A virtual service placement approach based on improved quantum genetic algorithm

  • Gang Xiong
  • Yu-xiang Hu
  • Le Tian
  • Ju-long Lan
  • Jun-fei Li
  • Qiao Zhou
Article

Abstract

Despite the critical role that middleboxes play in introducing new network functionality, management and innovation of them are still severe challenges for network operators, since traditional middleboxes based on hardware lack service flexibility and scalability. Recently, though new networking technologies, such as network function virtualization (NFV) and software-defined networking (SDN), are considered as very promising drivers to design cost-efficient middlebox service architectures, how to guarantee transmission efficiency has drawn little attention under the condition of adding virtual service process for traffic. Therefore, we focus on the service deployment problem to reduce the transport delay in the network with a combination of NFV and SDN. First, a framework is designed for service placement decision, and an integer linear programming model is proposed to resolve the service placement and minimize the network transport delay. Then a heuristic solution is designed based on the improved quantum genetic algorithm. Experimental results show that our proposed method can calculate automatically the optimal placement schemes. Our scheme can achieve lower overall transport delay for a network compared with other schemes and reduce 30% of the average traffic transport delay compared with the random placement scheme.

Keywords

Software-defined networking (SDN) Network function virtualization Quantum genetic algorithm Middlebox 

CLC number

TP393 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the reviewers of China Future Network Development and Innovation Forum 2015 (5th FNF). Their careful examination of the manuscript and valuable comments helped us considerably improve the paper.

References

  1. Anderson, J.W., Braud, R., Kapoor, R., et al., 2012. xOMB: extensible open middleboxes with commodity servers. Proc. 8th ACM/IEEE Symp. on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems, p.49–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2396556.2396566Google Scholar
  2. Anwer, B., Benson, T., Feamster, N., et al., 2013. A slick control plane for network middleboxes. Proc. 2nd ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking, p.147–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2491185.2491223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Basta, A., Kellerer, W., Hoffmann, M., et al., 2014. Applying NFV and SDN to LTE mobile core gateways, the functions placement problem. Proc. 4th Workshop on All Things Cellular: Operations, Applications, and Challenges, p.33–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2627585.2627592Google Scholar
  4. Carpenter, B., Brim, S., 2002. Middleboxes: Taxonomy and Issues, RFC 3234. The Internet Engineering Task Force. Available from http://www.rfc-base.org/rfc-3234.html.Google Scholar
  5. Cheng, G.Z., Chen, H.C., Hu, H.C., et al., 2015. Enabling network function combination via service chain instantiation. Comput. Netw., 92(Part 2):396–407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2015.09.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiosi, M., Clarke, D., Willis, P., et al., 2012. Network functions virtualisation—introductory white paper. SDN and OpenFlow World Congress. Available from https://portal.etsi.org/NFV/NFV_White_Paper.pdf.Google Scholar
  7. de Turck, F., Boutaba, R., Chemouil, P., et al., 2015. Guest editors’ introduction: special issue on efficient management of SDN/NFV-based systems—part I. IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manag., 12(1): 1–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNSM.2015.2403775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fayazbakhsh, S.K., Chaing, L., Sekar, V., et al., 2014). Enforcing network-wide policies in the presence of dynamic middlebox actions using FlowTags. 11th USENIX Symp. on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, p.533–546.Google Scholar
  9. Gember, A., Grandl, R., Anand, A., et al., 2012a). Stratos: virtual middleboxes as first-class entities. Technical Report, No. TR1771, University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  10. Gember, A., Prabhu, P., Ghadiyali, Z., et al., 2012b). Towards software-defined middlebox networking. Proc. 11th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks, p.7–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2390231.2390233Google Scholar
  11. Gember, A., Viswanathan, R., Prakash, C., et al., 2014. OpenNF: enabling innovation in network function control. Proc. ACM Conf. on SIGCOMM, p.163–174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2740070.2626313Google Scholar
  12. Greenberg, A., Hjalmtysson, G., Maltz, D.A., et al., 2005. A clean slate 4D approach to network control and management. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., 35(5): 41–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1096536.1096541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gude, N., Koponen, T., Pettit, J., et al., 2008. NOX: towards an operating system for networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., 38(3): 105–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1384609.1384625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gushchin, A., Walid, A., Tang, A., 2015. Scalable routing in SDN-enabled networks with consolidated middleboxes. Proc. ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Middleboxes and Network Function Virtualization, p.55–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2785989.2785999Google Scholar
  15. Hwang, J., Ramakrishnan, K.K., Wood, T., 2015. NetVM: high performance and flexible networking using virtualization on commodity platforms. IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manag., 12(1): 34–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNSM.2015.2401568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Joseph, D., Stoica, I., 2008. Modeling middleboxes. IEEE Netw., 22(5): 20–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MNET.2008.4626228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lange, S., Gebert, S., Zinner, T., et al., 2015. Heuristic approaches to the controller placement problem in large scale SDN networks. IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manag., 12(1): 4–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNSM.2015.2402432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li, Y., Chen, M., 2015. Software-defined network function virtualization: a survey. IEEE Access, 3: 2542–2553. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2499271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lu, B., Chen, J.Y., Cui, H.Y., et al., 2013. A virtual network mapping algorithm based on integer programming. J. Zhejiang Univ.-Sci. C (Comput. & Electron.), 14(12): 899–908. http://dx.doi.org/10.1631/jzus.C1300120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Malossini, A., Blanzieri, E., Calarco., T., 2008. Quantum genetic optimization. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., 12(2): 231–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2007.905006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Matias, J., Garay, J., Toledo, N., et al., 2015. Toward an SDN-enabled NFV architecture. IEEE Commun. Mag., 53(4): 187–193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2015.7081093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McKeown, N., Anderson, T., Balakrishnan, H., et al., 2008. OpenFlow: enabling innovation in campus networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., 38(2): 69–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1355734.1355746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mohammadkhan, A., Ghapani, S., Liu, G.Y., et al., 2015. Virtual function placement and traffic steering in flexible and dynamic software defined networks. IEEE Int. Workshop on Local and Metropolitan Area Networks, p.1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/LANMAN.2015.7114738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mohammed, A.M., Elhefnawy, N.A., El-Sherbiny, M.M., et al., 2012). Quantum crossover based quantum genetic algorithm for solving non-linear programming. 8th Int. Conf. on Informatics and Systems, p.BIO-145-BIO-153.Google Scholar
  25. Nunes, B.A.A., Mendonca, M., Nguyen, X.N., et al., 2014. A survey of software-defined networking: past, present, and future of programmable networks. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor., 16(3): 1617–1634. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SURV.2014.012214.00180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Open Networking Foundation (ONF), 2012. Software-Defined Networking: the New Norm for Networks. ONF White Paper.Google Scholar
  27. Qazi, Z.A., Tu, C.C., Chiang, L., et al., 2013. SIMPLE-fying middlebox policy enforcement using SDN. Proc. ACM SIGCOMM Conf., p.27–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2486001.2486022Google Scholar
  28. Qi, H., Shiraz, M., Liu, J.Y., et al., 2014. Data center network architecture in cloud computing: review, taxonomy, and open research issues. J. Zhejiang Univ.-Sci. C (Comput. & Electron.), 15(9): 776–793. http://dx.doi.org/10.1631/jzus.C1400013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rajagopalan, S., Williams, D., Jamjoom, H., et al., 2013. Split/Merge: system support for elastic execution in virtual middleboxes. 10th USENIX Symp. on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, p.227–240.Google Scholar
  30. Sekar, V., Ratnasamy, S., Reiter, M.K., et al., 2011. The middlebox manifesto: enabling innovation in middlebox deployment. Proc. 10th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks, p.1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2070562.2070583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sekar, V., Egi, N., Ratnasamy, S., et al., 2012. Design and implementation of a consolidated middlebox architecture. Proc. 9th USENIX Conf. on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, p.323–336.Google Scholar
  32. Shen, J., He, W.B., Liu, X., et al., 2015. End-to-end delay analysis for networked systems. Front. Inform. Technol. Electron. Eng., 16(9): 732–743. http://dx.doi.org/10.1631/FITEE.1400414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sherry, J., Hasan, S., Scott, C., et al., 2012. Making middleboxes someone else’s problem: network processing as a cloud service. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., 42(4): 13–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2377677.2377680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Walfish, M., Stribling, J., Krohn, M., et al., 2004. Middleboxes no longer considered harmful. Proc. 6th Symp. on Operating Systems Design & Implementation, p.215–230.Google Scholar
  35. Zegura, E.W., Calvert, K.L., Bhattacharjee, S., 1996. How to model an internetwork. 15th Annual Joint Conf. of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, p.594–602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/INFCOM.1996.493353Google Scholar
  36. Zhang, Y., Beheshti, N., Beliveau, L., et al., 2013. StEERING: a software-defined networking for inline service chaining. Proc. 21st IEEE Int. Conf. on Network Protocols, p.1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICNP.2013.6733615Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Journal of Zhejiang University Science Editorial Office and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gang Xiong
    • 1
  • Yu-xiang Hu
    • 1
  • Le Tian
    • 2
  • Ju-long Lan
    • 1
  • Jun-fei Li
    • 1
  • Qiao Zhou
    • 1
  1. 1.National Digital Switching System Engineering & Technological Research CenterZhengzhouChina
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations