A network in a laptop: rapid prototyping for software-defined networks
20 Oct 2010-pp 19
TL;DR: The greatest value of Mininet will be supporting collaborative network research, by enabling self-contained SDN prototypes which anyone with a PC can download, run, evaluate, explore, tweak, and build upon.
Abstract: Mininet is a system for rapidly prototyping large networks on the constrained resources of a single laptop The lightweight approach of using OS-level virtualization features, including processes and network namespaces, allows it to scale to hundreds of nodes Experiences with our initial implementation suggest that the ability to run, poke, and debug in real time represents a qualitative change in workflow We share supporting case studies culled from over 100 users, at 18 institutions, who have developed Software-Defined Networks (SDN) Ultimately, we think the greatest value of Mininet will be supporting collaborative network research, by enabling self-contained SDN prototypes which anyone with a PC can download, run, evaluate, explore, tweak, and build upon
Citations
More filters
01 Jan 2015
TL;DR: This paper presents an in-depth analysis of the hardware infrastructure, southbound and northbound application programming interfaces (APIs), network virtualization layers, network operating systems (SDN controllers), network programming languages, and network applications, and presents the key building blocks of an SDN infrastructure using a bottom-up, layered approach.
Abstract: The Internet has led to the creation of a digital society, where (almost) everything is connected and is accessible from anywhere. However, despite their widespread adoption, traditional IP networks are complex and very hard to manage. It is both difficult to configure the network according to predefined policies, and to reconfigure it to respond to faults, load, and changes. To make matters even more difficult, current networks are also vertically integrated: the control and data planes are bundled together. Software-defined networking (SDN) is an emerging paradigm that promises to change this state of affairs, by breaking vertical integration, separating the network's control logic from the underlying routers and switches, promoting (logical) centralization of network control, and introducing the ability to program the network. The separation of concerns, introduced between the definition of network policies, their implementation in switching hardware, and the forwarding of traffic, is key to the desired flexibility: by breaking the network control problem into tractable pieces, SDN makes it easier to create and introduce new abstractions in networking, simplifying network management and facilitating network evolution. In this paper, we present a comprehensive survey on SDN. We start by introducing the motivation for SDN, explain its main concepts and how it differs from traditional networking, its roots, and the standardization activities regarding this novel paradigm. Next, we present the key building blocks of an SDN infrastructure using a bottom-up, layered approach. We provide an in-depth analysis of the hardware infrastructure, southbound and northbound application programming interfaces (APIs), network virtualization layers, network operating systems (SDN controllers), network programming languages, and network applications. We also look at cross-layer problems such as debugging and troubleshooting. In an effort to anticipate the future evolution of this new paradigm, we discuss the main ongoing research efforts and challenges of SDN. In particular, we address the design of switches and control platforms—with a focus on aspects such as resiliency, scalability, performance, security, and dependability—as well as new opportunities for carrier transport networks and cloud providers. Last but not least, we analyze the position of SDN as a key enabler of a software-defined environment.
3,589 citations
TL;DR: The SDN architecture and the OpenFlow standard in particular are presented, current alternatives for implementation and testing of SDN-based protocols and services are discussed, current and future SDN applications are examined, and promising research directions based on the SDN paradigm are explored.
Abstract: The idea of programmable networks has recently re-gained considerable momentum due to the emergence of the Software-Defined Networking (SDN) paradigm. SDN, often referred to as a ''radical new idea in networking'', promises to dramatically simplify network management and enable innovation through network programmability. This paper surveys the state-of-the-art in programmable networks with an emphasis on SDN. We provide a historic perspective of programmable networks from early ideas to recent developments. Then we present the SDN architecture and the OpenFlow standard in particular, discuss current alternatives for implementation and testing of SDN-based protocols and services, examine current and future SDN applications, and explore promising research directions based on the SDN paradigm.
2,013 citations
Cites background from "A network in a laptop: rapid protot..."
...Mininet [64] allows an entire OpenFlow network to be emu-...
[...]
Posted Content•
TL;DR: Software-Defined Networking (SDN) as discussed by the authors is an emerging paradigm that promises to change this state of affairs, by breaking vertical integration, separating the network's control logic from the underlying routers and switches, promoting (logical) centralization of network control, and introducing the ability to program the network.
Abstract: Software-Defined Networking (SDN) is an emerging paradigm that promises to change this state of affairs, by breaking vertical integration, separating the network's control logic from the underlying routers and switches, promoting (logical) centralization of network control, and introducing the ability to program the network. The separation of concerns introduced between the definition of network policies, their implementation in switching hardware, and the forwarding of traffic, is key to the desired flexibility: by breaking the network control problem into tractable pieces, SDN makes it easier to create and introduce new abstractions in networking, simplifying network management and facilitating network evolution. In this paper we present a comprehensive survey on SDN. We start by introducing the motivation for SDN, explain its main concepts and how it differs from traditional networking, its roots, and the standardization activities regarding this novel paradigm. Next, we present the key building blocks of an SDN infrastructure using a bottom-up, layered approach. We provide an in-depth analysis of the hardware infrastructure, southbound and northbound APIs, network virtualization layers, network operating systems (SDN controllers), network programming languages, and network applications. We also look at cross-layer problems such as debugging and troubleshooting. In an effort to anticipate the future evolution of this new paradigm, we discuss the main ongoing research efforts and challenges of SDN. In particular, we address the design of switches and control platforms -- with a focus on aspects such as resiliency, scalability, performance, security and dependability -- as well as new opportunities for carrier transport networks and cloud providers. Last but not least, we analyze the position of SDN as a key enabler of a software-defined environment.
1,968 citations
NEC1
TL;DR: This work identifies additional steps that will be required for ONOS to support use cases such as core network traffic engineering and scheduling, and to become a usable open source, distributed network OS platform that the SDN community can build upon.
Abstract: We present our experiences to date building ONOS (Open Network Operating System), an experimental distributed SDN control platform motivated by the performance, scalability, and availability requirements of large operator networks. We describe and evaluate two ONOS prototypes. The first version implemented core features: a distributed, but logically centralized, global network view; scale-out; and fault tolerance. The second version focused on improving performance. Based on experience with these prototypes, we identify additional steps that will be required for ONOS to support use cases such as core network traffic engineering and scheduling, and to become a usable open source, distributed network OS platform that the SDN community can build upon.
1,137 citations
Cites methods from "A network in a laptop: rapid protot..."
...For this experiment, we connected a 6-node ONOS cluster to an emulated Mininet [15] network of 206 software [12] switches and 416 links....
[...]
08 Apr 2014
TL;DR: The intellectual history of programmable networks, including active networks, early efforts to separate the control and data plane, and more recent work on OpenFlow and network operating systems are traced.
Abstract: Software Defined Networking (SDN) is an exciting technology that enables innovation in how we design and manage networks. Although this technology seems to have appeared suddenly, SDN is part of a long history of efforts to make computer networks more programmable. In this paper, we trace the intellectual history of programmable networks, including active networks, early efforts to separate the control and data plane, and more recent work on OpenFlow and network operating systems. We highlight key concepts, as well as the technology pushes and application pulls that spurred each innovation. Along the way, we debunk common myths and misconceptions about the technologies and clarify the relationship between SDN and related technologies such as network virtualization.
925 citations
References
More filters
01 Jul 2008
TL;DR: The question posed here is: Can one build a network operating system at significant scale?
Abstract: As anyone who has operated a large network can attest, enterprise networks are difficult to manage. That they have remained so despite significant commercial and academic efforts suggests the need for a different network management paradigm. Here we turn to operating systems as an instructive example in taming management complexity. In the early days of computing, programs were written in machine languages that had no common abstractions for the underlying physical resources. This made programs hard to write, port, reason about, and debug. Modern operating systems facilitate program development by providing controlled access to high-level abstractions for resources (e.g., memory, storage, communication) and information (e.g., files, directories). These abstractions enable programs to carry out complicated tasks safely and efficiently on a wide variety of computing hardware. In contrast, networks are managed through low-level configuration of individual components. Moreover, these configurations often depend on the underlying network; for example, blocking a user’s access with an ACL entry requires knowing the user’s current IP address. More complicated tasks require more extensive network knowledge; forcing guest users’ port 80 traffic to traverse an HTTP proxy requires knowing the current network topology and the location of each guest. In this way, an enterprise network resembles a computer without an operating system, with network-dependent component configuration playing the role of hardware-dependent machine-language programming. What we clearly need is an “operating system” for networks, one that provides a uniform and centralized programmatic interface to the entire network. Analogous to the read and write access to various resources provided by computer operating systems, a network operating system provides the ability to observe and control a network. A network operating system does not manage the network itself; it merely provides a programmatic interface. Applications implemented on top of the network operating system perform the actual management tasks. The programmatic interface should be general enough to support a broad spectrum of network management applications. Such a network operating system represents two major conceptual departures from the status quo. First, the network operating system presents programs with a centralized programming model; programs are written as if the entire network were present on a single machine (i.e., one would use Dijkstra to compute shortest paths, not Bellman-Ford). This requires (as in [3, 8, 14] and elsewhere) centralizing network state. Second, programs are written in terms of high-level abstractions (e.g., user and host names), not low-level configuration parameters (e.g., IP and MAC addresses). This allows management directives to be enforced independent of the underlying network topology, but it requires that the network operating system carefully maintain the bindings (i.e., mappings) between these abstractions and the low-level configurations. Thus, a network operating system allows management applications to be written as centralized programs over highlevel names as opposed to the distributed algorithms over low-level addresses we are forced to use today. While clearly a desirable goal, achieving this transformation from distributed algorithms to centralized programming presents significant technical challenges, and the question we pose here is: Can one build a network operating system at significant scale?
1,681 citations
04 Oct 2010
TL;DR: Onix provides a general API for control plane implementations, while allowing them to make their own trade-offs among consistency, durability, and scalability.
Abstract: Computer networks lack a general control paradigm, as traditional networks do not provide any network-wide management abstractions. As a result, each new function (such as routing) must provide its own state distribution, element discovery, and failure recovery mechanisms. We believe this lack of a common control platform has significantly hindered the development of flexible, reliable and feature-rich network control planes.To address this, we present Onix, a platform on top of which a network control plane can be implemented as a distributed system. Control planes written within Onix operate on a global view of the network, and use basic state distribution primitives provided by the platform. Thus Onix provides a general API for control plane implementations, while allowing them to make their own trade-offs among consistency, durability, and scalability.
1,463 citations
01 Jan 2010
TL;DR: With simulation based studies, the approach can be studied in detail at varying scales, with varying data applications, varying field conditions, and will result in reproducible and analyzable results.
Abstract: As networks of computing devices grow larger and more complex, the need for highly accurate and scalable network simulation technologies becomes critical. Despite the emergence of large-scale testbeds for network research, simulation still plays a vital role in terms of scalability (both in size and in experimental speed), reproducibility, rapid prototyping, and education. With simulation based studies, the approach can be studied in detail at varying scales, with varying data applications, varying field conditions, and will result in reproducible and analyzable results.
1,462 citations
16 Aug 2009
TL;DR: Through the design and implementation of PortLand, a scalable, fault tolerant layer 2 routing and forwarding protocol for data center environments, it is shown that PortLand holds promise for supporting a ``plug-and-play" large-scale, data center network.
Abstract: This paper considers the requirements for a scalable, easily manageable, fault-tolerant, and efficient data center network fabric. Trends in multi-core processors, end-host virtualization, and commodities of scale are pointing to future single-site data centers with millions of virtual end points. Existing layer 2 and layer 3 network protocols face some combination of limitations in such a setting: lack of scalability, difficult management, inflexible communication, or limited support for virtual machine migration. To some extent, these limitations may be inherent for Ethernet/IP style protocols when trying to support arbitrary topologies. We observe that data center networks are often managed as a single logical network fabric with a known baseline topology and growth model. We leverage this observation in the design and implementation of PortLand, a scalable, fault tolerant layer 2 routing and forwarding protocol for data center environments. Through our implementation and evaluation, we show that PortLand holds promise for supporting a ``plug-and-play" large-scale, data center network.
1,238 citations
"A network in a laptop: rapid protot..." refers methods in this paper
...Examples of software-dened networks include 4D [7], Ethane [4], PortLand [ 12 ], and FlowVisor [22])....
[...]
27 Aug 2007
TL;DR: Ethane allows managers to define a single network-wide fine-grain policy, and then enforces it directly, and this design is backwards-compatible with existing hosts and switches.
Abstract: This paper presents Ethane, a new network architecture for the enterprise. Ethane allows managers to define a single network-wide fine-grain policy, and then enforces it directly. Ethane couples extremely simple flow-based Ethernet switches with a centralized controller that manages the admittance and routing of flows. While radical, this design is backwards-compatible with existing hosts and switches.We have implemented Ethane in both hardware and software, supporting both wired and wireless hosts. Our operational Ethane network has supported over 300 hosts for the past four months in a large university network, and this deployment experience has significantly affected Ethane's design.
1,079 citations