Adaptive Resilient Routing via Preorders in SDN

Adaptive Resilient Routing via
Preorders in SDN
Eman Ramadan
, Hesham Mekky, Braulio Dumba and
Zhi-Li Zhang
University of Minnesota
Agenda
Introduction
Limitations of Path-based Routing
Routing via Preorders
Realization in SDN
Conclusion
Introduction
Adding more switches and links to networks
Increases available 
parallelism
An effective way to meet insatiable application demands for
bandwidth
Leads to a far richer network topology (often many 
diverse
paths between two end points)
However, with the growing network scale
The probability of 
failures 
becomes 
higher
 
Resilient
 
routing – e.g., via 
pro-active
 fast failover
mechanisms – is imperative, to meet ever stringent
availability, reliability and QoS requirements demanded by
applications
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Existing routing schemes for communication &
SCADA control networks are 
path-based
!
i.
compute one path (e.g., shortest) or multiple paths from 
s
 to 
d
ii.
route traffic along the path or paths, e.g., via IP or MPLS protocol
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-
based Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Toy Network Example
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
O(2
L
)
 many (shortest) paths of length 
2L
!
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Toy Network Example
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Toy Network Example
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Toy Network Example
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Toy Network Example: fairly 
robust 
topology
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Toy Network Example
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Toy Network Example
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Toy Network Example
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
Path-based Routing Doesn’t Work!
Toy Network Example
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
Beyond
 
Path: Can We Do Better?
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
What about using a Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)?
i.
no need to pre-specify any specific path
ii.
any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically utilized
Toy Network Example
Beyond
 
Path: Can We Do Better?
Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based
Routing:
i.
paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links
ii.
paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!
What about using a Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)?
i.
no need to pre-specify any specific path
ii.
any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically utilized
Toy Network Example
Can survive arbitrary link/node failures as long as they do not disconnect 
s
 and 
d
!
Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency?
Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)
i.
no need to pre-specify any specific path
ii.
any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically
Sufficient to guarantee 
optimal resiliency 
for any topology?
i.e., ensure data delivery from
 s 
to 
d
 under arbitrary failures
as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes?
 
New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example
Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency?
Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)
i.
no need to pre-specify any specific path
ii.
any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically
Sufficient to guarantee 
optimal resiliency 
for any topology?
i.e., ensure data delivery from
 s 
to 
d
 under arbitrary failures
as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes?
New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example
Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency?
Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)
i.
no need to pre-specify any specific path
ii.
any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically
Sufficient to guarantee 
optimal resiliency 
for any topology?
i.e., ensure data delivery from
 s 
to 
d
 under arbitrary failures
as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes?
New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example
Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency?
Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)
i.
no need to pre-specify any specific path
ii.
any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically
Sufficient to guarantee 
optimal resiliency 
for any topology?
i.e., ensure data delivery from
 s 
to 
d
 under arbitrary failures
as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes?
New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example
Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency?
Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)
i.
no need to pre-specify any specific path
ii.
any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically
Sufficient to guarantee 
optimal resiliency 
for any topology?
i.e., ensure data delivery from
 s 
to 
d
 under arbitrary failures
as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes?
New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example
 
?
Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency?
Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)
i.
no need to pre-specify any specific path
ii.
any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically
Sufficient to guarantee 
optimal resiliency 
for any topology?
i.e., ensure data delivery from
 s 
to 
d
 under arbitrary failures
as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes?
New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example
ROUTING VIA PREORDERS
 
Routing via Preorders
Routing via Preorder & PrOG
Routing Preorder
Routing Preorder Graph (PrOG)
Traffic forwarding
Split proportionally across outgoing links
Bi-directed links generally not used under normal
operations; invoked (along one direction) under failures
Routing via Preorder: Failure Handling
Failure Handling Process:
Upon failures, use alternative outgoing links if exist
Routing via Preorder: Failure Handling
Failure Handling Process:
Upon failures, use alternative outgoing links if exist
If a node becomes a “sink”, de-activate incoming links
d = G
E
F
C
D
B
s = A
No Need for Global Topology
Information Exchange &
 Route Recomputation
Routing via Preorder: Recovery Process
Recovery Process:
If a node/link recovers, 
re-activate
 outgoing links
d = G
E
F
C
D
B
s = A
Guarantee to Restore to the Original
Routing State
Optimal Resilient 
PrOG Construction
with 
Latency
 Constraints
 
Primary PrOG
 
Backup PrOG
  -Complete Preorder Graphs (PrOGs)
REALIZATION IN SDN
 
Realization in Emerging
Software-Defined Networks (SDNs)
 
The controller computes the routing preorder
(satisfying latency constraints), then installs the
corresponding rules in the relevant switches
Each switch forwards packets using the 
match-
action 
data plane abstraction
Small functionality added to switches to maintain
and update some internal states, and generate
activation
 
and 
deactivation
 
tags
Switches perform some actions to handle link
activation, deactivation and failure
Resilient Routing via Preorders: Packet
Forwarding
 
Each switch/router maintains a set of routing rules and states
 
Each packet carries two header fields
 
Eligible outgoing links at node 
u 
for forwarding packet to 
d
:
 
Upon failure, update both header fields before rerouting
Simple Demonstration & Evaluation
Routing via preorder implemented in Mininet
with slightly modified Open vSwitch (OVS) using
v.2.4
 
Simple Demonstration:
Realization in SDN: Rule Examples
Match-action rules for switch D
Simple Demonstration & Evaluation
Simple Demonstration:
a UDP traffic generator at
host h
1
, attached to node
A, sends datagrams to host
h
2
, attached to node G
Traffic lasts for 20 seconds,
sending around 90 pks/sec
Simple Demonstration & Evaluation
Simple Demonstration:
a UDP traffic generator at
host h
1
, attached to node
A, sends datagrams to host
h
2
, attached to node G
Traffic lasts for 20 seconds,
sending around 90 pks/sec
Simple Demonstration & Evaluation
Simple Demonstration:
a UDP traffic generator at
host h
1
, attached to node
A, sends datagrams to host
h
2
, attached to node G
Traffic lasts for 20 seconds,
sending around 90 pks/sec
Simple Demonstration & Evaluation
Simple Demonstration:
a UDP traffic generator at
host h
1
, attached to node
A, sends datagrams to host
h
2
, attached to node G
Traffic lasts for 20 seconds,
sending around 90 pks/sec
Simple Demonstration & Evaluation
Simple Demonstration:
a UDP traffic generator at
host h
1
, attached to node
A, sends datagrams to host
h
2
, attached to node G
Traffic lasts for 20 seconds,
sending around 90 pks/sec
Simple Demonstration & Evaluation
Simple Demonstration:
a UDP traffic generator at
host h
1
, attached to node
A, sends datagrams to host
h
2
, attached to node G
Traffic lasts for 20 seconds,
sending around 90 pks/sec
Conclusion
Proposed a new routing paradigm – 
routing via preorders
Circumvents the limitations of conventional path-based routing
schemes
Effectively takes advantage of topological diversity inherent in a
network with rich topology for 
adaptive resilient routing
Meets the QoS requirements (e.g., latency) of applications or
flows
Resilient against arbitrary 
k
 link or node failures (if network not
partitioned)
Realized routing via preorders in SDN networks using the
“match-action” data plane abstraction, with a
preliminary implementation of it in Mininet
Thank you
Slide Note
Embed
Share

This research paper discusses the challenges of path-based routing in modern networks and introduces a novel approach called Adaptive Resilient Routing via Preorders in Software-Defined Networking (SDN). The authors emphasize the limitations of traditional routing schemes, the importance of resilient routing in the face of network failures, and the benefits of adopting a proactive and adaptive routing strategy. By incorporating preorders into the routing process, the proposed method aims to enhance network resilience and optimize performance in dynamic environments.

  • Resilient Routing
  • SDN
  • Adaptive
  • Preorders
  • Network Topology

Uploaded on Sep 25, 2024 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Adaptive Resilient Routing via Preorders in SDN Eman Ramadan, Hesham Mekky, Braulio Dumba and Zhi-Li Zhang University of Minnesota

  2. Agenda Introduction Limitations of Path-based Routing Routing via Preorders Realization in SDN Conclusion

  3. Introduction Adding more switches and links to networks Increases available parallelism An effective way to meet insatiable application demands for bandwidth Leads to a far richer network topology (often many diverse paths between two end points) However, with the growing network scale The probability of failures becomes higher Resilient routing e.g., via pro-active fast failover mechanisms is imperative, to meet ever stringent availability, reliability and QoS requirements demanded by applications

  4. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Existing routing schemes for communication & SCADA control networks are path-based! i. compute one path (e.g., shortest) or multiple paths from s to d ii. route traffic along the path or paths, e.g., via IP or MPLS protocol Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path- based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid!

  5. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! Toy Network Example O(2L) many (shortest) paths of length 2L! v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  6. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  7. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  8. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  9. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! Toy Network Example: fairly robust topology v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  10. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  11. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  12. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  13. Path-based Routing Doesnt Work! Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  14. BeyondPath: Can We Do Better? Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! What about using a Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)? i. no need to pre-specify any specific path ii. any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically utilized Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  15. BeyondPath: Can We Do Better? Fundamental Limitations of Conventional Path-based Routing: i. paths are rigid: must be precisely specified a seq. of nodes & links ii. paths are fragile: failure of any node or link renders it invalid! What about using a Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph)? i. no need to pre-specify any specific path ii. any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically utilized Toy Network Example v2 v5 v3 v6 v10 v4L-2 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L Can survive arbitrary link/node failures as long as they do not disconnect s and d!

  16. Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency? Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph) i. no need to pre-specify any specific path ii. any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically Sufficient to guarantee optimal resiliency for any topology? i.e., ensure data delivery from s to d under arbitrary failures as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes? New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  17. Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency? Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph) i. no need to pre-specify any specific path ii. any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically Sufficient to guarantee optimal resiliency for any topology? i.e., ensure data delivery from s to d under arbitrary failures as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes? New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  18. Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency? Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph) i. no need to pre-specify any specific path ii. any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically Sufficient to guarantee optimal resiliency for any topology? i.e., ensure data delivery from s to d under arbitrary failures as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes? New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  19. Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency? Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph) i. no need to pre-specify any specific path ii. any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically Sufficient to guarantee optimal resiliency for any topology? i.e., ensure data delivery from s to d under arbitrary failures as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes? New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  20. Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency? Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph) i. no need to pre-specify any specific path ii. any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically Sufficient to guarantee optimal resiliency for any topology? i.e., ensure data delivery from s to d under arbitrary failures as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes? New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 ? v8 v12 v4 v4L

  21. Routing DAGs Sufficient for Resiliency? Routing DAG (directed acyclic graph) i. no need to pre-specify any specific path ii. any outgoing link in the routing DAG can be dynamically Sufficient to guarantee optimal resiliency for any topology? i.e., ensure data delivery from s to d under arbitrary failures as long as they do not disconnect the two nodes? New (slightly modified) Toy Network Example v6 v10 v2 v4L-2 v3 v5 v7 s=v1 d=v2L+1 v8 v12 v4 v4L

  22. ROUTING VIA PREORDERS

  23. Routing via Preorders Routing Preorder Mathematically, a preorder on a node set ? ? is a binary relation that is reflective and transitive, for any ? ?,? ? d, ? a path between s, d via u Routing Preorder Graph (PrOG) Directed graph associated with a routing preorder d = O B A C F D E G H I s = J

  24. Routing via Preorder & PrOG Routing Preorder Routing Preorder Graph (PrOG) Traffic forwarding Split proportionally across outgoing links Bi-directed links generally not used under normal operations; invoked (along one direction) under failures C E B s = A d = G F D

  25. Routing via Preorder: Failure Handling Failure Handling Process: Upon failures, use alternative outgoing links if exist C E B s = A d = G F D

  26. Routing via Preorder: Failure Handling Failure Handling Process: Upon failures, use alternative outgoing links if exist If a node becomes a sink , de-activate incoming links C No Need for Global Topology Information Exchange & Route Recomputation E B s = A d = G F D

  27. Routing via Preorder: Recovery Process Recovery Process: If a node/link recovers, re-activate outgoing links C E B Guarantee to Restore to the Original Routing State s = A d = G F D

  28. Optimal Resilient PrOG Construction with Latency Constraints C C E B E B Questions: do such PrOGS exist? If yes, can they be constructed in polynomial time? d = G s = A s = A d = G F F D D H K I J Primary PrOG Backup PrOG

  29. -Complete Preorder Graphs (PrOGs) B

  30. REALIZATION IN SDN

  31. Realization in Emerging Software-Defined Networks (SDNs) The controller computes the routing preorder (satisfying latency constraints), then installs the corresponding rules in the relevant switches Each switch forwards packets using the match- action data plane abstraction Small functionality added to switches to maintain and update some internal states, and generate activation and deactivation tags Switches perform some actions to handle link activation, deactivation and failure

  32. Resilient Routing via Preorders: Packet Forwarding Each switch/router maintains a set of routing rules and states Each packet carries two header fields Eligible outgoing links at node u for forwarding packet to d: Upon failure, update both header fields before rerouting

  33. Simple Demonstration & Evaluation Routing via preorder implemented in Mininet with slightly modified Open vSwitch (OVS) using v.2.4 C E B Simple Demonstration: s = A d = G F D

  34. Realization in SDN: Rule Examples Group Table Flow Table Match Action Group Id Group Type Action Bucket State src=A, dst=G, in_port = A Group: 100 Group: 200 Group: 300 Group 400 Active Active Active fast failover src=A, dst=G, in_port = B Group: 100 100 - Invoke deactivation - Group: 100 src=A, dst=G, in_port = E Output: F Output: E Active Active 200 select - Invoke deactivation - Group: 100 src=A, dst=G, in_port = F Output: J Active 300 select Match Action - Output: in_port - Invoke deactivation Active Activation tag [src, dst, in_port] Invoke activation 400 select Deactivation tag [src, dst, in_port] Invoke deactivation C Match-action rules for switch D E B s = A d = G F D

  35. Simple Demonstration & Evaluation C Simple Demonstration: a UDP traffic generator at host h1, attached to node A, sends datagrams to host h2, attached to node G Traffic lasts for 20 seconds, sending around 90 pks/sec E B s = A d = G F D

  36. Simple Demonstration & Evaluation C Simple Demonstration: a UDP traffic generator at host h1, attached to node A, sends datagrams to host h2, attached to node G Traffic lasts for 20 seconds, sending around 90 pks/sec E B s = A d = G F D

  37. Simple Demonstration & Evaluation C Simple Demonstration: a UDP traffic generator at host h1, attached to node A, sends datagrams to host h2, attached to node G Traffic lasts for 20 seconds, sending around 90 pks/sec E B s = A d = G F D

  38. Simple Demonstration & Evaluation C Simple Demonstration: a UDP traffic generator at host h1, attached to node A, sends datagrams to host h2, attached to node G Traffic lasts for 20 seconds, sending around 90 pks/sec E B s = A d = G F D

  39. Simple Demonstration & Evaluation C Simple Demonstration: a UDP traffic generator at host h1, attached to node A, sends datagrams to host h2, attached to node G Traffic lasts for 20 seconds, sending around 90 pks/sec E B s = A d = G F D

  40. Simple Demonstration & Evaluation C Simple Demonstration: a UDP traffic generator at host h1, attached to node A, sends datagrams to host h2, attached to node G Traffic lasts for 20 seconds, sending around 90 pks/sec E B s = A d = G link up F D

  41. Conclusion Proposed a new routing paradigm routing via preorders Circumvents the limitations of conventional path-based routing schemes Effectively takes advantage of topological diversity inherent in a network with rich topology for adaptive resilient routing Meets the QoS requirements (e.g., latency) of applications or flows Resilient against arbitrary k link or node failures (if network not partitioned) Realized routing via preorders in SDN networks using the match-action data plane abstraction, with a preliminary implementation of it in Mininet

  42. Thank you

More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#