Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A tool for tracing network data plane via SDN/OpenFlow

基于SDN/OpenFlow 追踪网络数据平面的工具

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Science China Information Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

SDN provides an approach to create desired network forwarding plane by programming applications. For a large-scale SDN network comprised of multiple domains and running multiple controller applications, it is difficult to measure and diagnose the problems of flow tables in data plane. Tracing the forwarding path of SDN is one of effective way for data plane state measurement. Previously proposed methods for debugging SDN were applied to a single administrative domain. There is less effort to trace the flow entries of the data plane in large-scale multi-domain SDN networks. In this paper, we propose a method of software defined data plane tracing in large-scale multi-domain SDN networks. Our method can trace forwarding paths, and get the matched flow entries and other customized trace information. We present the designs compatible with OpenFlow 1.0 and 1.3 switches. The performance and deployment effect are evaluated by simulation test and analysis. It shows that our method has better performance than traditional IP traceroute, and its deployment at about 20% of AS nodes can enable 70% of AS paths to be traceable.

摘要

创新点

SDN提供了通过编程应用构建所需网络转发平面的途径。 对于由多个域组成的并且运行多个控制器应用的大型SDN网络, 难以测量诊断数据平面的流表问题。 在本文中, 我们提出了在大规模多域SDN网络中的软件定义的数据平面追踪方法。 我们的方法可以追踪转发路径, 获得匹配的流表项, 以及其他的用户可配置追踪信息。 我们提出了兼容 OpenFlow1.0 和 1.3 的设计方法。 通过模拟测试和分析, 我们评价了方法的性能和部署效果。 结果显示方法比传统 IP traceroute 具有较好的性能, 并且20%的AS节点部署能够使得70%的AS路径可以被追踪。

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Motamedi R, Rejaie R, Willinger W. A survey of techniques for Internet topology discovery. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor, 2015, (17): 1044–1065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Keys K. Internet-scale IP alias resolution techniques. ACM SIGCOMM Comp Commun Rev, 2010, (40): 50–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Marchetta P, Persico V, Pescapé A, et al. Don’t trust traceroute (completely). In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Student Workhop. Santa Barbara: ACM, 2013. 5–8

    Google Scholar 

  4. Keys K, Hyun Y, Luckie M, et al. Internet-scale IPv4 alias resolution with MIDAR. IEEE ACM Trans Netw, 2013, (21): 383–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Nunes B, Mendonca M, Nguyen X N, et al. A survey of software-defined networking: past, present, and future of programmable networks. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor, 2014, (16): 1617–1634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. McKeown N, Anderson T, Balakrishnan H, et al. OpenFlow: enabling innovation in campus networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comp Commun Rev, 2008, (38): 69–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jain S, Kumar A, Mandal S, et al. B4: experience with a globally-deployed software defined WAN. ACM SIGCOMM Comp Commun Rev, 2013, (43): 3–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Xu M W, Li Q, Yang Y, et al. Self-healing routing: failure, modeling and analysis. Sci China Inf Sci, 2011, (54): 609–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Wu J P, Ren G, Li X. Building a next generation Internet with source address validation architecture. Sci China Ser F-Inf Sci, 2008, (51): 1681–1691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Li X, Bao C X. Address switching: reforming the architecture and traffic of Internet. Sci China Ser F-Inf Sci, 2009, (52): 1203–1216

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Mao Z M, Rexford J, Wang J, et al. Towards an accurate AS-level traceroute tool. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communications. Karlsruhe: ACM, 2003. 365–378

    Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang Y, Oliveira R, Wang Y, et al. A framework to quantify the pitfalls of using traceroute in AS-level topology measurement. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun, 2011, (29): 1822–1836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Luckie M, Hyun Y, Huffaker B. Traceroute probe method and forward IP path inference. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement. Seattle: ACM, 2008. 311–324

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Handigol N, Heller B, Jeyakumar V, et al. Where is the debugger for my software-defined network? In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networks. Helsinki: ACM, 2012. 55–60

    Google Scholar 

  15. Agarwal K, Rozner E, Dixon C, et al. SDN traceroute: tracing SDN forwarding without changing network behavior. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking. Chicago: ACM, 2014. 145–150

    Google Scholar 

  16. Handigol N, Heller B, Jeyakumar V, et al. I know what your packet did last hop: using packet histories to troubleshoot networks. In: Proceedings of the 11th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation. Seattle: USENIX Association, 2014. 71–85

    Google Scholar 

  17. Durairajan R, Sommers J, Barford P. OFf: bugspray for openflow. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking. Chicago: ACM, 2014. 225–226

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wundsam A, Levin D, Seetharaman S, et al. OFRewind: enabling record and replay troubleshooting for networks. In: Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. Portland: USENIX Association, 2011

    Google Scholar 

  19. Peresini P, Kuzniar M, Kostic D. Monocle: dynamic, fine-grained data plane monitoring. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Emerging Networking EXperiments and Technologies. Heidelberg: ACM, 2015. In press, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2716281.2836117

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fayaz S K, Sekar V. Testing stateful and dynamic data planes with FlowTest. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking. Chicago: ACM, 2014. 79–84

    Google Scholar 

  21. Canini M, Venzano D, Peresini P, et al. A NICE way to test OpenFlow applications. In: Proceedings of the 9th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation. San Jose: USENIX Association, 2012. 127–140

    Google Scholar 

  22. Al-Shaer E, Al-Haj S. FlowChecker: configuration analysis and verification of federated OpenFlow infrastructures. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Assurable and Usable Security Configuration. Chicago: ACM, 2010. 37–44

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Scott R C, Wundsam A, Zarifis K, et al. What, Where, and When: Software Fault Localization for sdn. Technical Report UCB/EECS-2012-178. 2012

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kazemian P, Varghese G, McKeown N. Header space analysis: static checking for networks. In: Proceedings of the 9th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation. San Jose: USENIX Association, 2012. 113–126

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kazemian P, Chan M, Zeng H, et al. Real time network policy checking using header space analysis. In: Proceedings of the 10th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation. Lombard: USENIX Association, 2013. 99–111

    Google Scholar 

  26. Khurshid A, Zhou W, Caesar M, et al. Veriflow: verifying network-wide invariants in real time. ACM SIGCOMM Comp Commun Rev, 2012, (42): 467–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zeng H, Zhang S, Ye F, et al. Libra: divide and conquer to verify forwarding tables in huge networks. In: Proceedings of the 11th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation. Seattle: USENIX Association, 2014. 87–99

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nichols K, Black D L, Blake S, et al. Definition of the differentiated services field (DS field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 headers. RFC 2474. https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2474.txt. 1998

    Google Scholar 

  29. Katz-Bassett E, Madhyastha H V, Adhikari V K, et al. Reverse traceroute. In: Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation. San Jose: USENIX Association, 2010. 219–234

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gregori E, Improta A, Lenzini L, et al. On the incompleteness of the AS-level graph: a novel methodology for BGP route collector placement. In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Conference. Boston: ACM, 2012. 253–264

    Google Scholar 

  31. Luckie M, Huffaker B, Dhamdhere A, et al. AS relationships, customer cones, and validation. In: Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference. Barcelona: ACM, 2013. 243–256

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gupta A, Vanbever L, Shahbaz M, et al. Sdx: a software defined Internet exchange. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on SIGCOMM. Chicago: ACM, 2014. 551–562

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Network Sciences and Cyberspace, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

    Yangyang Wang, Jun Bi & Keyao Zhang

  2. Department of Computer Science, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

    Jun Bi & Keyao Zhang

  3. Tsinghua National Laboratory for Information Science and Technology (TNList), Beijing, 100084, China

    Yangyang Wang & Jun Bi

Authors
  1. Yangyang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jun Bi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Keyao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jun Bi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, Y., Bi, J. & Zhang, K. A tool for tracing network data plane via SDN/OpenFlow. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 60, 022304 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-015-1057-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-015-1057-7

Keywords

关键词

Search

Navigation