Share these last links between
matrices
Problem:
Higher control
complexity
1
2
100
12
10
11
12
1
2
100
12
10
11
12
13
Multiple-Stage Switching
In single-stage switches:
Only one specific crosspoint for a certain input / output

pair
9
Inefficiency
Low robustness: if the crosspoint fails, no alternative

connection
Multiple-stage switches:
Sharing of crosspoints
9
Several internal paths through the matrices using

different crosspoints
Design principle: Use of small matrices

9
Arranged in two or more stages
Interconnected by a mesh structure between the stages

14
Discussion: Multiple-Stage Switching
Advantage:
Reduction of crosspoints
9
Try to make usage of crosspoints more efficient
Use one crosspoint for several internal paths
Robustness: Have several path for one input / output pair
Use of regular and uniform structures to alleviate the

design and possible extensions
But: Potentially limited accessibility
(i.e. from all input links to all output links)
Might be restricted, even though there is a free output

link (but no free internal path)
INTERNAL BLOCKING
15
Two-Stage Switches: Example I
Continuation of previous example:
200 subscribers, A0 = 10 erlang

4x4
(1)
...
4x4
(50)
1st stage, 50 matrices
Meshed
interconnection
200 input links
50 x 6
(1)
50 x 6
(2)
50 x 6
(3)
24 output
links
50 x 6
(4)
2nd stage, 4 matrices
Nx = 50x(4x4) + 4x(50x6) = 2.000 crosspoints
Problem: Internal blocking possible

16
Two-Stage Switches:
Internal Blocking
Internal Blocking:
Only a single path available in the meshed

interconnection for one input and a given output:
Example: Connect input 2 and output 5
Input 1 and 3 can not be connected to output 4 or 6

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
3x3
4
5
6
7
8
9
17
Two-Stage Switches: Example II
Specify internal blocking in previous example:
One connection from 1st-stage switch 1 to 2nd-stage

switch 2
9
Bint = a = 0,05 for a concrete output link

9
No other connection possible
Probability that the necessary path is busy
Btot < [ a + E (6, 0,05 * 50) ]4 << 0.0001

9
Btot < 0,002 = GoS
Btot: congestion and internal blocking to any output
Only a rough calculation, not easy to separate Bint

and congestion blocking
18
Gain of Crosspoint Reduction

in Two-Stage Switches
Reduction of crosspoints:
E.g. for an NxN switch of n matrices nxn in each stage:
N = nn n = N
N X = 2n( n n) = 2 N
If N = 1000, Nx = 2.000.000
In contrast: Nx = 100.000.000 for a single square

matrix
At minimum three stages necessary to avoid

internal blocking
19
Multiple Stage Switches

Without Internal Blocking
To avoid internal blocking:

Have more than one path for each pair input - output
Based on the number of possible paths, the blocking
probability can be reduced or even eliminated
Example: Three stages with blocking

1
2
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
4
5
6
7
8
9
7
8
9
When adding the third stage, connect

input 2 with exit 5 and then connection
16 and 34 are possible
Having the connections

11, 22, and 58,
connection 37 is no
longer possible.
20
Generic Structure
of a Switch with Three Stages I
NxM
switch
k internal
paths
possible
1st stage
p = M/m
matrices
km
N M
n m
outputs
...
nk
...
inputs
...
...
b = N/n
matrices
k matrices
...
...
km
...
inputs
nk
...
N M
n m
outputs
3rd stage
2nd stage
21
Generic Structure
of a Switch with Three Stages II
Abbreviated
n
notation:
k
N/n
b=N/n
p=M/m
N X = bnk + k
Special
N
N M
NM
+ pkm = ( N + M ) k + k
< N *M
n m
nm
case: Symmetric NxN switch:

n
b=N/n
M/m
N/n
N/n
2
b=N/n
2
N
N
N X = bnk + k + bkn = 2 Nk + k < N 2
n
n
22
Theorem of Clos
for Three-Stage Switches
Basic question:
Possible to construct a three-stage switch without internal

blocking?
I.e. is there a minimum value for k which always allows to find
an internal path for a given input / output pair?
9
k: number of matrices in the 2nd stage
Theorem of Clos (1953), looking at the worst case:

9
Given an input and an output, find a 2nd-stage matrix which has

a free connection to the 1st-stage matrix and the 3rd-stage matrix
In the 1st-stage matrices of the input and the 3rd-stage matrices

of the output, in summary n-1 and m-1 connections are
occupied
Assumption: The given input link and the given output link are idle
9
Need at least one more 2nd-stage matrix
Clos condition:
k min = (n 1) + (m 1) + 1 = m + n 1
23
Theorem of Clos for Three-Stage

Switches: The Worst Case
N M
n m
nk
nk
n-1 busy
paths
n-1 free
paths
...
nk
N M
n m
m-1 free
paths
k m
N M
n m
...
Available
path
Busy
Free
Available
m-1 busy
paths
k m
N M
n m
N M
n m
k m
Available
path
Clos condition
k min = (n 1) + (m 1) + 1 = m + n 1
24
Theorem of Clos for

Symmetric Three-Stage Switches
M=N:
Clos condition:
k min = 2n 1
Crosspoints:
Optimization to minimize the number of

crosspoints:
2
2
N
N
N X Clos 3 ( N , n ) = 2 Nk + k = (2n 1) 2 N +
n
n
N X Clos 3 ( N , n )
=0
n
N X Clos 3
n optimal
mnimal
= 4N
n>>1
N>>1
N
2
2 N 1 = O( N 3 2 )
25
Comparison: Three-Stage Clos Switch

vs. Single-Stage Square Matrix
N
16
27
128
2048
131072
2
3
8
32
256
Crosspoints Clos
288
675
7.680
516.096
267.911.168
Crosspoints
square matrix
256
729
16.384
4.194.304
17.179.869.184
26
Multistage Switches based on Clos
n n (2n 1)
Example: Symmetric Clos

switch with 5 stages:
N/n
k=2n-1
m (2m 1)
N
N
nm nm
m (2m 1)
N
N
nm nm
N/(nm)
k =2m-1
(2n 1) n n
N/n
(2m 1) m
N/n
...
...
...
N/n
N N
n n
(2n 1) n n
...
N N
n n
...
n n (2n 1)
...
Given a three-stage switch

complying with the Clos
condition (Clos switches):
Reduce the number of
crosspoints even more by
substituting the 2nd-stage
switches by three-stage
Clos switches
(2m 1) m
N/(nm)
27
Multistage Switches based on Clos:

Abbreviated Notation
N
2n-1
N/n
N/n
m 2m-1
N/(nm)
N/n
N/n
2n-1
2n-1
N/(nm)
2m-1
n
N/n
N/(nm) 2m-1
N/n
N/(nm)
N
N
N
N X Clos 3 , m = 2 (2 m 1) + ( 2 m 1)
n
n
n
m
28

Crosspoints
for a Clos switch with 5
N X Clos 5 (N , n, m ) = 2
N
N
n (2n 1) + (2n 1)N X Clos 3 , m =
n
n
stages:
N N 2
= (2n 1) 2 N + (2m 1) 2 +
n n m
Optimization
of the number of crosspoints:
N X Clos 5 ( N , n, m )
=0
n
N X Clos 5 ( N , n, m )
=0
m
13
opt
4

n (2 N )1 3
opt
m>>1
n>>1
N>>1
29

Generalization:
With the same procedure, can create switches

of 7, 9, stages.
9 Finally,
Cantor demonstrated in 1972:
N Clos
stages
N
O N e
2 Log 2 N
Upper limit for reducing the number of crosspoints at
the expense of increasing the interconnection effort in

the meshed interconnection network
30
Exercise: Clos Switches

Design
an optimal 3-stage switch without

blocking for 1200 lines
Solution:
1200
24
47
50
50
50
47
47
24
50
31
Switches with Internal Blocking
Strictly non-blocking switches: Still too large

number of crosspoints
Example: Typical residence telephone
Busy: 5-10% of the time in the busy hour

Blocking: Appr. 1% in the busy hour
Peer might be busy in anyway...
Can reduce the number of crosspoints

significantly
Reduce further, tolerate a certain (small) blocking

probability
Example: Local centers / PBX (less loaded)
Two methods for evaluating blocking probabilities:
Lee: very easy, not that accurate, very useful to compare

different structures in general
Jacobaeus: more accurate
32
Method of Lee: Lee Graphs
To calculate the blocking probability in a multistage switch:
Draw a graph with all possible paths
Denote the link utilization for each link

9
Called loading p = probability that link is busy
Also: utilization of the link or % of time it is busy

9
q = 1 p : probability the link is idle
Example (three stages)

1
p
...
2
k
p
p
33
Blocking Probability Calculation

(Lee)
n
parallel links, each with a utilization of p

9 Assuming:
Independence between links
Blocking probability: B = pn
p
p
links in series, each with a utilization of p

Blocking probability: B = 1 qn
n
34
Lee: Three-Stage Example
Here: B = (1 (q)2 )k
q: probability for an interstage link to be idle 1

p 2
k parallel links
p
2 links in series
p
Problem: What is q ( = 1 p)?
p
k
Look at stage 1 (n input links, k output links)
...
p
p
p = (p * n ) / k = p / ,
= k / n: expansion factor
> 1: More 2nd stage matrices than input links
< 1: Concentration (for local centrals only)
9
q = 1- p /
Then: B = (1 (1 (p / ))2)k
35
Example Design for Three-Stage

Switches (Inlet utilization: 0.1)
For
local centrals / PBX
Concentrators (n > k, < 1)
Switch
Size, N
128
8 5
512
16 7
2048
32 10
8192
64 15
32768 128 24
131072 256 41
Can
0,625
0,438
0,313
0,234
0,188
0,160
Number of
Crosspoints
2.560
14.336
81.920
491.520
3,1 million
21,5 million
Number of
Crosspoints (nonblocking)
7.680 (k = 15)
63.488 (k = 31)
516.096 (k = 63)
4,2 million (k = 127)
33 million (k = 255)
268 million (k = 511)
save a lot of crosspoints!

36
Example Design for Three-Stage

Switches (Inlet utilization: 0.7)
For
transit switches
Space expansion (n < k, > 1)
Switch
Size, N
128
8 14
512
16 22
2048
32 37
8192
64 64
32768 128 116
131072 256 215
Not
1,75
1,38
1,36
1
0,91
0,84
Number of
Crosspoints
7.168
45.056
303.104
2,1 million
15,2 million
113 million
Number of
Crosspoints (nonblocking)
7.680 (k = 15)
63.488 (k = 31)
516.096 (k = 63)
4,2 million (k = 127)
33 million (k = 255)
268 million (k = 511)
so big savings (50% at maximum)

37
Lee: Multiple-Stage Example I

Three-stage example to be generalized
Example: 5 stages (build from k1 three-stage switches):
p2
p2
p1 = p(n1 / k1) 2
p2
...
p1 = p(n1 / k1)
k1
p2
p2
p2
p2
p2
k2
p1
p1
1
2
p1
p2
p2
p2
k2
...
p2
1
2
...
p2
p2
p2
k2
...
p2
p2 = p(n1 / k1) (n2 / k2)
...
p2
1
2
38
Lee: Multiple-Stage Example II

Then:
B = (1 (q1)2[1 (1 q22)k2])k1
With:
q1 = 1 p1 and p1 = p(n1 / k1)

q2 = 1 p2 and p2 = p(n1 / k1) (n2 / k2)
k1: number of outgoing links from each 1ststage switch
k2: number of outgoing links from each 2ndstage switch
39
Discussion: Lee Graphs

Problem
of Lee scheme:
Assumption that the blocking probabilities p

on the interstage links are independent
This
is not true if the expansion factor is

large (i.e. > 1)
Example: Non-blocking three-stage switch
with k = 2n-1 (i.e. k 2nd-stage matrices)
According to Lee: B 0
But: Non-blocking switch (i.e. B = 0!)
40
Example: Worst Case
Why is Lee inaccurate?
...
Assumes that if (2n 2) links busy, the remaining one busy

with probability (1 q)2
But: cannot be busy...
N M
Busy
n m
Free
n k
Available
n-1 busy
n
N M m-1 free
n k
paths
n k
Available
path
paths
k m
N M
n m
...
n-1 free
paths
N M
n m
N M
n m
m-1 busy
paths
k m
k m
Available
path
I.e.: the more paths are busy, the lower the blocking
probability for the remaining paths
41
The Jacobaeus Method (1950)

More
complex than Lee
Just presenting the Formula:

Works only for > 1 (else: Lees method is
more accurate)
2
(n!)
k
2nk
B=
p (2 p)
k!(2n k )!
Take
care to use the right method

depending on the value of !!
42
Example Problems: 1
1.
Design a 3-stage switch without blocking

with a minimum number of crosspoints
for 512 lines.
Solution:
1st stage: b = 32 matrices

2nd stage: k = 31 matrices
Number of crosspoints: Nx = 63.488
43
Example Problems: 2
2.
Based on problem 1 (n=16), calculate B

for k = {31, 28, 24, 20, 16}
An increasing degree of concentration and,

thus, blocking
Use a traffic intensity of 0,7 (transit central)
For both methods (Lee and Jacobaeus)
Solution:
k
31
28
24
20
16
B (Lee)
1,94 8,5*10-8
1,75 3,7*10-6
1,50 3,2*10-4
1,25 0,014
1,00 0,221
B
(Jacobaeus)
Number of
Crosspoints
0,1*10-12
7,7*10-9
2,7*10-5
0,007
0,221
63.488
57.344
49.152
40.960
32.768
44
Example Problems: 3
3.
Based on problem 1 (n=16), calculate B for k =

{16, 14, 12, 10, 8, 6}
Also, an increasing degree of concentration and, thus,

blocking
Use a traffic intensity of 0,1 (local central)
For both methods (Lee and Jacobaeus)
Solution:
k
16
14
12
10
8
6
1,00
0,88
0,75
0,63
0,50
0,38
B
Number of
B (Lee)
(Jacobaeus) Crosspoints
2,9*10-12
4*10-10
5,7*10-8
4,9*10-6
2,8*10-4
0,0097
2,9*10-12
7,8*10-10
1,4*10-7
1,5*10-5
8,6*10-4
0,027
32.768
28.672
24.576
20.480
16.384
12.288
45
Example Problem 4
4.
Based on problem 1, compare the necessary

number of crosspoints for
1.
2.
3.
4.
Square matrices
Matrices based on Clos
For problem 2 and B < 10-2
For problem 3 and B < 10-2
Solution:
1.
2.
3.
Square Matrix (N = 512): Nx = 262.144

Clos: 63.488 (cf. problem 1)
Problem 2 (A = 0.1 erlang): Nx = 40960
4.
According to Jacobaeus (Lee overestimates B)
Problem 3 (A = 0.7 erlang): Nx = 12.288
According to Lee (Jacobaeus overestimates B)

46
Blocking Probabilities
in Transit Switches
Up to now two assumptions:
Blocking probabilities between two specific input/output
Service requests independent from each other
Ok for line-to-line switching (local centrals)
Well, some approximations necessary...
Not ok for transit switches
Where any output from a trunk group is needed, not a

specific one
9
Lower blocking probability than for line-to-line switching
If independent blocking probabilities: Just the product of the

individual blocking probabilities of each output
But: Not independent because of common links
E.g.: Between 1st stage and 2nd stage
47
Assigning Output Lines

in a Transit Switch
Bad: Assign all links of

a trunk to one output
matrix (e.g. 7, 8, 9):
Same path to all links

of the trunk
Three paths in total
Better: Distribute links

of a trunk over the
output matrices (e.g.,
1, 6, 9)
Decreases the
probability of internal
blocking
Three paths for each

output link
48
Further Issues on Transit Switches

Blocking
probability p of single lines not

independent
If some busy, p for the remaining links

increases
Average
traffic intensity varies:
Business subscriber loops have higher activity

than private subscriber loops
Try to distribute highly active subscribers
uniformly over the 1st stages of a switch
9 Decreases
the internal blocking probability
So-called Line Management

49
Folded Four-Wire Switches
Remember for four-wire connections:
Useful approach:
4 wires for digital transmissions

Need two paths through the switch
Find one path as for two-wire connection
Use the mirror image of the path for second path
Folded operation
3
Output 6
of Matrix 3
(6,4)
(3,7)
...
Input 11
of Matrix 15 15
(11,7)
(15,4)
7
Output 11
of Matrix 15
(15,4)
...
(3,7)
...
...
(6,4)
...
...
Input 6
of Matrix 3
(11,7) 15
50
Discussion:
Folded Four-Wire Switches
Advantages:
Only one pathfinding operation

9
Reverse path automatically available (pairs of

crosspoints)
Half the information for control status needed

9
Simpler control
Half the blocking probability compared to finding two

path independently
For switches with an even number of stages
For odd numbers: center stage must have an even

number of arrays so that it can be folded in the middle
51
Pathfinding in Multiple-Stage
Switches
In
multiple-stage switches: More than one

path from a certain input to a certain output
Need control logic to find a path
Two
important components:
Store state information about established paths

To be updated on each request / release of a path
Amount depends on the number of established paths
Need some time to search the state information
to find a free path (pathfinding process)
Necessary time depends on the amount of state
information!
Determine the time necessary to process a request!
Can take long in large switches!
52
Pathfinding Time
Assumption:
All paths through a switch busy independently with

probability p (free with prob. q = 1 p)
Define:
pi: probability that exactly i paths are tested before an

idle one is found
9
Is equal to: probability that first i-1 paths are busy and
path i is free: pi = p(i-1)q
Np: Expected number of path tested before an idle

path is found
Sums up to:
9
N p = (1)q + (2) pq + (3) p 2 q + ... + (k ) p k 1 q + (k ) p k
Last term: probability that all paths k are busy
Closed form:
1 pk
Np =
1 p
53
Example: Pathfinding Time

Expected
number of paths to be tested to

find an idle path in the following switch:
3-stage, 8192 lines, n = 64, k = 15, A=0,1 erlang

Target GoS: 0,002
Solution:
3 out of 15 potential paths to be tested on

average
54
Example Exam: June 1999 I
The university has in one of its campuses a small

switching central based on a square-matrix
architecture. It gives service to 100 subscriber
lines and has 12 outgoing lines. As a new building
has been built, this central is too small now and
must be replaced by a larger one, which shall be a
Clos-based switch of three stages supporting 300
subscriber lines.
For dimensioning the new switch, a traffic
measurement has led to the following results:
Each subscriber line is busy on average 40 minutes per

day.
The hour with the most traffic is between 11:00 and 12:00
in the morning, where 20% of the total traffic occurs.
40% of the calls are internal (within the University) and
the remaining 60% are external (go to outside).
55
Example Exam: June 1999 II
1.
Suppose that the traffic from the 300 lines has the same
characteristic as measured for the 100 subscriber lines:
Calculate the number of output lines necessary for the new
central to provide the same GoS.
Solution: 30 output lines

56
Example Exam: June 1999 III

2.
Show the internal switching architecture of the new central

and compare the necessary number of crosspoints and the
internal blocking probability with the old central.
Solution:
Square (new): Nx = 108.900, Clos: Nx = 32.760, Square (old) Nx

= 12.544
Blocking: Zero for the old and the new central
57
Example Exam: September 2000 I
A company has a Clos switch of 3 stages with 10 output

lines, giving service to 500 subscribers.
The measured traffic is:
1.
Calculate for the busy hour:

The traffic intensity of the outgoing traffic.
2.
In the busy hour, the output lines are not available for 6
minutes on average.
80% of the calls are internal.
The service time of internal calls is twice as much as for
external calls.
Solution: Aext = 7,51 erlangs
The total traffic intensity
Solution: Atotal = 67,59 erlangs

58
Example Exam: September 2000 II

3.
The minutes each subscriber line is busy on average.
4.
The probability that the communicating partner is busy in

case of an internal call.
5.
Solution: 8.11 minutes
Solution: 13,5 %
The optimal design of the internal switch architecture.
Solution: N = 510, n = 15, k = 29, N/n = 34, Nx = 63.104

59
Bibliography
J.
Bellamy, Digital Telephony, 3rd

edition, John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 0-47134571-7.
Chapter 5
60

03-CS Space Division Switching 1pps

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

03-CS Space Division Switching 1pps

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Switching, Part I

Rectangular N x M matrix of crosspoints

Basic Structure for

a square matrix for four-wire

Connection between i and j requires:

of two crosspoints: (i, j) and (j, i)

Basic Structure for

For two-wire transmission

Only a single crosspoint necessary

Roughly proportional to the number of crosspoints

Highly inefficient scheme

E.g. if N = 1.000, Nx = 1.000.000

At maximum: only 1.000 points in use simultaneously

More efficient schemes necessary

Tradeoff: Increased control complexity

Tradeoff: Scalability more complex to achieve

Important for electromechanical switches

Example: Two-Wire Switch

Requires activating only one

Improving Utilization: Folding

Remove crosspoints for (i, i) connections

Need more control logic

Test whether i < j

Triangular or folded matrix for twowire switching

No matter if the call

Extension of Basic Switches I

extension of square matrices

Extension of Basic Switches II

extension of triangular matrices

in switching centrals which are assumed not

to be extended (e.g., PBX)

Extending a NxN switch

Must re-cable all

Construction of a switch with limited access to save

Sharing of links within the matrix

Division and tradeoff crosspoints vs. link

Increase the number of matrices at the expense of

With / without sharing links between matrices, which

50% reduction of number of

Example: Multiple Matrices I

Advanced solution: Two matrices with 100 subscribers each

B = 0.002 = E(m, 5) m = 13 (26 in total)

More advanced solution: Four matrices with 50 subscribers

B = 0.002 = E (m, 10) m = 20

B = 0.002 = E(m, 2,5) m = 8 (32 in total)

Tradeoff: Number of crosspoints vs. number of links

Example: Multiple Matrices II

Total number output links

Sharing Links between Matrices

free links are used in a

Last links have low probability of

Only one specific crosspoint for a certain input / output

Low robustness: if the crosspoint fails, no alternative

Several internal paths through the matrices using

Design principle: Use of small matrices

Arranged in two or more stages

Interconnected by a mesh structure between the stages

Discussion: Multiple-Stage Switching

Try to make usage of crosspoints more efficient

Use one crosspoint for several internal paths

Robustness: Have several path for one input / output pair

Use of regular and uniform structures to alleviate the

But: Potentially limited accessibility

(i.e. from all input links to all output links)