Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Virtual networks: isolation, performance, and trends

  • Published:
annals of telecommunications - annales des télécommunications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Currently, there is a strong effort of the research community in rethinking the Internet architecture to cope with its current limitations and support new requirements. Many researchers conclude that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for all of the user and network provider needs and thus advocate for a pluralist network architecture, which allows the coexistence of different protocol stacks running at the same time over the same physical substrate. In this paper, we investigate the advantages and limitations of the virtualization technologies for creating a pluralist environment for the Future Internet. We analyze two types of virtualization techniques, which provide multiple operating systems running on the same hardware, represented by Xen, or multiple network flows on the same switch, represented by OpenFlow. First, we define the functionalities needed by a Future Internet virtual network architecture and how Xen and OpenFlow provide them. We then analyze Xen and OpenFlow in terms of network programmability, processing, forwarding, control, and scalability. Finally, we carry out experiments with Xen and OpenFlow network prototypes, identifying the overhead incurred by each virtualization tool by comparing it with native Linux. Our experiments show that OpenFlow switch forwards packets as well as native Linux, achieving similar high forwarding rates. On the other hand, we observe that the high complexity involving Xen virtual machine packet forwarding limits the achievable packet rates. There is a clear trade-off between flexibility and performance, but we conclude that both Xen and OpenFlow are suitable platforms for network virtualization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson T, Peterson L, Shenker S, Turner J (2005) Overcoming the Internet impasse through virtualization. IEEE Comput 38(4):34–41

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baran P (1964) On distributed communications networks. IEEE Trans Commun Syst 12(1):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Blumenthal MS, Clark DD (2001) Rethinking the design of the Internet: the end-to-end arguments vs. the brave new world. ACM Trans Internet Technol 1(1):70–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chisnall D (2007) The definitive guide to the Xen Hypervisor. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  5. Clark C, Fraser K, Hand S, Hansen JG, Jul E, Limpach C, Pratt I, Warfield A (2005) Live migration of virtual machines. In: Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation—NSDI, pp 273–286

  6. Clark D, Braden R, Sollins K, Wroclawski J, Katabi D, Kulik J, Yang X, Faber T, Falk A, Pingali V, Handley M, Chiappa N (2004) New arch: future generation Internet architecture. Technical report, USC Information Sciences Institute Computer Networks Division, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science and International Computer Science Institute (ICSI)

  7. Egi N, Greenhalgh A, Handley M, Hoerdt M, Mathy L, Schooley T (2007) Evaluating Xen for router virtualization. In: International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks—ICCCN, pp 1256–1261

  8. Fathi H, Prasad R, Chakraborty S (2005) Mobility management for VoIP in 3G systems: evaluation of low-latency handoff schemes. IEEE Wirel Commun 12(2):96–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Feamster N, Gao L, Rexford J (2007) How to lease the Internet in your spare time. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 37(1):61–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gude N, Koponen T, Pettit J, Pfaff B, Casado M, McKeown N, Shenker S (2008) NOX: towards an operating system for networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 38(3):105–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mateo MP (2009) OpenFlow switching performance. Master’s thesis, Politecnico Di Torino, Torino, Italy

  12. McKeown N, Anderson T, Balakrishnan H, Parulkar G, Peterson L, Rexford J, Shenker S, Turner J (2008) OpenFlow: enabling innovation in campus networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 38(2):69–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Menon A, Cox AL, Zwaenepoel W (2006) Optimizing network virtualization in Xen. In: USENIX annual technical conference, pp 15–28

  14. Olsson R (2005) Pktgen the Linux packet generator. In: Linux symposium, pp 11–24

  15. Pfaff B, Heller B, Talayco D, Erickson D, Gibb G, Appenzeller G, Tourrilhes J, Pettit J, Yap K-K, Casado M, Kobayashi M, McKeown N, Balland P, Price R, Sherwood R, Yiakoumis Y (2009) OpenFlow switch specification version 1.0.0 (wire protocol 0x01). Technical report, Stanford University

  16. Sherwood R, Chan M, Covington A, Gibb G, Flajslik M, Handigol N, Huang T-Y, Kazemian P, Kobayashi M, Naous J, Seetharaman S, Underhill D, Yabe T, Yap K-K, Yiakoumis Y, Zeng H, Appenzeller G, Johari R, McKeown N, Parulkar G (2010) Carving research slices out of your production networks with OpenFlow. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 40(1):129–130

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wang Y, Keller E, Biskeborn B, van der Merwe J, Rexford J (2008) Virtual routers on the move: live router migration as a network-management primitive. In: ACM SIGCOMM, pp 231–242

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Grupo de Teleinformática e Automação (GTA), Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    Natalia C. Fernandes, Marcelo D. D. Moreira, Igor M. Moraes, Lyno Henrique G. Ferraz, Rodrigo S. Couto, Hugo E. T. Carvalho, Miguel Elias M. Campista, Luís Henrique M. K. Costa & Otto Carlos M. B. Duarte

  2. Instituto de Computação (IC), Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Niterói, RJ, Brazil

    Igor M. Moraes

Authors
  1. Natalia C. Fernandes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marcelo D. D. Moreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Igor M. Moraes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lyno Henrique G. Ferraz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rodrigo S. Couto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hugo E. T. Carvalho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Miguel Elias M. Campista
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Luís Henrique M. K. Costa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Otto Carlos M. B. Duarte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Otto Carlos M. B. Duarte.

Additional information

This work was supported by CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, FUJB, FINEP, and FUNTTEL.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fernandes, N.C., Moreira, M.D.D., Moraes, I.M. et al. Virtual networks: isolation, performance, and trends. Ann. Telecommun. 66, 339–355 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12243-010-0208-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12243-010-0208-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation