A comparison between several Software Defined Networking controllers

Stancu, Alexandru; Halunga, Simona; Vulpe, Alexandru; Suciu, George; Fratu, Octavian; Popovici, Eduard C.

doi:10.1109/telsks.2015.7357774

Cited by 66 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A. Stancu et al,in [10] measured and compared the performance of four SDN controllers (ONOS, OpenDaylight, POX, and Ryu). A tree topology with 15 switches and 16 hosts was used to be connected to the controllers.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating and Comparing the Performance of Using Multiple Controllers in Software Defined Networks

Abdullah¹,

Alawad²,

Hussein³

2019

IJMECS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Software Defined Networks (SDN) the control plane is removed to a separate device called the controller. The controller is the most important and main part in SDN architecture and large SDN networks may consist of multiple controllers or controller domains that distribute the network management between them. Because of the controller importance, it has been given a proper attention and many studies have been made to compare, test, and evaluate the performance of the controllers. This paper aims to evaluate and compare the performance of different SDN controllers which are Open Network Operating System (ONOS), OpenDaylight, POX and Ryu, using Two performance tests; the first test includes connecting two controllers of each of the four controllers to linear topology with different number of switches; and the other test includes connecting different number of controllers of each of the four controllers to linear topology with fixed number of switches. Then for these tests, the performance in terms of some Quality of Service (QoS) parameters such as average Round-Trip Time (RTT), throughput, and jitter are measured between the two end hosts in each network. After the evaluation of the performance has been completed, it had been seen that the controllers showed different behaviors, and that POX controller showed more stable and good performance results than other controllers.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating and Comparing the Performance of Using Multiple Controllers in Software Defined Networks

Abdullah¹,

Alawad²,

Hussein³

2019

IJMECS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This difference can be appreciated within the performance variations between the two controllers. While both controllers are comparable, ONOS has been proven to out-perform OpenDaylight [15]. For these reasons we decide to implement our solution in ONOS.…”

Section: Sdn Controllersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancing the Resiliency of Cyber-Physical Systems with Software-Defined Networks

Salazar

Cárdenas

2019

Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Cyber-Physical Systems Security &Amp; Privacy - CPS-SPC'19

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous research efforts have focused on intrusion detection in industrial control networks, however, few of them discuss what to do after an intrusion has been detected. Because the safety of most of these control systems is time-sensitive, we need new research on automatic incident response. In this paper, we extend our work on leveraging Software-Defined Networking (SDN) to automatically reconfigure an industrial control network to mitigate the impact of attacks, and to deceive adversaries. CCS CONCEPTS • Security and privacy → Intrusion detection systems; Network security; Domain-specific security and privacy architectures; • Networks → Programmable networks; • Applied computing → Industry and manufacturing.

show abstract

“…Among all available SDN controllers, this work has addressed a comparison from those that are open source and widely accepted by the scientific community [21,22] to point out the one that meets the requirements of an IIoT scenario.…”

Section: Odl As Industrial Iot Platformmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It supports different OpenFlow versions. Since it is written in Python, the network performance seems to be lower than other Java based SDN controllers, as stated in [21]. Floodlight (http://www.projectfloodlight.org/floodlight/) consists of a set of modules which provide service to other modules and/or to the control logic application through a simple Java or REST API.…”

Section: Odl As Industrial Iot Platformmentioning

confidence: 99%

Software Architecture Solution Based on SDN for an Industrial IoT Scenario

Romero-Gázquez

Bueno-Delgado

2018

Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Industry 4.0 (I4.0) adoption comprises the change of traditional factories intosmartusing the ICTs. The goal is to monitor processes, objects, machinery, and workers in order to have real-time knowledge about what is going on in the factory and for achieving an efficient data collection, management, and decision-making that help improve the businesses in terms of product quality, productivity, and efficiency. Internet of Things (IoT) will have an important role in the I4.0 adoption because future smart factories are expected to rely on IoT infrastructures composed of constellations of hundreds or thousands of sensor devices spread all over the industrial facilities. However, some problems could arise in the massive IoT deployment in a medium-high factory: thousands of IoT devices to cope from different technologies and vendors could mean dozens of vendor tools and user interfaces to manage them. Moreover, the heterogeneity of IoT devices could entail different communication protocols, languages, and data formats, which can result in lack of interoperability. On the other hand, conventional IT networks and industrial machinery are expected to be managed together with the IoT infrastructure, maybe using a tool or a set of tools, fororchestratingthe whole smart factory. This work meets these challenges presenting an open-source software architecture solution based on OpenDaylight (ODL), a Software Defined Network (SDN) controller, for orchestrating an industrial IoT scenario. This work is addressed by shedding light on critical aspects from the SDN controller architectural choices, to specific IoT interfaces and the difficulties for covering the wide range of communication protocols, popular in industrial contexts. Such a global view of the process gives light to practical difficulties appearing in introducing SDN in industrial contexts, providing an open-source architecture solution that guarantees devices and networks interoperability and scalability, breaking the vendor lock-in barriers and providing a vendor-agnostic solution for orchestrating all actor of an I4.0 smart factory.

show abstract

A comparison between several Software Defined Networking controllers

Cited by 66 publications

References 1 publication

Evaluating and Comparing the Performance of Using Multiple Controllers in Software Defined Networks

Evaluating and Comparing the Performance of Using Multiple Controllers in Software Defined Networks

Enhancing the Resiliency of Cyber-Physical Systems with Software-Defined Networks

Software Architecture Solution Based on SDN for an Industrial IoT Scenario

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About