Mario Wenning;Jonas Berl;Tobias Fehenberger;Carmen Mas-Machuca
{"title":"Comparison of distributed and centralized quantum key management systems for meshed QKD networks","authors":"Mario Wenning;Jonas Berl;Tobias Fehenberger;Carmen Mas-Machuca","doi":"10.1364/JOCN.542054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent developments in quantum key distribution (QKD) demonstrate the maturity of securing sensitive data against the emerging quantum computing threat. For QKD-secured long-haul and meshed optical transport networks (OTNs), quantum key management systems (QKMSs) are essential to overcome current distance limitations of available QKD devices. In this work, we present and compare two implementations of QKMSs, analyzing their scalability with an emulated QKD network (QKDN) utilizing recorded performance metrics from deployed QKD devices. First, we use a state-of-the-art Internet routing scheme, i.e., open shortest path first (OSPF), demonstrating that key management entities (KMEs) can solve the key routing problem utilizing distributed routing. Second, we apply software-defined networking (SDN) to implement centralized routing with a SDN controller. This paper compares distributed with centralized key routing regarding scalability, throughput, and latency. Both schemes facilitate up to six key relays between any pair of nodes in parallel with average key relay durations per hop below 300 ms given the Nobel-Germany topology and any-to-any demand matrix. With a network-wide joint key routing optimization in the SDN controller, up to 16.7% higher demands can be served compared to distributed key routing. Within the inherent compatibility of our study to network-function virtualization (NFV), we guideline future integration of QKMSs into deployed OTNs.","PeriodicalId":50103,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Optical Communications and Networking","volume":"17 2","pages":"A224-A233"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Optical Communications and Networking","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10862985/","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Recent developments in quantum key distribution (QKD) demonstrate the maturity of securing sensitive data against the emerging quantum computing threat. For QKD-secured long-haul and meshed optical transport networks (OTNs), quantum key management systems (QKMSs) are essential to overcome current distance limitations of available QKD devices. In this work, we present and compare two implementations of QKMSs, analyzing their scalability with an emulated QKD network (QKDN) utilizing recorded performance metrics from deployed QKD devices. First, we use a state-of-the-art Internet routing scheme, i.e., open shortest path first (OSPF), demonstrating that key management entities (KMEs) can solve the key routing problem utilizing distributed routing. Second, we apply software-defined networking (SDN) to implement centralized routing with a SDN controller. This paper compares distributed with centralized key routing regarding scalability, throughput, and latency. Both schemes facilitate up to six key relays between any pair of nodes in parallel with average key relay durations per hop below 300 ms given the Nobel-Germany topology and any-to-any demand matrix. With a network-wide joint key routing optimization in the SDN controller, up to 16.7% higher demands can be served compared to distributed key routing. Within the inherent compatibility of our study to network-function virtualization (NFV), we guideline future integration of QKMSs into deployed OTNs.
期刊介绍:
The scope of the Journal includes advances in the state-of-the-art of optical networking science, technology, and engineering. Both theoretical contributions (including new techniques, concepts, analyses, and economic studies) and practical contributions (including optical networking experiments, prototypes, and new applications) are encouraged. Subareas of interest include the architecture and design of optical networks, optical network survivability and security, software-defined optical networking, elastic optical networks, data and control plane advances, network management related innovation, and optical access networks. Enabling technologies and their applications are suitable topics only if the results are shown to directly impact optical networking beyond simple point-to-point networks.