Performance Test of Openflow Agent on Openflow Software-Based Mikrotik RB750 Switch

Rikie Kartadie

Abstract


A network is usually developed by several devices such as router, switch etc. Every device forwards data package manipulation with complicated protocol planted in its hardware. An operator is responsible for running configuration either to manage rules or application applied in the network. Human error may occur when device configuration run manually by operator. Some famous vendors, one of them is MikroTik, has also been implementing this OpenFlow on its operation. It provides the implementation of SDN/OpenFlow architecture with affordable cost. The second phase research result showed that switch OF software-based MikroTik resulted higher latency value than both mininet and switch OF software-based OpenWRT. The average gap value of switch OF software-based MikroTik is 2012 kbps lower than the value of switch OF software-based OpenWRT. The average gap value of throughput bandwidth protocol UDP switch OF software-based MikroTik is 3.6176 kBps lower than switch OF software-based OpenWRT and it is 8.68 kBps lower than mininet. The average gap throughput jitter protokol UDP of switch OF software-based MiktoTik is 0.0103ms lower than switch OF software-based OpenWRT and 0.0093ms lower than mininet.


Keywords


mininet, mikrotik, openflow, Software-defined Network

Full Text:

PDF

References


Appelman, M. and M. De Boer, Performance Analysis of OpenFlow Hardware, p. 28, 2012.

Kartadie, R., Software-Defined Network Infrastructure Prototype With OpenFlow Protocol Using Ubuntu As Controller, STMIK AMIKOM Yogyakarta, 2014.

Kartadie, R. and B. Satya, Uji Performa Implementasi Software-Based OpenFlow Switch Berbasis OpenWRT Pada Infrastruktur Software-Defined Network, DASI, vol. 16, no. 3, p. 87, 2015.

Yik, E. C., Implementation of an Open Flow Switch on Netfpga, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 2012.

Tanutama, L., Jaringan Komputer, 1st ed. Yogyakarta: Elex Media Komputindo, 1996.

Casado, M. et al., Ethane: taking control of the enterprise, Sigcomm 07, pp. 112, 2007.

Mckeown, N. et al., OpenFlow: Enabling Innovation in Campus Networks, ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 6974, 2008.

Shirazipour, M. et al., Realizing packet-optical integration with SDN and OpenFlow 1.1 extensions, 2012 IEEE Int. Conf. Commun., pp. 66336637, 2012.

Noname, Software-Defined Networking: The New Norm for Networks [white paper], ONF White Pap., pp. 112, 2012.

Paper, W., Infrastructure SDN with Cariden Technologies, pp. 114, 2012.

Mateo, M. P., OpenFlow Switching Performance, Politecnico Di Torino, 2009.

Hucaby, D., CCNP BSCI Official Exam Certification Guide, 1st ed., vol. 205, no. 4594. Indiana: Cisco Press, 2007.

Hariyani, Y. S. et al., ROUTING IMPLEMENTATION BASED-ON SOFTWARE DEFINED NETWORK USING RYU CONTROLLER AND OPENVSWITCH, J. Teknol., vol. 8, no. 2015, pp. 8993, 2015.

Vishnoi, A. and A. Kumbhare, Open Flow 1.3.1 Support: Controller View, 2013. [Online]. Available: https://wiki.opendaylight.org/images/d/dc/Openflow1.3_Support_for_Opendaylight.pdf.

Platonov, A. et al., Estimation of available bandwidth and measurement infrastructure for Russian segment of Internet, Arxiv Prepr. arXiv0803.1723, pp. 18, 2008




DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/sji.v3i2.7987

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.