TY - GEN
T1 - Comparison of SDN OpenFlow network simulator and emulators
AU - Wang, Shie-Yuan
PY - 2014/9/26
Y1 - 2014/9/26
N2 - In this paper, we compare and evaluate the correctness, performance, and scalability of EstiNet OpenFlow simulator, EstiNet OpenFlow emulator, and Mininet OpenFlow emulator over a set of grid networks. The popular Floodlight OpenFlow controller is used without any modification to control the simulated/emulated OpenFlow switches created in these tools. We performed experiments over a set of N × N grid networks, where N = 5, 6,..., 31 and used the real-world ping program to observe whether the average RTTs reported by these ping packets are correct or not over these tools. We found that in EstiNet simulation, the simulated results of the average RTT are always correct and repeatable, but EstiNet simulator needs more time to finish the simulation when the network size becomes larger. As for emulation, we found that Mininet emulator generated strange results that cannot be explained over some network sizes. In addition, Mininet emulator spends a huge amount of time on its program launch, network setup, and resource releasing when the network size is large. As for EstiNet emulator, we found that it generated good performance and scalability and it used less time to obtain results.
AB - In this paper, we compare and evaluate the correctness, performance, and scalability of EstiNet OpenFlow simulator, EstiNet OpenFlow emulator, and Mininet OpenFlow emulator over a set of grid networks. The popular Floodlight OpenFlow controller is used without any modification to control the simulated/emulated OpenFlow switches created in these tools. We performed experiments over a set of N × N grid networks, where N = 5, 6,..., 31 and used the real-world ping program to observe whether the average RTTs reported by these ping packets are correct or not over these tools. We found that in EstiNet simulation, the simulated results of the average RTT are always correct and repeatable, but EstiNet simulator needs more time to finish the simulation when the network size becomes larger. As for emulation, we found that Mininet emulator generated strange results that cannot be explained over some network sizes. In addition, Mininet emulator spends a huge amount of time on its program launch, network setup, and resource releasing when the network size is large. As for EstiNet emulator, we found that it generated good performance and scalability and it used less time to obtain results.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84908191197&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/ISCC.2014.6912609
DO - 10.1109/ISCC.2014.6912609
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:84908191197
T3 - Proceedings - International Symposium on Computers and Communications
BT - 2014 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications, ISCC 2014 - Proceedings
PB - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
Y2 - 23 June 2014 through 26 June 2014
ER -