Student Name: Tze-Jie Tan 陳斯傑 Advisor: Ying-Dar Lin Date: 24/09/2014 Architecture Design for Inter-Domain Control Plane and Data Plane in Software-Defined Networks Student Name: Tze-Jie Tan 陳斯傑 Advisor: Ying-Dar Lin Date: 24/09/2014 A Hierarchical Architecture with Management Framework and Multiple controllers in Software-Defined Networks

Outline Motivation Background Issues Problem statement Survey Solution approach Evaluation plan Expected contributions Schedule References

Motivation Software-Defined Network Multiple Controllers Decouple design, centralized control plane Programmability network Multiple Controllers Single controller has limited capability for multi-domain Inter Domain Connection Retain centralized network wide information Conectivity between controller and controller Cross domain service extension

Background – Multi-domain SDN Controllers[13] Host WAN Capacity: 100Mbps Latency: 5ms Latency: 25ms Capacity: 10Mbps Latency: 10ms Domain A Domain B Domain C

Background – Multi-domain SDN Controller Architecture[13] Virtualization Service Manager Event Processing Link Discovery Switch Manager Monitoring Manager Host Manager Path Computation Reachability Agent Monitoring Agent Connectivity Agent Reservation Agent Agent … OpenFlow Driver Open Proto. Driver Vendor Spec. Driver Core Messenger Comm. Driver 1 Comm. Driver 3 Comm. Driver 2 Intra-domain Inter-domain REST OpenFlow SDN Protocol AMQP States AMQP – Advanced Message Queuing Protocol

Background – Multi-domain SDN Controller Architecture[13] MLLDP – Messenger AMQP (client/server) : Subscribe and unsubscribe topic Pair and unpaid neighbor controller ID Send topic and message. Agents: Reachability – hosts in domain are reachable (LISP) Reservation – RSVP Connectivity – in charge peering links Monitoring – periodically send link latency between all pair points in domain. AMQP – Advanced Message Queuing Protocol

Background – HyperFlow Events[2] Messages Type: Event propagation (Consistency) Publishing events Replaying events Redirecting commands targeted to a non-local switch Proxying OpenFlow messages and replies Message Propertise Event, e Ctrl_id: event_id Command, c Ctrl_id: switch_id: event_id Advertisement Ctrl_id

Background – Onix Manipulation Method[3] Category Purpose Query Find entities Create, destroy Create and remove entities Access attributes Inspect and modify entities Notifications Receive updates about changes Synchronize Wait for updates being exported to network elements and controllers Configuration Configure how state is imported to and export from the NIB Pull Ask for entities to be imported on-demand

Issues Connectivity between Controllers How source domain controller reach destination domain controller? How does controllers exchange information? Service extension to inter-domain What information to exchange? How does service extend to other domain?

Notations Description Categories Notation Descriptions Topology G={S,L} The network topology Management Server M A Management plane server Controller C={ci|i>=1} Controllers Switch S={si|i>=1} Switches S, connect to multiple controllers Link L={li|i>=1} Links, connect all the switches and controllers OpenFlow OFcontrol OpenFlow control messages Time Cdown Controller down time

Problem statement Given: Objective: Constraints: M, C, G OFcontrol ,openflow message Objective: OFcontrol approx. to lower bound Minimize Cdown Constraints: M must alive all the time

Survey - Related Works Proposal Message Exchange Mode Messages Exchange Purpose Cross-domain Service Extend HyperFlow[2] Push/Pull NIB and Command Consistency No Onix[3] NIB Centralized management and consistency DISCO[13] Advanced Message Queuing Protocol MLLDP - Agent Multi-domain connectivity Our Proposal Peer-to-Peer (?) (To be designed) Multi-domain service exchange Yes

Draft Solution Approach Service Registration mechanism: Register service to controller and publish over domain for synchronization Controller B Controller A Router OF Switch OF Switch Tested: If an edge device is router, connectivity is not an issue Likely to be peer-to-peer, controller work as super node in a domain

Evaluation Plan Environment: Evaluation: OpenFlow 1.3 Mininet RYU controller Evaluation: OpenFlow Control flow: hierarchical vs. centralized vs. distributed bottleneck Controller Failover time vs. OpenFlow controller_roles mechanism

Expected Contributions Improve controllers performance Reduce controller load Control flow approximate to lower bound Multiple controllers solve scalability Improve controller availability Reduce controller downtime

Schedule Date 8/26 (Tue) pre-proposal 10/15 (Wed) proposal 11/12 (Wed) solution confirmed 1/07  (Wed) preliminary numerical result 2/25  (Wed) numerical results and thesis outline 3/11   (Wed.) ch1 (introduction) due 3/25   (Wed.) ch2 (background) due 4/01   (Wed.) ch3 (problem statement) due 4/15   (Wed.) ch4 (algorithms) due 4/29   (Wed.) ch5 (numerical results) due 5/06   (Wed.) a complete draft due (The oral exam can be confirmed only after a satisfactory version is done.) 5/20   (Wed.) patent application draft, if any 5/28   (Thur.) revised thesis sent to the oral exam committee members 6/04   (Thur.) oral exam 6/06   (Sat.) graduation ceremony 6/30   (Tue.) thesis filed

references 1 Sherwood, Rob, et al. "Carving research slices out of your production networks with OpenFlow." ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 40.1 (2010): 129-130. 2 Tootoonchian, Amin, and Yashar Ganjali. "HyperFlow: A distributed control plane for OpenFlow." Proceedings of the 2010 internet network management conference on Research on enterprise networking. USENIX Association, 2010. 3 Koponen, Teemu, et al. "Onix: A Distributed Control Platform for Large-scale Production Networks." OSDI. Vol. 10. 2010. 4 Hassas Yeganeh, Soheil, and Yashar Ganjali. "Kandoo: a framework for efficient and scalable offloading of control applications." Proceedings of the first workshop on Hot topics in software defined networks. ACM, 2012. 5 Schmid, Stefan, and Jukka Suomela. "Exploiting locality in distributed sdn control." Proceedings of the second ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Hot topics in software defined networking. ACM, 2013. 6 Pfaff, Ben, B. LANTZ, and B. HELLER. "OpenFlow switch specification, version 1.3. 0." Open Networking Foundation (2012). 7 FlowVisor – FlowVisor – Confluence. https://openflow.stanford.edu/display/DOCS/Flowvisor. 11th August, 2014 8 Yu, Minlan, et al. "Scalable flow-based networking with DIFANE." ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 40.4 (2010): 351-362. 9 Curtis, Andrew R., et al. "Devoflow: scaling flow management for high-performance networks." ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review. Vol. 41. No. 4. ACM, 2011. 10 Lin, Pingping, Jun Bi, and Hongyu Hu. "Asic: an architecture for scalable intra-domain control in openflow." Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Future Internet Technologies. ACM, 2012.

references 11 Dixit, Advait, et al. "Towards an elastic distributed sdn controller." Proceedings of the second ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Hot topics in software defined networking. ACM, 2013. 12 Yeganeh, Soheil Hassas, Amin Tootoonchian, and Yashar Ganjali. "On scalability of software-defined networking." Communications Magazine, IEEE 51.2 (2013): 136-141. 13 Phemius, Kévin, Mathieu Bouet, and Jérémie Leguay. "DISCO: Distributed multi-domain SDN controllers." arXiv preprint arXiv:1308.6138 (2013).