iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://unpaywall.org/10.1007/S10586-019-02996-0
Evaluation and comparison of OpenDayLight and open networking operating system in software-defined networking | Cluster Computing Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Evaluation and comparison of OpenDayLight and open networking operating system in software-defined networking

  • Published:
Cluster Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Software-defined networking (SDN) is a new way of transforming networks. It works on the principle of separating the infrastructure plane from the control plane. In the control plane, the centralized SDN controller acts as a brain of the network. Selecting the best SDN controller for the network is one of the most crucial tasks. In this paper, the experimental comparison between the two most powerful and popularly known SDN controllers on which many other SDN controllers are laid down their foundations i.e. OpenDayLight (ODL) and open networking operating system (ONOS) is performed. The experimentation is carried out on the Mininet emulation tool. Real-time packets are captured and analyzed using Wireshark. The results of the comparison concluded that the performance of the ODL controller is better than the ONOS in terms of burst rate, throughput, Round Trip Time (RTT) and bandwidth.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Farhady, H., Lee, H.Y., Nakao, A.: Software defined networking: a survey. Comput. Netw. Int. J. Comput. Telecommun. Netw. 81, 79–95 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Nunes, A., Mendonca, M., Nguyen, X.N., Obraczka, K.: A survey of software-defined networking: past, present, and future of programmable networks. Commun. Surv. Tutor. IEEE 16(3), 1617–1634 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Masoudi, R., Ghaffari, A.: Software defined networks: a survey. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 67, 1–25 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Li, W., Meng, W., Kwok, L.F.: A survey on OpenFlow-based software defined networks: security challenges and countermeasures. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 68, 126 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Xia, W., Wen, Y., Foh, C.H., Niyato, D., Xie, H.: A survey on software-defined networking. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials 17(1), 27–51 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lantz, B., Heller, B., & McKeown, N.: A network in a laptop: rapid prototyping for software-defined networks. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks, p. 19. ACM (2010)

  7. Feamster, N., Rexford, J., Zegura, E.: The road to SDN: an intellectual history of programmable networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 44(2), 8798 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Nunes, B.A.A., Mendonca, M., Nguyen, X.N., Obraczka, K., Turletti, T.: A survey of software-defined networking: past, present, and future of programmable networks. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 16(3), 1617–1634 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Shalimov, A., Zuikov, D., Zimarina, D., Pashkov, V., Smeliansky, R.: Advanced study of SDN/OpenFlow controllers. In: Proceedings of the 9th Central & Eastern European Software Engineering Conference in Russia, ACM, p. 1 (2013)

  10. Yan, Q., Yu, F.R., Gong, Q., Li, J.: Software-defined networking (SDN) and distributed denial of service (ddos) attacks in cloud computing environments: a survey, some research issues, and challenges. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 18(1), 602–622 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Oktian, Y.E., Lee, S., Lee, H., Lam, J.: Distributed SDN controller system: a survey on design choice. Comput. Netw. 121, 100–111 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. https://osrg.github.io/ryu/. Accessed 25 Mar 2019 (2019)

  13. Kaur, S., Singh, J., Ghumman, N.S.: Network programmability using pox controller. In: ICCCS International Conference on Communication, Computing & Systems, IEEE, Vol. 134, p. 138 (2014)

  14. Medved, J., Varga, R., Tkacik, A., Gray, K.: Opendaylight: towards a model-driven SDN controller architecture. In: World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks, pp. 1–6 (2014)

  15. Berde, P., Gerola, M., Hart, J., Higuchi, Y., Kobayashi, M., Koide, T., Lantz, B., O’Connor, B., Radoslavov, P., Snow, W.: Onos: towards an open, distributed SDN os. In: The Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking, pp. 1–6 (2014)

  16. https://onosproject.org/members/. Accessed 04 July 2019

  17. https://www.opendaylight.org/support/members. Accessed 06 July 2019

  18. Gude, N., Koponen, T., Pettit, J., Pfaff, B., Casado, M., Mckeown, N., Shenker, S.: Nox: towards an operating system for networks. Acm Sigcomm Comput. Commun. Rev. 38(3), 105–110 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Koponen, T., Casado, M., Gude, N., Stribling, J., Poutievski, L., Zhu, M., Ramanathan, R., Iwata, Y., Inoue, H., Hama, T., et al.: Onix: a distributed control platform for large-scale production networks. In: OSDI, Vol. 10, pp. 1–6 (2010)

  20. Morales, L.V., Murillo, A.F., Rueda, S.J.: Extending the floodlight controller, In: IEEE International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications, pp. 126–133 (2015)

  21. https://trema.github.io/trema/. Accessed: 15 Mar 2019 (2019)

  22. Bispo, P., Corujo, D., & Aguiar, R. L.: A qualitative and quantitative assessment of sdn controllers. In: 2017 International Young Engineers Forum (YEF-ECE), pp. 6–11. IEEE (2017)

  23. Zhu, L., Karim, M. M., Sharif, K., Li, F., Du, X., & Guizani, M.: SDN Controllers: Benchmarking & Performance Evaluation (2019). arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.04491

  24. Stancu, A.L., Halunga, S., Vulpe, A., Suciu, G., Fratu, O., & Popovici, E. C: A comparison between several software defined networking controllers. In: 2015 12th International Conference on Telecommunication in Modern Satellite, Cable and Broadcasting Services (TELSIKS), pp. 223–226. IEEE (2015)

  25. Yamei, F., Qing, L., Qi, H.: Research and comparative analysis of performance test on SDN controller. In: 2016 First IEEE International Conference on Computer Communication and the Internet (ICCCI), pp. 207–210. IEEE (2016)

  26. Bondkovskii, A., Keeney, J., van der Meer, S., & Weber, S.: Qualitative comparison of open-source sdn controllers. In: NOMS 2016-2016 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium, pp. 889–894. IEEE (2016)

  27. Ali, S.R.: Software defined networking (SDN). In: Ali, S.R. (ed.) Next Generation and Advanced Network Reliability Analysis, pp. 105–130. Springer, Cham (2019)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Li, H., De Grande, R.E., Boukerche, A.: An efficient cpp solution for resilience-oriented SDN controller deployment. In: Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium Workshops (IPDPSW), 2017 IEEE International, IEEE, pp. 540–549 (2017)

  29. Schmid, S., Suomela, J.: Exploiting locality in distributed SDN control. In: Proceedings of the Second ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking, ACM, pp. 121–126 (2013)

  30. Zhang, Y., Cui, L., Wang, W., Zhang, Y.: A survey on software defined networking with multiple controllers. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 103, 101–118 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Tajiki, M.M., Akbari, B., Shojafar, M., Ghasemi, S.H., Barazandeh, M.L., Mokari, N., et al.: CECT: computationally efficient congestion-avoidance and traffic engineering in software-defined cloud data centers. Clust. Comput. 21(4), 1881–1897 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tajiki, M.M., Akbari, B., Mokari, N.: QRTP: QoS-aware resource reallocation based on traffic prediction in software defined cloud networks. In: 2016 8th International Symposium on Telecommunications (IST), pp. 527–532. IEEE (2016)

  33. https://www.opendaylight.org/. Accessed 22 Feb 2019 (2019)

  34. Controller platform (oscp): Clustering. https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_Controller/Clustering. Accessed 17 Feb 2019 (2019)

  35. Agrawal, P.: RAFT: a recursive algorithm for fault tolerance. In: ICPP, pp. 814–821 (1985)

  36. Kim, T., Choi, S.-G., Myung, J., Lim, C.-G.: Load balancing on distributed datastore in OpenDaylight SDN controller cluster. In: 2017 IEEE Conference on Network Softwarization (NetSoft). IEEE, pp. 1–3 (2017)

  37. ONOS Distributed Primitives. https://wiki.onosproject.org/display/ONOS/DistributedPrimitives. Accessed 28 Feb 2019 (2019)

  38. Berde, P., Gerola, M., Hart, J., Higuchi, Y., Kobayashi, M., Koide, T.,… & Parulkar, G.: ONOS: towards an open, distributed SDN OS. In: Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking, pp. 1–6. ACM (2014)

  39. https://onosproject.org/in-action/. Accessed 22 June 2019

  40. Kuźniar, M., Perešíni, P., Kostić, D., Canini, M.: Methodology, measurement and analysis of flow table update characteristics in hardware openflow switches. Comput. Netw. 136, 22–36 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. OpenFlow switch specifications: http://www.openflow.org/documents/openflow-spec-v1.0.0.pdf. Accessed 1 Apr 2019

  42. Mininet: http://mininet.org/. Accessed 30 June 2019

  43. Lee, S., Ali, J., & Roh, B. H.: Performance comparison of software defined networking simulators for tactical network: Mininet vs. OPNET. In: 2019 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC), pp. 197–202. IEEE (2019)

  44. Badotra, S., & Singh, J.: Creating firewall in transport layer and application layer using software defined networking. In: Innovations in Computer Science and Engineering, pp. 95–103. Springer, Singapore (2019)

  45. Jarschel, M., Lehrieder, F., Magyari, Z., & Pries, R.: A flexible OpenFlow-controller benchmark. In: 2012 European Workshop on Software Defined Networking, pp. 48–53. IEEE (2012)

  46. Wireshark: https://www.wireshark.org/. Accessed 30 June 2019

  47. Wang, T., Su, Z., Xia, Y., Hamdi, M.: Rethinking the data center networking: architecture, network protocols, and resource sharing. IEEE Access 2, 1481–1496 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chitkara University Institute of Engineering and Technology, Chitkara University, Punjab, India

    Sumit Badotra & Surya Narayan Panda

Authors
  1. Sumit Badotra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Surya Narayan Panda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sumit Badotra.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Badotra, S., Panda, S.N. Evaluation and comparison of OpenDayLight and open networking operating system in software-defined networking. Cluster Comput 23, 1281–1291 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-019-02996-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-019-02996-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation