4.5 Article

TSSM: Time-Sharing Switch Migration to Balance Loads of Distributed SDN Controllers

期刊

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TNSM.2022.3146834

关键词

Switches; Control systems; Protocols; Costs; Standards; Monitoring; Java; Load balance; ONOS; switch migration; SDN; time-sharing

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), Taiwan [109-2221-E-110-049-MY2]
  2. MOST [108-2221-E-110-016-MY3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article presents a scheme called time-sharing switch migration (TSSM) for providing more refined load sharing for controllers. TSSM can effectively reduce occurrences of controller overload and save a significant amount of migration cost.
Software-defined networking (SDN) makes network management easier by using a controller to govern all switches, but the controller may become a performance bottleneck. Distributed SDN control is a promising solution, which lets multiple controllers divide the work, where each controller manages a part of the network. Switch migration is one common means to the load balance of controllers, which transfers some switches to different subnets based on the workloads of their controllers. The paper proposes a time-sharing switch migration (TSSM) scheme to provide more refined load sharing for controllers, which allows two controllers to share a switch's load sequentially in the same period. When a controller is overloaded, TSSM finds assistant controllers to share its workload by selecting proper switches for migration and also deciding the time to perform migration. In this way, the workload of each controller can be kept below a given threshold. We implement the TSSM scheme on the open network operating system (ONOS) to attest to its feasibility. Experimental results show that TSSM can reduce 98% of the occurrences of overload for controllers as compared with the original OpenFlow method. Moreover, TSSM can save about 78% of the migration cost than the churn-triggered migration method.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据