Efficient topology discovery in OpenFlow-based Software Defined Networks

Software Defined Networking (SDN) is a new networking paradigm, with a great potential to increase network efficiency, ease the complexity of network control and management, and accelerate the rate of technology innovation. One of the core concepts of SDN is the separation of the network's control and data plane. The intelligence and the control of the network operation and management, such as routing, are removed from the forwarding elements (switches) and are concentrated in a logically centralised component, i.e. the SDN controller. In order for the controller to configure and manage the network, it needs to have up-to-date information about the state of the network, in particular its topology. Consequently, topology discovery is a critical component of any Software Defined Network architecture. In this paper, we evaluate the efficiency of the de facto standard approach to topology discovery currently implemented by the major SDN controller frameworks, and propose simple and practical modifications, which achieve a significantly improved efficiency and reduced control overhead. We have implemented our new topology discovery approach on the widely used POX controller platform, and have evaluated it for a range of network topologies via experiments using the Mininet network emulator as well as a specific topology in the OFELIA SDN testbed. Our results show that our proposed modifications achieve an up to 40% reduction in controller load compared to the current state-of-the-art approach, while delivering identical discovery functionality.

[1]  David Erickson,et al.  The beacon openflow controller , 2013, HotSDN '13.

[2]  Nick Feamster,et al.  Improving network management with software defined networking , 2013, IEEE Commun. Mag..

[3]  Jadwiga Indulska,et al.  Efficient topology discovery in software defined networks , 2014, 2014 8th International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication Systems (ICSPCS).

[4]  Nick McKeown,et al.  A network in a laptop: rapid prototyping for software-defined networks , 2010, Hotnets-IX.

[5]  Yiming Li,et al.  Software defined networking: State of the art and research challenges , 2014, Comput. Networks.

[6]  Didier Colle,et al.  Design and implementation of the OFELIA FP7 facility: The European OpenFlow testbed , 2014, Comput. Networks.

[7]  Rob Sherwood,et al.  On Controller Performance in Software-Defined Networks , 2012, Hot-ICE.

[8]  Martín Casado,et al.  NOX: towards an operating system for networks , 2008, CCRV.

[9]  Fernando M. V. Ramos,et al.  Software-Defined Networking: A Comprehensive Survey , 2014, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[10]  Guru M. Parulkar,et al.  OpenVirteX: A Network Hypervisor , 2014, ONS.

[11]  Qi Hao,et al.  A Survey on Software-Defined Network and OpenFlow: From Concept to Implementation , 2014, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.

[12]  Vijay Mann,et al.  Effective switch memory management in OpenFlow networks , 2014, DEBS '14.

[13]  Keith Kirkpatrick,et al.  Software-defined networking , 2013, CACM.

[14]  Nick McKeown,et al.  OpenFlow: enabling innovation in campus networks , 2008, CCRV.

[15]  Min Zhu,et al.  B4: experience with a globally-deployed software defined wan , 2013, SIGCOMM.

[16]  Guido Appenzeller,et al.  Implementing an OpenFlow switch on the NetFPGA platform , 2008, ANCS '08.

[17]  Thierry Turletti,et al.  A Survey of Software-Defined Networking: Past, Present, and Future of Programmable Networks , 2014, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.

[18]  Charles E. Leiserson,et al.  Fat-trees: Universal networks for hardware-efficient supercomputing , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[19]  Martín Casado,et al.  Onix: A Distributed Control Platform for Large-scale Production Networks , 2010, OSDI.

[20]  Nick McKeown,et al.  Reproducible network experiments using container-based emulation , 2012, CoNEXT '12.