Comprehensive Analysis of Software-Defined Networking: Evaluating Performance Across Diverse Topologies and Investigating Topology Discovery Protocols
by Nikolaos V. Oikonomou 1,* 
, Dimitrios V. Oikonomou 2 Eleftherios Stergiou 1 Dimitrios Liarokapis 1
1 Department of Informatics & Telecommunications, University of Ioannina, Arta,47150, Greece
2 Department 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 7, Page # 23-43, 2024; DOI: 10.55708/js0307003
Keywords: Network Architecture, Efficiency, SDN Controllers, Network Simulation, OpenFlow Protocol
Received: 30 April, 2024, Revised: 28 June, 2024, Accepted: 30 June, 2024, Published Online: 18 July, 2024
APA Style
Oikonomou, N. V., Oikonomou, D. V., Stergiou, E., & Liarokapis, D. (2024). Comprehensive analysis of software-defined networking: Evaluating performance across diverse topologies and investigating topology discovery protocols. Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences, 3(7), 23-43. https://doi.org/10.55708/js0307003
Chicago/Turabian Style
Oikonomou, Nikolaos V., Dimitrios V. Oikonomou, Eleftherios Stergiou, and Dimitrios Liarokapis. “Comprehensive Analysis of Software-Defined Networking: Evaluating Performance Across Diverse Topologies and Investigating Topology Discovery Protocols.” Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences 3, no. 7 (2024): 23-43. https://doi.org/10.55708/js0307003.
IEEE Style
Oikonomou, Nikolaos V., Dimitrios V. Oikonomou, Eleftherios Stergiou, and Dimitrios Liarokapis. “Comprehensive Analysis of Software-Defined Networking: Evaluating Performance Across Diverse Topologies and Investigating Topology Discovery Protocols.” Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences 3, no. 7 (2024): 23-43. https://doi.org/10.55708/js0307003.
Software-defined networking (SDN) represents an innovative approach to network architecture that enhances control, simplifies complexity, and improves operational efficiencies. This study evaluates the performance metrics of SDN frameworks using the Mininet simulator on virtual machines hosted on a Windows platform. The research objectives include assessing system performance across various predefined network topologies, investigating the impact of switch quantities on network performance, measuring CPU consumption, evaluating RAM demands under different network loads, and analyzing latency in packet transmission. Methods involved creating and testing different network topologies, including basic, hybrid, and custom, with the Mininet simulator. Performance metrics such as CPU and RAM usage, latency, and bandwidth were measured and analyzed. The study also examined the performance and extendibility of the OpenFlow Data Path (OFDP) protocol using the POX controller. Results indicate that balanced tree topologies consume the most CPU and RAM, while linear topologies are more efficient. Random topologies offer adaptability but face connection reliability issues. The POX controller and OFDP protocol effectively manage SDN network scalability. This research aims to analyze performance in a manner consistent with numerous previous studies, underscoring the importance of performance metrics and the scale of the network in determining the efficiency and reliability of SDN implementations. By benchmarking various topologies and protocols, the research offers a valuable reference for both academia and industry, promoting the development of more efficient SDN solutions. Understanding these performance metrics helps network administrators make informed decisions about implementing SDN frameworks to improve network performance and reliability.
- B. A. Nunes, M. Mendonca, N. Nguyen, K. Obraczka and T. Turletti, “A Survey of Software-Defined Networking: Past, Present, and Future of Programmable Networks,” in IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1617-1634, Third Quarter 2014, doi: 10.1109/SURV.2014.012214.00180.
- N. V. Oikonomou, S. V. Margariti, E. Stergiou, and D. Liarokapis, “Performance Evaluation of Software-Defined Networking Implemented on Various Network Topologies,” in 2021 6th South-East Europe Design Automation, Computer Engineering, Computer Networks and Social Media Conference (SEEDA-CECNSM), Preveza, Greece, 2021, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/SEEDA-CECNSM53056.2021.9566213.
- A. Zacharis, S. V. Margariti, E. Stergiou, and C. Angelis, “Performance evaluation of topology discovery protocols in software defined networks,” in 2021 IEEE Conference on Network Function Virtualization and Software Defined Networks (NFV-SDN), Heraklion, Greece, 2021, 135-140, doi: 10.1109/NFV-SDN53031.2021.9665006.
- M. Guo and P. Bhattacharya, “Controller Placement for Improving Resilience of Software-Defined Networks,” in 2013 Fourth International Conference on Networking and Distributed Computing, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2013, 23-27, doi: 10.1109/ICNDC.2013.15.
- IETF RFC 7426, “Request for Comments: 7426, ISSN: 2070-1721 EICT. Category: Informational,” K. Pentikousis, Ed., 2015.,doi:10.20535/2411-2976.12021.24-32
- D. Kreutz, F. M. V. Ramos, P. Verissimo, C. E. Rothenberg, S. Azodolmolky, and S. Uhlig, “Software-Defined Networking: A Comprehensive Survey,” arXiv, 2014, [Online], doi:/10.48550/arXiv.1406.0440
- A. Nayak, A. Reimers, N. Feamster, and R. Clark,“Resonance: Dynamic access control in enterprise networks,” in Proc. Workshop: Research on Enterprise Networking, Barcelona, Spain, 2009, 1-6, doi:10.1145/2602204.2602219
- A. Voellmy and P. Hudak, “Nettle: Functional reactive programming of OpenFlow networks,” in Proc. Workshop on Practical Issues in Programming, 2009, pp. 1-6,doi: 10112206
- B. Heller, S. Seetharaman, P. Mahadevan, Y. Yiakoumis, P. Sharma, S. Banerjee, and N. McKeown, “ElasticTree: Saving energy in data center networks,” in Proc. 7th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, 2010, 1-6,doi: 10.5555/1855711.1855728
- R. Wang, D. Butnariu, and J. Rexford, “OpenFlow-based server load balancing gone wild,” in Hot-ICE, 2011, 1-6,doi: 10.5555/1972422.1972438
- S. Jain, A. Kumar, S. Mandal, J. Ong, L. Poutievski, A. Singh, S. Venkata, J. Wanderer, J. Zhou, M. Zhu, J. Zolla, U. Hölzle, S. Stuart, and A. Vahdat, “B4: Experience with a globally deployed software defined WAN,” in ACM SIGCOMM, 2013, 1-6,doi: 10.1145/2534169.2486019
- T. Koponen, M. Casado, N. Gude, J. Stribling, L. Poutievski, M. Zhu, R. Ramanathan, Y. Iwata, H. Inoue, T. Hama, and S. Shenker, “Onix: A distributed control platform for large-scale production networks,” in OSDI, vol. 10, 1–6, 2010,doi: 10:351-364
- X. Zhao, S. S. Band, S. Elnaffar, M. Sookhak, A. Mosavi, and E. Salwana, “The Implementation of Border Gateway Protocol Using Software-Defined Networks: A Systematic Literature Review,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, 112596-112606, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3103241.
- I. F. Akyildiz, A. Lee, P. Wang, M. Luo, and W. Chou, “A roadmap for traffic engineering in SDN-OpenFlow networks,” Elsevier Computer Networks, vol. 71, pp. 1–30, 2014,doi:10.1016/j.comnet.2014.06.002
- ONF TR-537, “Negotiable Datapath Model and Table Type Pattern Signing,” Version 1.0, Sep. 2016, 1-6.
- N. Handigol, M. Flajslik, S. Seetharaman, N. McKeown, and R. Johari, “Aster*x: Load-balancing as a network primitive,” in ACLD ’10: Architectural Concerns in Large Datacenters, 2010, 1-6,doi: 10.1109/GREE.2014.9
- R. Sherwood, G. Gibb, K.-K. Yap, G. Appenzeller, M. Casado, N. McKeown, and G. Parulkar, “Can the production network be the testbed?” in Proc. 9th USENIX OSDI, Vancouver, Canada, 2010, 1-6, doi: 10.5555/1924943.19249691
- A. Rodriguez-Natal, M. Portoles-Comeras, V. Ermagan, D. Lewis, D. Farinacci, F. Maino, and A. Cabello, “LISP: a southbound SDN protocol?” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 53, 201-207, 2015, doi: 10.1109/MCOM.2015.7158286.
- K. Greene, “TR10: Software-defined networking,” MIT Technology Review, 2009, [Online]. Available:..http://www2.technologyreview.com/article/412194/tr10-software-defined-networking/, doi:10.1109/COMST.2016.2633579
- M. Casado, M. J. Freedman, J. Pettit, J. Luo, N. McKeown, and S. Shenker, “Ethane: Taking control of the enterprise,” in ACM SIGCOMM ’07, 2007, 1-6, doi:10.1145/1282427.1282382
- N. Gude, T. Koponen, J. Pettit, B. Pfaff, M. Casado, N. McKeown, and S. Shenker, “NOX: Towards an operating system for networks,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 38, no. 3, 105–110, 2008, doi:10.1145/1384609.1384625
