IMPLEMENTATION AND COMPARISON OF SOFTWARE-DEFINED NETWORK CONTROLLERS IN VARIOUS SIMULATED NETWORK ENVIRONMENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33003/fjs-2025-0903-3215Keywords:
SDN Controller, POX, FAUCET, Network Simulator, Performance Metrics, OpenFlowAbstract
In today's ever-evolving networking landscape, Software Defined Networking (SDN) has emerged as a paradigm-shifting technology that promises greater flexibility, agility, and control over network infrastructures. However, how easy are the configuration, extensibility, and programmability of these SDN controllers, considering the practical implications for network administrators and developers? Despite the growing adoption of SDN, there is limited research on the comparative performance of controllers across multiple simulation environments. This study aims to explore the practical implementation and comparative evaluation of different SDN Controllers within diverse simulated network environments. Prominent controllers such as POX and Faucet are meticulously configured and deployed in simulated network environments created using GNS3 (Graphical Network Simulator-3), OPNET (Optimized Network Engineering Tools), NS3 (Network Simulator-3), OMNET++ (Objective Modular Network Testbed in C++) and MININET platforms. Furthermore. the study employs a range of performance metrics like controller latency, network throughput, packet loss, CPU (Central Processing Unit) and memory utilization to assess the efficacy and efficiency of each SDN Controller. The Results indicated that Mininet provided the lowest latency, whereas OPNET demonstrated better scalability for large-scale networks. NS3, though useful for SDN network design and visualization, exhibited higher CPU and memory utilization that might limit its scalability for large-scale SDN controller simulations. While GNS3 offered a balanced performance and resource utilization, making it a suitable choice for SDN controller simulation that prioritizes realistic network modelling, OMNET++, on the other hand, exhibited moderate performance metrics with efficient resource utilization, making it suitable for SDN controller simulations requiring a balance between performance...
References
Abuarqoub, A. (2020). A Review of the Control Plane Scalability Approaches in Software Defined Networking. Future Internet, 12(3), 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi12030049
Adekunle O. O., & OluwaseyiO. (2023). A SECURITY ARCHITECTURE FOR SOFTWARE DEFINED NETWORK (SDN). FUDMA JOURNAL OF SCIENCES, 2(2), 28 - 36. Retrieved from https://fjs.fudutsinma.edu.ng/index.php/fjs/article/view/1347
Bosi, L. L., Mendes, A. C., & Salles, R. M. (2024). A Review on the Overall Performance of SDN Controllers. In 2024 11th International Conference on Software Defined Systems (SDS). IEEE. 156-163. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10883890
Chouhan, R. K., Atulkar, M., & Nagwani, N. K. (2019). Performance Comparison of Ryu and Floodlight Controllers in Different SDN Topologies. 2019 1st International Conference on Advanced Technologies in Intelligent Control, Environment, Computing & Communication Engineering (ICATIECE). https://doi.org/10.1109/icatiece45860.2019.9063806
Franco-Almazan, A., Fernandez-Soriano, N., & Vidal-Beltrn, S. (2019). A comparison of Traditional Network and Software-defined Network schemes using OpenFlow protocol. WSEAS Transactions on Computers, 18, 210-216.
Gil, P., Garcia, G. J., Delgado, A., Medina, R. M., Calderon, A., & Marti, P. (2014, October). Computer Networks Virtualization with GNS3. In Proc IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. 2141-2144).
Gupta, N., Maashi, M. S., Tanwar, S., Badotra, S., Aljebreen, M., & Bharany, S. (2022). A Comparative Study of Software Defined Networking Controllers Using Mininet. Electronics, 11(17), 2715. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11172715
Imran, Ghaffar, Z., Alshahrani, A., Fayaz, M., Alghamdi, A. M., & Gwak, J. (2021). A topical review on machine learning, software defined networking, internet of things applications: Research limitations and challenges. Electronics, 10(8), 880.
Ligia Rodrigues Prete, Shinoda, A. A., Schweitzer, C. M., & de Oliveira, R. L. S. (2014). Simulation in an SDN network scenario using the POX Controller. 2014 IEEE Colombian Conference on Communications and Computing (COLCOM). https://doi.org/10.1109/colcomcon.2014.6860403
McKeown, N., Anderson, T., Balakrishnan, H., Parulkar, G., Peterson, L., Rexford, J., Shenker, S., & Turner, J. (2008). OpenFlow: Enabling innovation in campus networks. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communications Review, Apr. 2008.
Rego, A., Garcia, L., Sendra, S., & Lloret, J. (2018). Software Defined Network-based control system for an efficient traffic management for emergency situations in smart cities. Future Generation Computer Systems, 88, 243-253.
Salman, O., Elhajj, I. H., Kayssi, A., & Chehab, A. (2016). SDN controllers: A comparative study. 2016 18th Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conference (MELECON). https://doi.org/10.1109/melcon.2016.7495430
Singh, A., Kaur, N., & Kaur, H. (2022). Extensive performance analysis of OpenDayLight (ODL) and Open Network Operating System (ONOS) SDN controllers. Microprocessors and Microsystems, 95, 104715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpro.2022.104715
Tello, A. M. D., & Abolhasan, M. (2019). SDN Controllers Scalability and Performance Study. 2019 13th International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication Systems (ICSPCS). https://doi.org/10.1109/icspcs47537.2019.9008462
Tiamiyu, A. O. (2012). Comparative Analysis of Imitation Modeling Software Supporting Trusted Routing ( , ). In Topical issues on problems of information security: collection of scientific articles ( , ) Stelmashonok E. V. (ed.) 4953. http://infosec.spb.ru/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/SbornikNTr_20121.pdf
