An OpenFlow Extension for the OMNeT++ INET Framework

Abstract

Software Defined Networking (SDN) is a new paradigm for communication networks which separates the control plane from the data plane of forwarding elements. This way, SDN constitutes a flexible architecture that allows quick and easy configuration of network devices. This ability is particularly useful when networks have to be adapted to changing traffic volumes of different applications running on the network. OpenFlow is currently the most prominent approach which implements the SDN concept and offers a high flexibility in the routing of network flows. In this paper, we describe the implementation of our model of the OpenFlow system in the INET framework for OMNeT++. We present performance results to show the correctness of our model. As a first application, we use the simulation model to assess the round-trip-times in a theoretical OpenFlow deployment in a real topology of a North-American Testbed.

Performance benchmarking of SDN experimental platforms

“…In paper [11] an OpenFlow Extension for OMNeT++ [12] using the INET Framework [13] is presented. Unfortunately, it is not as comprehensive as [10], since it only states the mean Round-Trip Time (RTT) of different spanning trees, which is one of the problems that solves.…”

Interactive monitoring, visualization, and configuration of OpenFlow-based SDN

“…A forma como essas mensagens são utilizadas depende da implementação das aplicações no controlador, mas basicamente para imitar o comportamento de redes Ethernet, existem pelo menos três implementações possíveis [Klein e Jarschel 2013]. A primeira seria o que os autores Klein e Jarschel chamam de Hub behavior, onde para cada Packet-In gerado por um switch é gerado um Packet-Out que faz flood do pacote para todas as interfaces (o que é obviamente ineficiente).…”

“…Three well known controller behaviors that affect the installation of forwarding rules and, consequently, the network operation are: Hub, Switch, and Forwarding [19]. Throughout this paper, we adopted the Forwarding behavior because it is the most sophisticated out of these three mentioned behaviors, presenting a lower control overhead.…”

“…The notion of keeping forwarding elements simple and making decisions at higher software layers is central in SDN. 19 Due to the introduction of these four principles and the flexible architecture, SDN is grabbing the attention of both academia and standardization bodies (e.g., ONF, IETF) and industry (e.g., Google, Cisco, NEC, Juniper), since it allows the easily creation of new abstractions in networking, simplifying management, and facilitating network innovation (FOUNDATION, 2014). In this sense, SDN reduces or even eliminates some traditional network management problems, such as enabling network configuration in a high-level language or providing support for enhanced network diagnosis and troubleshooting (KIM; FEAMSTER, 2013).…”

Resilience support in software-defined networking: A survey

“…The growth in number and variety of end-to-end services that networks must support has led to a great deal of heterogeneity in the way networks are implemented, resulting in (i) complex protocols to handle the communication between network devices [1], (ii) difficult deployment of network policies by network administrators [2] and (iii) limited routing scalability [3,4,5]. Additionally, challenges to normal network operation, such as malicious attacks and prohibitive communication delay, demonstrate that computer networks have long-standing resilience requirements [6].…”