Optimization of SDN Flow Operations in Multi-Failure Restoration Scenarios

Astaneh, Saeed Akhavan; Heydari, Shahram Shah

doi:10.1109/tnsm.2016.2580590

Cited by 54 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The recovery from link failure procedure is demonstrated in line (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13). However, the algorithm also includes the reversion procedure that is activated after a failure recurs (line [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32] and it is no less important than the recovery process [44]. This procedure is required to take into account the percentage of routing flaps that is necessary for the experimental analysis.…”

Section: Framework Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In such a case, it is necessary to reset the primary path to its initial state (i.e. optimal) as deliberated in (lines [19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. However, in case when there is a failure that is not captured by the prediction module then, it is considered as F N and such failures are tackled by calling Algorithm 1 as outlined in (line [28][29][30].…”

Section: Framework Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unlike existing works, the authors in [19] considered the problem of minimising the time of flow entries required when diverting from an affected primary path to a backup one. Although, the presented algorithms do not guarantee the shortest path from end-to-end, nonetheless, they open a new direction that is worth exploring.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Smart routing: Towards proactive fault handling of software-defined networks

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software-defined networking offers numerous benefits against the legacy networking systems through simplifying the process of network management and reducing the cost of network configuration. Currently, the management of failures in the data plane is limited to two mechanisms: proactive and reactive. Such failure recovery techniques are activated after occurrences of failures. Therefore, packet loss is highly likely to occur as a result of service disruption and unavailability. This issue is not only related to the slow speed of recovery mechanisms, but also the delay caused by the failure detection process. In this paper, we define a new approach to the management of fault tolerance in software-defined networks where the goal is to eliminate the convergence process altogether, rather than speed up failure detection and recovery. We propose a new framework, called Smart Routing, which works based on the forewarning signs on failures in order to compute alternative paths and isolate the risky links from the routing tables of the data plane devices. We validate our framework through a set of experiments that demonstrate how the underlying model runs.

show abstract

Section: Framework Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Framework Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Smart routing: Towards proactive fault handling of software-defined networks

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore,in time-sensitive situations, such as disasters, in which several paths must be changes in a short period of time, not all the flow changes will be successful . For example, SONET (Synchronous Optical Network) needs to be recovered within 50 ms, but, it will be challenging to change more than six flows within that time [10]. This time constraint can lead to delays or even service outage.…”

Section: Background and Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Proposal of Control Method Considering the Path Switching Time of SDN and Its Evaluation

Gotani¹,

Takahira²,

Hata³

et al. 2019

Adv. sci. technol. eng. syst. j.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, communication demands often change because of the various network services in companies and individuals. Software Defined Networking (SDN) has emerged as a viable control paradigm that allows flexible communication, using OpenFlow as its default standard and enabler. However, when changes happen frequently in SDN networks due to unforeseen reasons -such as a network failure or topology changes-it takes a long time to perform all the operations. For instance, to change a routing path, first new paths must be calculated, then the controller must transmit the commands to the network elements, which has to process those commands. This process can cause a delay, or even disruption, in the communication service. Therefore, this paper proposes a network control method to reduce the time to change a path using OpenFlow.

show abstract

“…In "Optimization of SDN Flow Operations in Multi-Failure Restoration Scenarios", Astaneh and Heydari [15] present techniques for efficient execution of flow operations (i.e., adding or removing flow-entries to/from the flow-tables) to dynamically restore disrupted flows. The authors aim to minimize the number of operations and formulate integer programs to find the most appropriate paths in case of multi-failure scenarios.…”

Section: B Optimizations To Openflow Network and Sdn Traffic Managementioning

confidence: 99%