Performance Analysis of POX and RYU Controller on Software Defined Network with Spanning Tree Protocol

Abidin, Nurul Zaenal; Fiade, Andrew; Arini,; Aripiyanto, Saepul; Nuryasin,; Handayani, Velia

doi:10.1109/citsm52892.2021.9588867

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We recommend using the OpenDayLight or Ryu controller when selecting the best distributed (logically centralized) controller. The Ryu controller was recommended by the authors of papers [4,53,65,82,85,91] in their research because of its simplicity of use and Python-based scripting. Conversely, using OpenDayLight controller was recommended by the authors of papers [7,32,56,77,79].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Qualitative and Comparative Performance Assessment of Logically Centralized SDN Controllers via Mininet Emulator

Sheikh,

Hwang,

Raza

et al. 2024

Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An alternative networking approach called Software Defined Networking (SDN) enables dynamic, programmatically efficient network construction, hence enhancing network performance. It splits a traditional network into a centralized control plane and a configurable data plane. Because the core component overseeing every data plane action is the controller in the control plane, which may contain one or more controllers and is thought of as the brains of the SDN network, controller functionality and performance are crucial to achieve optimal performances. There is much controller research available in the existing literature. Nevertheless, no qualitative comparison study of OpenFlow-enabled distributed but logically centralized controllers exists. This paper includes a quantitative investigation of the performance of several distributed but logically centralized SDN controllers in custom network scenarios using Mininet, as well as a thorough qualitative comparison of them. More precisely, we give a qualitative evaluation of their attributes and classify and categorize 13 distributed but logically centralized SDN controllers according to their capabilities. Additionally, we offer a comprehensive SDN emulation tool, called Mininet-based SDN controller performance assessment, in this study. Using six performance metrics—bandwidth, round-trip time, delay, jitter, packet loss, and throughput—this work also assesses five distributed but logically centralized controllers within two custom network scenarios (uniform and non-uniform host distribution). Our analysis reveals that the Ryu controller outperforms the OpenDayLight controller in terms of latency, packet loss, and round-trip time, while the OpenDayLight controller performs well in terms of throughput, bandwidth, and jitter. Throughout the entire experiment, the HyperFlow and ONOS controllers performed worst in all performance metrics. Finally, we discuss detailed research findings on performance. These experimental results provide decision-making guidelines when selecting a controller.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Researchers have made comparisons between the POX and Ryu controllers in several studies [55,65,85,91]. Because of its greater traffic management capabilities, POX performs better in layer 1 switching circumstances.…”

Section: Mininet and Mininet Based Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Qualitative and Comparative Performance Assessment of Logically Centralized SDN Controllers via Mininet Emulator

Sheikh,

Hwang,

Raza

et al. 2024

Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Response time and throughput were the performance parameters we looked at. Researchers have made comparisons between the POX and Ryu controllers in several research [54,64,85,91]. Because of its greater traffic management capabilities, POX performs better in layer 1 switching circumstances.…”

Section: Mininet and Mininet Based Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Qualitative and Comparative Performance Assessment of Logically Centralized SDN Controllers by Mininet Emulator

Sheikh,

Hwang,

Raza

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software-defined networking (SDN) divides a traditional network into a programmable data plane and a centralized control plane. This technology is expected to transform traditional network companies that provide flexible and intelligent network operations. The core component utilized to oversee every data plane action is the controller in the control plane. In order to achieve optimal performances, the controller’s performance and capabilities are therefore crucial. There are lots of controller research available in existing literature. Nevertheless, no qualitative comparison study of OpenFlow-enabled distributed but logically centralized controllers exists for them. This article also includes a quantitative investigation of the performance of several distributed but logically centralized SDN controllers in custom network scenarios using Mininet, as well as a thorough qualitative comparison of them. More precisely, we give a qualitative evaluation of their attributes and classify and categorize 13 distributed but logically centralized SDN controllers according to their capabilities. Additionally, we offer a comprehensive SDN emulation tool called Mininet-based SDN controller performance assessment in this study. Using six performance metrics—bandwidth, round- trip time, delay, jitter, packet loss, and throughput—this work also assesses five distributed but logically centralized controllers against two custom network scenarios (uniform and non-uniform host distribution). Our investigation shows that the OpenDayLight controller performs the best across all performance criteria, with the exception of delay, packet loss and round trip time, where the Ryu controller excels. In the entire experiment, the HyperFlow and ONOS controller performs the worst in terms of all performance metrics. Finally, we discuss detailed research findings on the performance. These experimental results provide a decision-making guideline when selecting a controller.

show abstract

“…2) controller POX dan RYU dengan parameter throughput, semakin tinggi background traffic, maka nilai througput semakin turun. sedangkan dengan parameter packet loss, delay dan jitter, semakin tinggi background traffic, maka akan semakin tinggi nilai yang dihasilkan dari parameter tersebut [12].…”

Section: Gambar 1 Konsep Spanning Tree Protocolunclassified

Topologi Redundansi Link Untuk Keamanan Serta Mitigasi Ketersediaan Jaringan Komputer Menggunakan Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol

Zaen,

Tantoni

2022

JoSYC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The frequent occurrence of natural disasters requires telecommunications companies to require a backup internet backbone line if the telecommunications infrastructure is damaged/disconnected due to natural disasters. Reporting from inet.detik.com APJII revealed that the Jakarta-Singapore fiber optic network had broken, which had an impact on internet services in Indonesia. Fiber optic repair can take up to 2-3 weeks requiring network backup, the main solution for network backup with satellite, but problems will arise when configuration for satellite lines takes 1-2 days. Problems arise again when combined between fiber optic internet lines and satellite internet lines which cause the looping network to create network disturbances, to maintain interference, a spanning tree protocol method is needed to backup lines automatically and create link redundancy if one of the lines is problematic or disconnected. The purpose of this study is to design a link redundancy topology for security and mitigation of network availability using the rapid spanning tree protocol (RSTP) with router rb750gr3, switch rb260gs and switch dgs-108. In the RSTP network topology, it is designed with 3 redundant lines connected between the rb260gs switch and the dgs-108 switch, with an on-stick router rb750gr3 and is designed with 6 access mode vlan lines. In testing the inter-vlan network, RSTP terminates the redundancy link and then uses the ping command at the command prompt to determine how many minutes to backup the link. The NDLC method is used in determining how many seconds to backup this redundancy link using. The results of testing the link termination ether2-switch-mikrotik and ether1-switch-dlink using the "ping" command for 20 seconds in determining how many seconds to backup the link get the result that Request Time Out does not occur and the average time for each pc in determining the backup path for the pc-vlan20 22.9ms, pc-vlan30 35ms, pc-vlan70 23.5ms. The results of link termination testing ether3-switch-mikrotik and ether2-switch-dlink using the "ping" command for 20 seconds in determining how many seconds to backup the link get the result that there is no Request Time Out and the average time for each pc in determining the backup path for the pc-vlan20 23ms, pc-vlan30 24ms, pc-vlan70 43.7ms.

show abstract

Performance Analysis of POX and RYU Controller on Software Defined Network with Spanning Tree Protocol

Cited by 5 publications

References 11 publications

A Qualitative and Comparative Performance Assessment of Logically Centralized SDN Controllers via Mininet Emulator

A Qualitative and Comparative Performance Assessment of Logically Centralized SDN Controllers via Mininet Emulator

A Qualitative and Comparative Performance Assessment of Logically Centralized SDN Controllers by Mininet Emulator

Topologi Redundansi Link Untuk Keamanan Serta Mitigasi Ketersediaan Jaringan Komputer Menggunakan Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About