TL;DR: In this article, two of the most popular controllers, Floodlight and OpenDaylight are compared in terms of Network QoS parameters such as delay and loss in different topologies and network loads.
Abstract: Software Defined Network is new network architecture. One of its components is the controller, which is the intelligent part of SDN. Many controllers such as Floodlight, Open Daylight, Maestro, NOX, POX and many others are released. The question is which controller can perform better in which situations. Many works were done to compare controllers regarding architecture, efficiency and controllers’ features. In this paper, two of the most popular controllers, Floodlight and OpenDaylight are compared in terms of Network QoS parameters such as delay and loss in different topologies and network loads. This paper can help researchers to choose the best controller in different use cases such as clouds and multimedia. The results with 95% confidence interval show that OpenDaylight outperforms Floodlight in low loaded networks and also for tree topology in mid loaded networks in terms of latency. Floodlight can outperform OpenDaylight in heavy loaded networks for tree topology in terms of packet loss and in linear topology in terms of latency. There is no significant difference in performance of Floodlight and OpenDaylight controllers in other cases.
TL;DR: Simulation of the two controllers of Floodlight and Ryu and the experimental results show that in all kinds of topology, the Floodlight controller has higher bandwidth and lower latency than Ryu controller, so the Floodlights controller has better performance.
Abstract: As the traditional network architecture can not meet the requirements of network users for high-quality network services, software defined network (SDN) has been proposed as a new network architecture. SDN divides the data plane and control plane in the network equipment, so that the controller can schedule the data in the network flexibly through openflow protocol. Floodlight and Ryu are two typical SDN controllers proposed for different purposes. In this paper, we first introduce Floodlight and Ryu, and then introduce the tools used in the paper: mininet and qperf. Then, we simulate the two controllers of Floodlight and Ryu, and compare their bandwidth and delay performance under different network topologies. The experimental results show that in all kinds of topology, the Floodlight controller has higher bandwidth and lower latency than Ryu controller, so the Floodlight controller has better performance.
TL;DR: This paper is a contribution towards performance evaluation of scalability of the Floodlights Controller by implementing multiple scenarios experimented on the simulation tool of Mininet, Floodlight Controller and iPerf.
Abstract: Software Defined Network is the booming area of research in the domain of networking With growing number of devices connecting to the global village of internet, it becomes inevitable to adapt to any new technology before testing its scalability in presence of dynamic circumstances While a lot of research is going on to provide solution to overcome the limitations of the traditional network, it gives a call to research community to test the applicability and caliber to withstand the fault tolerance of the provided solution in the form of SDN Controllers Out of existing multiple controllers providing the SDN functionalities to the network, one of the stellar controllers is Floodlight Controller This paper is a contribution towards performance evaluation of scalability of the Floodlight Controller by implementing multiple scenarios experimented on the simulation tool of Mininet, Floodlight Controller and iPerf Floodlight Controller is tested in the simulation environment by observing throughput and latency parameters of the controller and checked its performance in dynamic networking conditions over Mesh topology by exponentially increasing the number of nodes
TL;DR: The authors present a set of techniques that provide more security in the Floodlight SDN controller that are implemented as a network application and describe the basic mechanism.
Abstract: In this article the authors give a general idea of software-defined networking (SDN). The paper contains a description of Floodlight SDN controller and an issue of network security management. The authors present a set of techniques that provide more security in the controller. They are implemented as a network application and describe the basic mechanism.
TL;DR: This research article is a contribution towards performance evaluation of scalability of the Floodlight Controller by implementing dual scenarios implemented, experimented and analyzed on the emulation tool of OFNet.
Abstract: Software Defined Network is the thriving area of research in the realm of networking With growing number of devices connecting to the global village of internet, it becomes inevitable to adapt to any new technology before testing its scalability in presence of dynamic circumstances While a lot of research is going on to provide solution to overcome the limitations of the traditional network, it gives a call to research community to test the competence and applicability to hold up the fault tolerance of the solution offered in the form of SDN Controllers Out of the accessible multiple controllers with enabled the SDN functionalities to the network infrastructure, one of the best choice in controllers is Floodlight Controller This research article is a contribution towards performance evaluation of scalability of the Floodlight Controller by implementing dual scenarios implemented, experimented and analyzed on the emulation tool of OFNet Floodlight Controller is tested in the emulation environment by observing eight different parameters of the controller and checked its performance in scalable networking conditions over linear topology by gradually increasing the number of nodes