Educational Applications and Comparative Analysis of Network Simulators: Protocols, Types, and Performance Evaluation
by Nikolaos V. Oikonomou ¹ 
and Dimitrios V . Oikonomou ²
1 Department of Informatics & Telecommunications, University of Ioannina, Arta,47150, Greece
2Department of Regional & Cross Border Studies, University of Western Macedonia, Kozani,50100, Greece
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences, Volume 3, Issue 1, Page # 18-32, 2024; DOI: 10.55708/js0306003
Keywords: Network Architecture, Network Simulation, Network Protocol, Emulator, Educational Technology, Performance Evaluation
Received: 30 April 2024, Revised: 20 June 2024, Accepted: 21 May 2024, Published Online: 21 June 2024
APA Style
Oikonomou, N. V., & Oikonomou, D. V. (2024). Educational applications and comparative analysis of network simulators: Protocols, types, and performance evaluation. Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences, 3(6), 18. https://doi.org/10.55708/js0306003
Chicago/Turabian Style
Oikonomou, Nikolaos V., and Dimitrios V. Oikonomou. “Educational Applications and Comparative Analysis of Network Simulators: Protocols, Types, and Performance Evaluation.” Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences 3, no. 6 (2024): 18. https://doi.org/10.55708/js0306003.
IEEE Style
N. V. Oikonomou and D. V. Oikonomou, “Educational Applications and Comparative Analysis of Network Simulators: Protocols, Types, and Performance Evaluation,” Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences, vol. 3, no. 6, p. 18, 2024. doi: 10.55708/js0306003.
This work explores the role of simulation in computer networks, discussing various network types, communication protocols, and the utilization of network simulators, with a focus on educational settings. We specifically analyze and compare five prominent network simulators: Cisco Packet Tracer, Riverbed Modeler Academic Edition, GNS3, NS-3, and Mininet. These tools are examined in terms of their functionality, user-friendliness, and suitability for educational purposes, assessing how they facilitate learning for students and trainees. The comparison extends to their operational capabilities, differences, effectiveness, and overall impact on networking education. The evaluation aims to highlight each simulator’s strengths and weaknesses, providing insights into their practical applications in an academic context.
- C. CasconeO’Connor, T. Vachuska, B. Davie, “Software-Defined Networks: A Systems Approach,” 2021, p. 152.
- E. Altman, T. Jimenez, “NS Simulator for beginners,” Lecture notes. [Online]. Available: http://www-sop.inria.fr/maestro/personnel/Eitan.Altman/COURS-NS/n3.pdf
- “Future Directions in Control, Dynamics and Systems,” [Online]. Available: http://www.cds.caltech.edu/~murray/cdspanel, last accessed Mar. 2005.
- L. Globa, M. Skulysh, O. Romanov, M. Nesterenko, “Quality Control for Mobile Communication Management Services in Hybrid Environment,” in *Advances in Information and Communication Technologies*, UKRMICO 2018, Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 560, Springer, Cham, 2019, pp. 20-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16770-7_4, Print ISBN: 978-3-030-16769-1.
- IETF RFC 7426, Request for Comments: 7426, ISSN: 2070-1721 EICT. Category: Informational, K. Pentikousis, Ed., 2015.
- J. Nilsson, “Real-time Control Systems with Delays,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Automatic Control, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund, Sweden, 1998. [Online]. Available: http://www.control.lth.se/documents/1998/nilj98dis.pdf
- J. Lam, S. Lee, H. Lee, Y. Oktian, “Securing SDN Southbound and Data Plane Communication with IBC,” *Mobile Information Systems*, vol. 2016, Article ID 1708970, 12 pages, 2016. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1708970.
- K. Phemius, M. Bouet, J. Leguay, “DISCO: Distributed Multi-domain SDN Controllers,” Thales Communications & Security, arXiv:1308.6138v2 [cs.NI], Aug. 2013.
- O. I. Romanov, M. V. Oryschuk, Y. S. Hordashnyk, “Computing of influence of stimulated Raman scattering in DWDM telecommunication systems,” in *2016 International Conference Radio Electronics & Info Communications (UkrMiCo)*, 2016. DOI: 10.1109/UkrMiCo.2016.7739622, eISBN: 978-1-5090-4409-2.
- O. Romanov, V. Mankivskyi, “Optimal Traffic Distribution Based on the Sectoral Model of Loading Network Elements,” in *2019 IEEE International Scientific-Practical Conference Problems of Infocommunications, Science and Technology (PIC S&T)*, Oct. 2019, pp. 8-11. DOI: 10.1109/PICST47496.2019.9061296, eISBN: 978-1-7281-4184-8.
- O. I. Romanov, M. M. Nesterenko, N. O. Fesokha, V. B. Mankivskyi, “Evaluation of productivity virtualization technologies of switching equipment telecommunications networks,” *Information and Telecommunication Sciences*, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 53-58, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20535/2411-2976.12020.53-58.
- ONF specification, “OpenFlow Table Type Patterns,” Version 1.0, Aug. 2014.
- ONF TR-508, “Requirements Analysis for Transport OpenFlow/SDN,” Version 1.0, Aug. 2014.
- ONF TR-537, “Negotiable Datapath Model and Table Type Pattern Signing,” Version 1.0, Sep. 2016.
- ONF TR-539, “OpenFlow Controller Benchmarking Methodologies,” Version 1.0, Nov. 2016.
- ONF TS-029, “MPLS-TP OpenFlow Protocol Extensions for SPTN,” Version 1.0, June 2017.
- ONF, “OpenFlow Switch Specification Version 1.5.1 (Protocol version 0x06),” 2014. [Online]. Available: https://opennetworking.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/openflow-switch-v1.5.1.pdf
- ONOS, “Security and Performance Analysis,” Report No. 2, Nov. 2018.
- Open Network Foundation, “Accelerating the Adoption of SDN & NFV,” 2021. [Online]. Available: http://opennetworking.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ONF%20Overview%204-pager%20FINAL.pdf
