Prioritized admission control with load distribution over multiple controllers for scalable SDN-based mobile networks
- 165 Downloads
Software-defined networking (SDN) is a promising networking paradigm towards a centralized network control plane decoupled from the forwarding plane. Owing to its intrinsic separated architecture between the control and forwarding plane (OpenFlow switch specification 1.5.0. https://www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/sdn-resources/onf-specifications/openflow/openflow-switch-v1.5.0.noipr.pdf, 2014; Doria et al. in Forwarding and control element separation (ForCES) protocol specification. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5810), SDN control plane is more sensitive to scalability concerns compared to traditional management systems (GPP TS 32.101. Telecommunication management; Principles and high level requirements (Release 14), 2017) because forwarding plane nodes no longer have the ability to make decisions of incoming traffics which means forwarding plane performance is highly dependent on the control plane’s response (Karakus and Durresi in Comput Netw 112: 279–293, 2016; Oktian et al. in Comput Netw 121: 100–111, 2017; Bianco et al. in Comput Commun 102:130–138, 2016). To solve the problem, SDN architectures employing multiple controllers have been proposed. However, when the load is concentrated on certain controllers, incoming requests to the controllers can be blocked while others are idle resulting in low efficiency overall. Especially, in mobile networks, this problem can become critical because blocking or delay of requests related to handover causes a severe quality of service degradation. This paper proposes a prioritized admission control scheme with load distribution over multiple controllers for scalable SDN-based mobile networks in which handover messages are admitted with high priority and load distribution is performed over multiple controllers to prevent blocking of handover messages. From the performance evaluation of the proposed scheme, the blocking probability of handover messages can be reduced and controller resources can be efficiently utilized without significant additional signaling load compared to conventional schemes.
KeywordsSoftware-defined networking Scalability OpenFlow Mobility Admission control QoS Load migration
This work was supported by Institute for Information & communications Technology Promotion (IITP) grant funded by the Korea government(MSIP) (No. B0101-16-1272, Development of Device Collaborative Giga-Level Smart Cloudlet Technology).
- 1.OpenFlow switch specification 1.5.0. (2014). https://www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/sdn-resources/onf-specifications/openflow/openflow-switch-v1.5.0.noipr.pdf, December 2014.
- 2.Doria, A., et al. Forwarding and control element separation (ForCES) protocol specification. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5810.
- 3.GPP TS 32.101. (2017). Telecommunication management; Principles and high level requirements (Release 14), March 2017.Google Scholar
- 13.Jin, X., Li, L. E., Vanbever, L., & Rexford, J. (2013). SoftCell: Scalable and flexible cellular core network architecture. In Proceedings of ACM CoNEXT (pp. 163–174), December 2013.Google Scholar
- 14.Open Networking Foundation (ONF). (2013). Wireless & Mobile. WMWG (Wireless & Mobile Working Group) Charter Application, ONF. https://www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/working-groups/charter-wireless-mobile.pdf.
- 15.Koponen, T., Casado, M., Gude, N., Stribling, J., Poutievski, L., Zhu, M., et al. (2010). Onix: A distributed control platform for large-scale production networks. In Proceedings of OSDI.Google Scholar
- 16.Dixit, A., Hao, F., Mukherjee, S., Lakshman, T. V., & Kompella, R. (2013). Towards and elastic distributed SDN controller. Proceedings of ACM HotSDN, 43(4), 7–12.Google Scholar
- 17.Yeganeh, S., & Ganjali, Y. (2012). Kandoo: A framework for efficient and scalable offloading of control applications. In Proceedings of HotSDN (pp. 19–24).Google Scholar
- 18.Zander, J. S., Sarrar, N., & Schmid, S. (2014). Towards a scalable and near-sighted control plane architecture for WiFi SDNs. In Proceedings of ACM HotSDN (pp. 217–218), August 2014.Google Scholar
- 19.Levin, D., Wundsam, A., Heller, B., Handigol, N., & Feldmann, A. (2012). Logically centralized? State distribution trade-offs in software defined networks. In Proceedings of HotSDN.Google Scholar
- 20.Jain, S., Kumar, A., Mandal, S., Ong, J., Poutievski, L., Singh, A., et al. (2013). B4: Experience with a globally-deployed software defined WAN. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM (pp. 3–14).Google Scholar
- 21.Hong, C.-Y., Kandula, S., Mahajan, R., Zhang, M., Gill, V., Nanduri, M., et al. (2013). Achieving high utilization with software-driven WAN. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM (pp. 15–26).Google Scholar
- 22.Shah, S. A. R., Bae, S., Jaikar, A., & Noh, S. Y. (2016). An adaptive load monitoring solution for logically centralized SDN controller. In Proceedings of 18th Asia-Pacific network operations and management symposium (APNOMS) (pp. 1–6), Kanazawa.Google Scholar
- 23.Aslan, M., & Matrawy, A. (2016). Adaptive consistency for distributed SDN controllers. In Proceedings of 17th international telecommunications network strategy and planning symposium (networks) (pp. 150–157), Montreal, QC, 2016.Google Scholar
- 24.Kyung, Y., Hong, K., Nguyen, T. M., & Park, J. (2015). A load distribution scheme over multiple controllers for scalable SDN. In Proceedings of ICUFN (pp. 808–810), July 2015.Google Scholar
- 25.Kim, W., Sharma, P., Lee, J., Banerjee, S., Tourrilhes, J., Lee, S. J., et al. (2010). Automated and scalable qos control for network convergence. In Proceedings of USENIX INM/WREN (pp. 1–6), April 2010.Google Scholar
- 26.Huang, J., He, Y., Duan, Q., Yang, Q., & Wang, W. (2014). Admission control with flow aggregation for QoS provisioning in software-defined network. In Proceedings of IEEE global communications conference (GLOBECOM) (pp. 1182–1186).Google Scholar
- 27.Guck, J. W. & Kellerer, W. (2014). Achieving end-to-end real-time quality of service with software defined networking. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on cloud networking (CloudNet) (pp. 70–76).Google Scholar
- 28.Kyung, Y., Yim, T., Kim, T., Nguyen, T. M., & Park J. (2014). A QoS-aware differential processing control scheme for OpenFlow-based mobile networks. In IEICE transactions on information and systems (Vol. E97-D, No. 9, pp. 2178–2181), August 2014.Google Scholar
- 29.Wang, R., Butnariu, D., & Rexford, J. (2011). OpenFlow-based server load balancing gone wild. In Proceedings of USENIX HotICE (pp. 12–12), USA.Google Scholar
- 30.Handigol, N., Seetharaman, S., Flajslik, M., McKeown, N., & Johari, R. (2009). Plug-n-serve: Load-balancing web traffic using OpenFlow. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM demo, August 2009.Google Scholar
- 31.Namal, S., Ahmad, I., Gurtov, A., & Ylianttila, M. (2013). SDN based inter-technology load balancing leveraged by flow admission control. In Proceedings of IEEE SDN4FN (pp. 1–5), November 2013.Google Scholar
- 34.Yazici, V., Sunay, M. O., & Ercan, A. O. (2012). Controlling a software-defined network via distributed controllers. In Proceedings of 2012 NEM summit (pp. 16–20), October 2012.Google Scholar
- 36.Jarschel, M., et al. (2011). Modeling and performance evaluation of an OpenFlow architecture. In Proceedings of 23rd ITC (pp. 1–7).Google Scholar