Software Defined Networks: a Comparative Study and Quality of Services Evaluation

Herry Prasetyo Nugroho(1), Muhammad Irfan(2), Amrul Faruq(3),

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/sji.v6i2.20585


(1) Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang
(2) Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang
(3) Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang

Abstract

Software-Defined Network (SDN) as architecture network that separates the control and forwarding functions, so that network operators and administrators can configure the networks in a simple and centrally between thousands of devices. This study is designed and evaluate the Quality of Services (QoS) performances between the two networks employed SDN-based architecture and without SDN-based. MinNet as a software emulator used as a data plane in the network Software Define Network. In this study, comparison of the value of the QoS on the network based on Software Defined Network and traditional network during the test run from the source node is investigated. Network testing by using traffic loads. Traffic loads are used starting from 20Mbps-100Mbps. The result is verified that the QoS analysis of the Software-Defined Network architecture performed better than conventional network architectures. The value of the latency delay on the Software Define Network range between 0,019-0,084ms, and with 0% packet loss when addressed the network traffics of 10-100Mbps.

Keywords

Software Defined Networks, Floodlight, MiniNet, Computer Networks, Quality of Services

Full Text:

PDF

References

K. Ahmed, J. O. Blech, M. A. Gregory, and H. W. Schmidt, “Software defined networks in industrial automation,†J. Sens. Actuator Networks, vol. 7, no. 3, 2018.

D. Kreutz, F. M. V. Ramos, P. E. Verissimo, C. E. Rothenberg, S. Azodolmolky, and S. Uhlig, “Software-defined networking: A comprehensive survey,†Proc. IEEE, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 14–76, 2015.

S. Singh and R. K. Jha, “A Survey on Software Defined Networking: Architecture for Next Generation Network,†J. Netw. Syst. Manag., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 321–374, 2017.

T. Truong, Q. Fu, and C. Lorier, “FlowMap: Improving network management with SDN,†Proc. NOMS 2016 - 2016 IEEE/IFIP Netw. Oper. Manag. Symp., no. Noms, pp. 821–824, 2016.

A. El-hassany and L. Vanbever, “SDNRacer : Concurrency Analysis for Software-Defined Networks,†in ACM SIGPLAN conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, PLDI, 2016, pp. 402–415.

H. Kim and N. Feamster, “Improving network management with software defined networking,†IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 114–119, 2013.

M. Afrin and R. Mahmud, “Software Defined Network-based Scalable Resource Discovery for Internet of Things,†EAI Endorsed Trans. Scalable Inf. Syst., vol. 4, no. 14, pp. 1–6, 2017.

A. Bradai, K. Singh, T. Ahmed, and T. Rasheed, “Cellular Software Defined Networking: a Framework,†IEEE Commun. Mag. — Commun. Stand. Suppl., no. June, pp. 1–8, 2015.

A. Duque-torres, F. Amezquita-su, O. Mauricio, C. Rendon, A. Ord, and W. Y. Campo, “An Approach Based on Knowledge-Defined Networking for Identifying Heavy-Hitter Flows in Data Center Networks,†Appl. Sci., vol. 9, no. 4808, pp. 1–19, 2019.

ONF, “Software-Defined Networking: The New Norm for Networks,†Open Netw. Found., no. April, pp. 1–12, 2012.

Z. Yao and Z. Yan, “Security in software-defined-networking: A survey,†Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. (including Subser. Lect. Notes Artif. Intell. Lect. Notes Bioinformatics), vol. 10066 LNCS, no. 4, pp. 319–322, 2016.

B. A. Linuwih, A. Virgono, and B. Irawan, “Design and Analysis Software Defined Networking For LAN Network: Application and Analysis Routing Method Path Calculating Using Dijkstra’s Algorithm,†e-Proceeding Eng., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 749–756, 2016.

F. D. S. Sumadi and D. R. Chandranegara, “Controller Based Proxy for Handling NDP in OpenFlow Network,†Kinet. Game Technol. Inf. Syst. Comput. Network, Comput. Electron. Control, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 55, 2018.

J. H. Porras Duque, D. O. Ducuara Beltrán, and G. A. Puerto Leguizamón, “On the features of Software Defined Networking for the QoS provision in data networks,†Inge Cuc, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 106–115, 2018.

International Telecommunication Union, “ITU-T Recommendation G. 1010: End-user multimedia QoS categories (Quality of service and performance),†Int. Telecommun. Union, vol. 1010, 2001.

I. Z. Bholebawa and U. D. Dalal, “Performance analysis of SDN/openflow controllers: POX versus floodlight,†Wirel. Pers. Commun., vol. 98, no. 2, pp. 1679–1699, 2018.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share


Scientific Journal of Informatics (SJI)
p-ISSN 2407-7658 | e-ISSN 2460-0040
Published By Department of Computer Science Universitas Negeri Semarang
Website: https://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/sji
Email: [email protected]

Creative Commons License

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