[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-meth

Internet-Draft                                Bhuvaneswaran Vengainathan
Network Working Group                                        Anton Basil
Intended Status: Informational                        Veryx Technologies
Expires: January 18, 2016                                 Mark Tassinari
                                                         Hewlett-Packard
                                                          Vishwas Manral
                                                              Ionos Corp
                                                             Sarah Banks
                                                          VSS Monitoring
                                                           July 19, 2015


     Benchmarking Methodology for SDN Controller Performance
        draft-bhuvan-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-meth-01

Abstract

   This document defines the methodologies for benchmarking performance
   of SDN controllers. Terminology related to benchmarking SDN
   controllers is described in the companion terminology document.
   SDN controllers have been implemented with many varying designs in
   order to achieve their intended network functionality. Hence, the
   authors have taken the approach of considering an SDN controller as
   a black box, defining the methodology in a manner that is agnostic
   to protocols and network services supported by controllers. The
   intent of this document is to provide a standard mechanism to
   measure the performance of all controller implementations.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
   months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
   documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts
   as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in
   progress.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on January 18, 2016.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors. All rights reserved.


Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016              [Page 1]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document. Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
   respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this
   document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
   Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
   warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Scope   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Test Setup  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.1  Test setup - Controller working in Standalone Mode  . .  . .  4
   3.2  Test setup - Controller working in Cluster Mode  . . . . . .  5
   4.  Test Considerations   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   4.1  Network Topology   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   4.2  Test Traffic   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   4.3  Connection Setup   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   4.4  Measurement Point Specification and Recommendation . . . . .  7
   4.5  Connectivity Recommendation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.6  Test Repeatability           . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   5.  Test Reporting  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   6.  Benchmarking Tests  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.1  Performance  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.1.1  Network Topology Discovery Time  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.1.2  Asynchronous Message Processing Time   . . . . . . . . . .  9
   6.1.3  Asynchronous Message Processing Rate   . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.1.4  Reactive Path Provisioning Time    . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   6.1.5  Proactive Path Provisioning Time   . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   6.1.6  Reactive Path Provisioning Rate    . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   6.1.7  Proactive Path Provisioning Rate     . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   6.1.8  Network Topology Change Detection Time   . . . . . . . . . 16
   6.2  Scalability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
   6.2.1  Control Sessions Capacity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
   6.2.2  Network Discovery Size   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
   6.2.3  Forwarding Table Capacity  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
   6.3  Security   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
   6.3.1  Exception Handling   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
   6.3.2  Denial of Service Handling   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
   6.4  Reliability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   6.4.1  Controller Failover Time   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   6.4.2  Network Re-Provisioning Time   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23





Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016              [Page 2]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   7.  References    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   7.1  Normative References   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   7.2  Informative References   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
   8.   IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
   9.   Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
   10.  Appendix A - Example Test Topologies                       . 26
   11.  Appendix B - Benchmarking Methodology using OF Controllers . 26
   12.  Acknowledgements   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
   13.  Authors' Addresses   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46


1. Introduction

   This document provides generic methodologies for benchmarking SDN
   controller performance. An SDN controller may support many
   northbound and southbound protocols, implement a wide range of
   applications, and work solely, or as a group to achieve the desired
   functionality. This document considers an SDN controller as a black
   box, regardless of design and implementation. The tests defined in
   the document can be used to benchmark SDN controller for
   performance, scalability, reliability and security independent of
   northbound and southbound protocols. These tests can be performed
   on an SDN controller running as a virtual machine (VM) instance or
   on a bare metal server.  This document is intended for those who
   want to measure the SDN controller performance as well as compare
   various SDN controllers performance.

   Conventions used in this document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.

2. Scope

   This document defines methodology to measure the networking
   metrics of SDN controllers. The tests defined in this document
   enable benchmarking of SDN Controllers in two ways; as a standalone
   controller and as a cluster of homogeneous controllers. These tests
   are recommended for execution in lab environments rather than in live
   network deployments. Performance benchmarking of a federation of
   controllers is beyond the scope of this document.

3. Test Setup

   The tests defined in this document enable measurement of an SDN
   controllers performance in standalone mode and cluster mode. This
   section defines common reference topologies that are later referred
   to in individual tests.



Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 3]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


3.1  Test setup - Controller working in Standalone Mode

       +-----------------------------------------------------------+
       |               Management Plane Test Emulator              |
       |                                                           |
       |                    --------------------                   |
       |                   |  SDN Applications  |                  |
       |                    --------------------                   |
       |                                                           |
       +-----------------------------+(I2)-------------------------+
                                     |
                                     |
                                     | (Northbound interface)
                    +-------------------------------+
                    |       +----------------+      |
                    |       | SDN Controller |      |
                    |       +----------------+      |
                    |                               |
                    |    Device Under Test (DUT)    |
                    +-------------------------------+
                                     | (Southbound interface)
                                     |
                                     |
       +-----------------------------+(I1)-------------------------+
       |                                                           |
       |          +---------+                +---------+           |
       |          |   SDN   |l1          ln-1|  SDN    |           |
       |          |  Node 1 |----- .... -----|  Node n |           |
       |          +---------+                +---------+           |
       |               |l0                        |ln              |
       |               |                          |                |
       |               |                          |                |
       |       +---------------+          +---------------+        |
       |       | Test Traffic  |          | Test Traffic  |        |
       |       |  Generator    |          |  Generator    |        |
       |       |    (TP1)      |          |    (TP2)      |        |
       |       +---------------+          +---------------+        |
       |                                                           |
       |              Forwarding Plane Test Emulator               |
       +-----------------------------------------------------------+

                                  Figure 1









Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016              [Page 4]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


3.2 Test setup - Controller working in Cluster Mode

       +-----------------------------------------------------------+
       |               Management Plane Test Emulator              |
       |                                                           |
       |                    --------------------                   |
       |                   |  SDN Applications  |                  |
       |                    --------------------                   |
       |                                                           |
       +-----------------------------+(I2)-------------------------+
                                     |
                                     |
                                     | (Northbound interface)
        +---------------------------------------------------------+
        |                                                         |
        |  ------------------             ------------------      |
        | | SDN Controller 1 | <--E/W--> | SDN Controller n |     |
        |  ------------------             ------------------      |
        |                                                         |
        |                    Device Under Test (DUT)              |
        +---------------------------------------------------------+
                                     | (Southbound interface)
                                     |
                                     |
       +-----------------------------+(I1)-------------------------+
       |                                                           |
       |          +---------+                +---------+           |
       |          |   SDN   |l1          ln-1|  SDN    |           |
       |          |  Node 1 |----- .... -----|  Node n |           |
       |          +---------+                +---------+           |
       |               |l0                        |ln              |
       |               |                          |                |
       |               |                          |                |
       |       +---------------+          +---------------+        |
       |       | Test Traffic  |          | Test Traffic  |        |
       |       |  Generator    |          |  Generator    |        |
       |       |    (TP1)      |          |    (TP2)      |        |
       |       +---------------+          +---------------+        |
       |                                                           |
       |              Forwarding Plane Test Emulator               |
       +-----------------------------------------------------------+

                                  Figure 2








Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016              [Page 5]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


4. Test Considerations

4.1 Network Topology

   The test cases SHOULD use Leaf-Spine topology with atleast 1 SDN node
   in the topology for benchmarking. The test traffic generators TP1
   and TP2 SHOULD be connected to the first and the last SDN leaf node.
   If a test case uses test topology with 1 SDN node, the test traffic
   generators TP1 and TP2 SHOULD be connected to the same node. However
   to achieve a complete performance characterization of the SDN
   controller, it is recommended that the controller be benchmarked for
   many network topologies and varying number of SDN nodes. This
   document includes a few sample test topologies, defined in
   Section 10 - Appendix A for reference. Further, care should be taken
   to make sure that a loop prevention mechanism is enabled either in
   the SDN controller, or in the network when the topology contains
   redundant network paths.


4.2 Test Traffic

   Test traffic are used to notify the controller about the arrival
   of new flows. The test cases SHOULD use multiple frame sizes as
   recommended in RFC 2544 for benchmarking.


4.3 Connection Setup

   There may be controller implementations that support unencrypted
   and encrypted network connections with SDN nodes. Further, the
   controller may have backward compatibility with SDN nodes running
   older versions of southbound protocols. It is recommended that the
   controller performance be measured with one or more applicable
   connection setup methods defined below.

   1. Unencrypted connection with SDN nodes, running same protocol
      version.
   2. Unencrypted connection with SDN nodes, running different protocol
      versions.
      Example:
         1. Controller running current protocol version and switch
            running older protocol version
         2. Controller running older protocol version and switch
            running current protocol version
   3. Encrypted connection with SDN nodes, running same protocol version






Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016              [Page 6]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   4. Encrypted connection with SDN nodes, running different protocol
      versions.
      Example:
         1. Controller running current protocol version and switch
            running older protocol version
         2. Controller running older protocol version and switch
            running current protocol version


4.4 Measurement Point Specification and Recommendation

   The measurement accuracy depends on several factors including the
   point of observation where the indications are captured. For example,
   the notification can be observed at the controller or test emulator.
   The test operator SHOULD make the observations/measurements at the
   interfaces of test emulator unless it is explicitly mentioned
   otherwise in the individual test.


4.5 Connectivity Recommendation

   The SDN controller in the test setup SHOULD be connected directly
   with the forwarding and the management plane test emulators to
   avoid any delays or failure introduced by the intermediate devices
   during benchmarking tests.


4.6 Test Repeatability

   To increase the confidence in measured result, it is recommended that
   this test SHOULD be performed atleast 10 times with same number of
   nodes using same topology.


5. Test Reporting

   Each test has a reporting format which is specific to individual
   tests. In addition, the following test configuration parameters and
   controller settings parameters MUST be reflected in the test report.

   Test Configuration Parameters:
   1. Controller name and version
   2. Northbound protocols and versions
   3. Southbound protocols and versions
   4. Controller redundancy mode (Standalone or Cluster Mode)
   5. Connection setup (Unencrypted or Encrypted)
   6. Network Topology (Mesh or Tree or Linear)




Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016              [Page 7]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   7. SDN Node Type (Physical or Virtual or Emulated)
   8. Number of Nodes
   9. Number of Links
   10. Test Traffic Type
   11. Controller System Configuration (e.g., CPU, Memory, Operating
       System, Interface Speed etc.,)
   12. Reference Test Setup (e.g., Section 3.1 etc.,)

   Controller Settings Parameters:
   1. Topology re-discovery timeout
   2. Controller redundancy mode (e.g., active-standby etc.,)

6. Benchmarking Tests

6.1 Performance

6.1.1 Network Topology Discovery Time

   Objective:
      Measure the time taken by the SDN controller to discover the
      network topology (nodes and links), expressed in milliseconds.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1.  The controller MUST support network discovery.
      2.  Tester should be able to retrieve the discovered topology
          information either through the controller's management
          interface or northbound interface to determine if the
          discovery was successful and complete.
      3.  Ensure that the controller's topology re-discovery timeout
          has been set to the maximum value to avoid initiation of
          re-discovery process in the middle of the test.

   Procedure:
      1.  Ensure that the controller is operational, its network
          applications, northbound and southbound interfaces are up and
          running.
      2.  Establish the network connections between controller and
          SDN nodes.
      3.  Record the time for the first discovery message (Tm1)
          received from the controller at forwarding plane test emulator
          interface I1.






Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016              [Page 8]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


      4.  Query the controller every 3 seconds to obtain the discovered
          network topology information through the northbound
          interface or the management interface and compare it with the
          deployed network topology information.
      5.  Stop the test when the discovered topology information is
          matching with the deployed network topology or the discovered
          topology information for 3 consecutive queries return the same
          details.
      6.  Record the time last discovery message (Tmn) sent to
          controller from the forwarding plane test emulator
          interface (I1) when the test completed successfully.
          (e.g., the topology matches).

   Measurement:
      Topology Discovery Time Tr1 = Tmn-Tm1.

                                        Tr1 + Tr2 + Tr3 .. Trn
      Average Topology Discovery Time = -----------------------
                                        Total Test Iterations

   Reporting Format:
      The Topology Discovery Time results MUST be reported in the
      format of a table, with a row for each successful iteration. The
      last row of the table indicates the average Topology Discovery
      Time.

      If this test is repeated with varying number of nodes over the
      same topology, the results SHOULD be reported in the form of a
      graph. The X coordinate SHOULD be the Number of nodes (N), the
      Y coordinate SHOULD be the average Topology Discovery Time.

      If this test is repeated with same number of nodes over different
      topologies, the results SHOULD be reported in the form of a graph.
      The X coordinate SHOULD be the Topology Type, the Y coordinate
      SHOULD be the average Topology Discovery Time.

6.1.2 Asynchronous Message Processing Time

   Objective:
      Measure the time taken by the SDN controller to process an
      asynchronous message, expressed in milliseconds.

   Reference Test Setup:
      This test SHOULD use one of the test setup described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.





Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016              [Page 9]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Prerequisite:
      1. The controller MUST have completed the network topology
         discovery for the connected SDN nodes.

   Procedure:
      1. Generate asynchronous messages from every connected SDN node,
         to the SDN controller, one at a time in series from the
         forwarding plane test emulator for the test duration.
      2. Record every request transmit (T1) timestamp and the
         corresponding response (R1) received timestamp at the
         forwarding plane test emulator interface (I1) for every
         successful message exchange.

   Measurement:
                                              (R1-T1) + (R2-T2)..(Rn-Tn)
      Asynchronous Message Processing Time Tr1 = -----------------------
                                                           Nrx

      Where Nrx is the total number of successful messages exchanged

                                                   Tr1 + Tr2 + Tr3..Trn
      Average Asynchronous Message Processing Time= --------------------
                                                  Total Test Iterations

   Reporting Format:
      The Asynchronous Message Processing Time results MUST be
      reported in the format of a table with a row for each iteration.
      The last row of the table indicates the average Asynchronous
      Message Processing Time.

      The report should capture the following information in addition
      to the configuration parameters captured in section 5.
      - Successful messages exchanged (Nrx)

      If this test is repeated with varying number of nodes with same
      topology, the results SHOULD be reported in the form of a graph.
      The X coordinate SHOULD be the Number of nodes (N), the
      Y coordinate SHOULD be the average Asynchronous Message Processing
      Time.

      If this test is repeated with same number of nodes using
      different topologies, the results SHOULD be reported in the form
      of a graph. The X coordinate SHOULD be the Topology Type, the
      Y coordinate SHOULD be the average Asynchronous Message Processing
      Time.







Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 10]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


6.1.3 Asynchronous Message Processing Rate

   Objective:
      To measure the maximum number of asynchronous messages (session
      aliveness check message, new flow arrival notification
      message etc.) a controller can process within the test duration,
      expressed in messages processed per second.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. The controller MUST have completed the network topology
         discovery for the connected SDN nodes.

   Procedure:
      1. Generate asynchronous messages continuously at the maximum
         possible rate on the established connections from all the
         connected SDN nodes in the forwarding plane test emulator
         for the Test Duration (Td).
      2. Record total number of responses received from the
         controller (Nrx) as well as the number of messages sent(Ntx) to
         the controller within the test duration(Td) at the forwarding
         plane test emulator interface (I1) .

   Measurement:
                                                 Nrx
      Asynchronous Message Processing Rate Tr1 = -----
                                                 Td
                                                   Tr1 + Tr2 + Tr3..Trn
      Average Asynchronous Message Processing Rate= --------------------
                                                  Total Test Iterations

      Loss Ratio = (Ntx-Nrx)/100.

   Reporting Format:
      The Asynchronous Message Processing Rate results MUST be
      reported in the format of a table with a row for each iteration.
      The last row of the table indicates the average Asynchronous
      Message Processing Rate.

      The report should capture the following information in addition
      to the configuration parameters captured in section 5.
      - Offered rate (Ntx)
      - Loss Ratio





Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 11]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


      If this test is repeated with varying number of nodes over same
      topology, the results SHOULD be reported in the form of a graph.
      The X coordinate SHOULD be the Number of nodes (N), the
      Y coordinate SHOULD be the average Asynchronous Message Processing
      Rate.

      If this test is repeated with same number of nodes over different
      topologies, the results SHOULD be reported in the form of a graph.
      The X coordinate SHOULD be the Topology Type, the Y coordinate
      SHOULD be the average Asynchronous Message Processing Rate.

6.1.4 Reactive Path Provisioning Time

   Objective:
      To measure the time taken by the controller to setup a path
      reactively between source and destination node, expressed in
      milliseconds.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. The controller MUST contain the network topology information
         for the deployed network topology.
      2. The controller should have the knowledge about the location of
         destination endpoint for which the path has to be provisioned.
         This can be achieved through dynamic learning or static
         provisioning.
      3. Ensure that the default action for flow miss in SDN node is
         'send to controller'.
      4. Ensure that each SDN node in a path requires the controller
         to make the forwarding decision while paving the entire path.

   Procedure:
      1. Send a single traffic stream from test traffic generator TP1 to
         test traffic generator TP2.
      2. Record the time of the first flow provisioning request message
         sent to the controller(Tsf1) from the SDN node at the
         forwarding plane test emulator interface (I1).
      3. Wait for the arrival of first traffic frame at the Traffic
         Endpoint TP2 or the expiry of test duration (Td).
      4. Record the time of the last flow provisioning response message
         received from the controller(Tdf1) to the SDN node at the
         forwarding plane test emulator interface (I1).






Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 12]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Measurement:
      Reactive Path Provisioning Time Tr1 = Tdf1-Tsf1.

                                                Tr1 + Tr2 + Tr3 .. Trn
      Average Reactive Path Provisioning Time = -----------------------
                                                Total Test Iterations

   Reporting Format:
      The Reactive Path Provisioning Time results MUST be reported in
      the format of a table with a row for each iteration. The last row
      of the table indicates the Average Reactive Path Provisioning Time

      The report should capture the following information in addition
      to the configuration parameters captured in section 5.
      - Number of SDN nodes in the path

6.1.5 Proactive Path Provisioning Time

   Objective:
      To measure the time taken by the controller to setup a path
      proactively between source and destination node, expressed in
      milliseconds.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. The controller MUST contain the network topology information
         for the deployed network topology.
      2. The controller should have the knowledge about the location of
         destination endpoint for which the path has to be provisioned.
         This can be achieved through dynamic learning or static
         provisioning.
      3. Ensure that the default action for flow miss in SDN
         node is 'drop'.

   Procedure:
      1. Send single traffic stream from test traffic generator TP1 to
         TP2.
      2. Install the flow entries to reach from test traffic generator
         TP1 to the test traffic generator TP2 through controller's
         northbound or management interface.
      3. Wait for the arrival of first traffic frame at the test traffic
         generator TP2 or the expiry of test duration (Td).
      4. Record the time when proactive flow is provisioned in the
         Controller (Tsf1) at the management plane test emulator
         interface I2.



Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 13]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


      5. Record the time of the last flow provisioning message
         received from the controller(Tdf1) at the forwarding plane
         test emulator interface I1.

   Measurement:
      Proactive Flow Provisioning Time Tr1 = Tdf1-Tsf1.

                                                 Tr1 + Tr2 + Tr3 .. Trn
      Average Proactive Path Provisioning Time = -----------------------
                                                 Total Test Iterations

   Reporting Format:
      The Proactive Path Provisioning Time results MUST be reported in
      the format of a table with a row for each iteration. The last row
      of the table indicates the Average Proactive Path Provisioning
      Time.

      The report should capture the following information in addition
      to the configuration parameters captured in section 5.
      - Number of SDN nodes in the path


6.1.6 Reactive Path Provisioning Rate

   Objective:
      Measure the maximum number of independent paths a controller
      can concurrently establish between source and destination nodes
      reactively within the test duration, expressed in paths per
      second.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. The controller MUST contain the network topology information
         for the deployed network topology.
      2. The controller should have the knowledge about the location of
         destination addresses for which the paths have to be
         provisioned. This can be achieved through dynamic learning or
         static provisioning.
      3. Ensure that the default action for flow miss in SDN node is
         'send to controller'.
      4. Ensure that each SDN node in a path requires the controller
         to make the forwarding decision while paving the entire path.






Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 14]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Procedure:
      1. Send traffic with unique source and destination addresses from
         test traffic generator TP1.
      2. Record total number of unique traffic frames (Ndf) received at
         the test traffic generator TP2 within the test duration (Td).

   Measurement:
                                             Ndf
      Reactive Path Provisioning Rate Tr1 = ------
                                             Td

                                                Tr1 + Tr2 + Tr3 .. Trn
      Average Reactive Path Provisioning Rate = ------------------------
                                                Total Test Iterations

   Reporting Format:
      The Reactive Path Provisioning Rate results MUST be reported in
      the format of a table with a row for each iteration. The last row
      of the table indicates the Average Reactive Path Provisioning
      Rate.

      The report should capture the following information in addition
      to the configuration parameters captured in section 5.
      - Number of SDN nodes in the path
      - Offered rate


6.1.7 Proactive Path Provisioning Rate

   Objective:
      Measure the maximum number of independent paths a controller
      can concurrently establish between source and destination nodes
      proactively within the test duration, expressed in paths per
      second.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. The controller MUST contain the network topology information
         for the deployed network topology.
      2. The controller should have the knowledge about the location of
         destination addresses for which the paths have to be
         provisioned. This can be achieved through dynamic learning or
         static provisioning.
      3. Ensure that the default action for flow miss in SDN
         node is 'drop'.



Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 15]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Procedure:
      1. Send traffic continuously with unique source and destination
         addresses from test traffic generator TP1.
      2. Install corresponding flow entries to reach from simulated
         sources at the test traffic generator TP1 to the simulated
         destinations at test traffic generator TP2 through
         controller's northbound or management interface.
      3. Record total number of unique traffic frames received Ndf) at
         the test traffic generator TP2 within the test duration (Td).

   Measurement:
                                             Ndf
      Proactive Path Provisioning Rate Tr1 = ------
                                             Td

                                                 Tr1 + Tr2 + Tr3 .. Trn
      Average Proactive Path Provisioning Rate = -----------------------
                                                 Total Test Iterations

   Reporting Format:
      The Proactive Path Provisioning Rate results MUST be reported in
      the format of a table with a row for each iteration. The last row
      of the table indicates the Average Proactive Path Provisioning
      Rate.

      The report should capture the following information in addition
      to the configuration parameters captured in section 5.
      - Number of SDN nodes in the path
      - Offered rate


6.1.8 Network Topology Change Detection Time

   Objective:
      Measure the time taken by the controller to detect any changes
      in the network topology, expressed in milliseconds.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. The controller MUST have discovered the network topology
         information for the deployed network topology.
      2. The periodic network discovery operation should be configured
         to twice the Test duration (Td) value.





Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 16]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Procedure:
      1. Trigger a topology change event by bringing down an active
         SDN node in the topology.
      2. Record the time when the first topology change notification
         is sent to the controller (Tcn) at the forwarding plane
         test emulator interface (I1).
      3. Stop the test when the controller sends the first topology
         re-discovery message to the SDN node or the expiry of test
         interval (Td).
      4. Record the time when the first topology re-discovery message
         is received from the controller (Tcd) at the forwarding plane
         test emulator interface (I1)

   Measurement:
      Network Topology Change Detection Time Tr1 = Tcd-Tcn.

                                        Tr1 + Tr2 + Tr3 .. Trn
      Average Network Topology Change
                      Detection Time = ---------------------------
                                        Total Test Iterations

   Reporting Format:
      The Network Topology Change Detection Time results MUST be
      reported in the format of a table with a row for each iteration.
      The last row of the table indicates the average Network Topology
      Change Time.


6.2 Scalability

6.2.1 Control Session Capacity

   Objective:
      Measure the maximum number of control sessions that the controller
      can maintain.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Procedure:
      1.  Establish control connection with controller from every SDN
          nodes emulated in the forwarding plane test emulator.
      2.  Stop the test when the controller starts dropping the control
          connection.
      3.  Record the number of successful connections established with
          the controller (CCn) at the forwarding plane test emulator.




Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 17]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Measurement:
      Control Sessions Capacity = CCn.

   Reporting Format:
      The Control Session Capacity results MUST be reported in addition
      to the configuration parameters captured in section 5.


6.2.2 Network Discovery Size

   Objective:
      Measure the network size (number of nodes, links, and hosts)
      that a controller can discover.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. The controller MUST support automatic network discovery.
      2. Tester should be able to retrieve the discovered topology
         information either through controller's management interface
         or northbound interface.

   Procedure:
      1.  Establish the network connections between controller and
          network nodes.
      2.  Query the controller for the discovered network topology
          information and compare it with the deployed network topology
          information.
      3a. Increase the number of nodes by 1 when the comparison is
          successful and repeat the test.
      3b. Decrease the number of nodes by 1 when the comparison fails
          and repeat the test.
      4.  Continue the test until the comparison of step 3b is
          successful.
      5.  Record the number of nodes for the last iteration (Ns) where
          the topology comparison was successful.

   Measurement:

      Network Discovery Size = Ns.

   Reporting Format:
      The Network Discovery Size results MUST be reported in addition
      to the configuration parameters captured in section 5.





Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 18]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


6.2.3 Forwarding Table Capacity

   Objective:
      Measure the maximum number of flow entries a controller can
      manage in its Forwarding table.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. The controller Forwarding table should be empty.
      2. Flow Idle time MUST be set to higher or infinite value.
      3. The controller MUST have completed network topology
         discovery.
      4. Tester should be able to retrieve the forwarding table
         information either through controller's management interface
         or northbound interface.

   Procedure:
   Reactive Flow Provisioning Mode:
      1. Send bi-directional traffic continuously with unique source
         and/or destination addresses from test traffic generators
         TP1 and TP2 at the asynchronous message processing rate of
         controller.
      2. Query the controller at a regular interval (e.g., 5 seconds)
         for the number of learnt flow entries from its northbound
         interface.
      3. Stop the test when the retrieved value is constant for three
         consecutive iterations and record the value received from the
         last query (Nrp).

   Proactive Flow Provisioning Mode:
      1. Install unique flows continuously through controller's
         northbound or management interface until a failure response
         is received from the controller.
      2. Record the total number of successful responses (Nrp).

   Note:
      Some controller designs for proactive flow provisioning mode may
      require the switch to send flow setup requests in order to
      generate flow setup responses. In such cases, it is recommended
      to generate bi-directional traffic for the provisioned flows.








Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 19]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Measurement:
   Proactive Flow Provisioning Mode:

      Max Flow Entries = Total number of flows provisioned (Nrp)

   Reactive Flow Provisioning Mode:

      Max Flow Entries = Total number of learnt flow entries (Nrp)

      Forwarding Table Capacity = Max Flow Entries.

   Reporting Format:
      The Forwarding Table Capacity results MUST be tabulated with the
      following information in addition to the configuration parameters
      captured in section 5.
      - Provisioning Type (Proactive/Reactive)


6.3 Security

6.3.1 Exception Handling

   Objective:
      Determine the effect of handling error packets and
      notifications on performance tests. The impact MUST be measured
      for the following performance tests
      a. Path Provisioning Rate
      b. Path Provisioning Time
      c. Network Topology Change Detection Time

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. This test MUST be performed after obtaining the baseline
          measurement results for the above performance tests.
      2. Ensure that the invalid messages are not dropped by the
         intermediate devices connecting the controller and SDN nodes.

   Procedure:
      1. Perform the above listed performance tests and send 1% of
         messages from the Asynchronous Message Processing Rate as
         invalid messages from the connected SDN nodes emulated at the
         forwarding plane test emulator.






Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 20]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


      2. Perform the above listed performance tests and send 2% of
         messages from the Asynchronous Message Processing Rate as
         invalid messages from the connected SDN nodes emulated at the
         forwarding plane test emulator.

   Note:
      1. Invalid messages can be frames with incorrect protocol fields
         or any form of failure notifications sent towards controller.

   Measurement:
      Measurement MUST be done as per the equation defined in the
      corresponding performance test measurement section.

   Reporting Format:
      The Exception Handling results MUST be reported in the format
      of table with a column for each of the below parameters and row
      for each of the listed performance tests.
      - Without Exceptions
      - With 1% Exceptions
      - With 2% Exceptions


6.3.2 Denial of Service Handling

   Objective:
      Determine the effect of handling DoS attacks on performance
      and scalability tests the impact MUST be measured for the
      following tests:
      a. Path Provisioning Rate
      b. Path Provisioning Time
      c. Network Topology Change Detection Time
      d. Network Discovery Size

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use one of the test setups described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      This test MUST be performed after obtaining the baseline
      measurement results for the above tests.











Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 21]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Procedure:
      1. Perform the listed tests and launch a DoS attack towards
         controller while the test is running.

   Note:
      DoS attacks can be launched on one of the following interfaces.
      a. Northbound (e.g., Sending a huge number of requests on
         northbound interface)
      b. Management (e.g., Ping requests to controller's management
         interface)
      c. Southbound (e.g., TCP SYNC messages on southbound interface)

   Measurement:
      Measurement MUST be done as per the equation defined in the
      corresponding test's measurement section.

   Reporting Format:
      The DoS Attacks Handling results MUST be reported in the format
      of table with a column for each of the below parameters and row
      for each of the listed tests.
      - Without any attacks
      - With attacks

      The report should also specify the nature of attack and the
      interface.


6.4 Reliability

6.4.1 Controller Failover Time

   Objective:
      Measure the time taken to switch from an active controller
      to the backup controller, when the controllers work in
      redundancy mode and the active controller fails.

   Reference Test Setup:
      The test SHOULD use the test setup described in section 3.2 of
      this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. Master controller election MUST be completed.
      2. Nodes are connected to the controller cluster as per the
         Redundancy Mode (RM).
      3. The controller cluster should have completed the network
         topology discovery.
      4. The SDN Node MUST send all new flows to the controller when
         it receives from the test traffic generator.
      5. Controller should have learnt the location of destination
         (D1) at test traffic generator TP2.

Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 22]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Procedure:
      1. Send uni-directional traffic continuously with incremental
         sequence number and source addresses from test test traffic
         generator TP1 at the rate that the controller processes without
         any drops.
      2. Ensure that there are no packet drops observed at the test
         traffic generator TP2.
      3. Bring down the active controller.
      4. Stop the test when a first frame received on TP2 after
         failover operation.
      5. Record the time at which the last valid frame received (T1)
         at test traffic generator TP2 before sequence error and the
         first valid frame received (T2) after the sequence error at TP2

   Measurement:
      Controller Failover Time = (T2 - T1)
      Packet Loss = Number of missing packet sequences.

   Reporting Format:
      The Controller Failover Time results MUST be tabulated with the
      following information.
      - Number of cluster nodes
      - Redundancy mode
      - Controller Failover
      - Time Packet Loss
      - Cluster keep-alive interval


6.4.2 Network Re-Provisioning Time

   Objective:
      Compute the time taken to re-route the traffic by the
      controller when there is a failure in existing traffic paths.

   Reference Test Setup:
      This test SHOULD use one of the test setup described in
      section 3.1 or section 3.2 of this document.

   Prerequisite:
      1. Network with the given number of nodes and redundant paths
         MUST be deployed.
      2. Ensure that the controller MUST have knowledge about the
         location of test traffic generators TP1 and TP2.
      3. Ensure that the controller does not pre-provision the alternate
         path in the emulated SDN nodes at the forwarding plane test
         emulator.





Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 23]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Procedure:
      1. Send bi-directional traffic continuously with unique sequence
         number from TP1 and TP2.
      2. Bring down a link or switch in the traffic path.
      3. Stop the test after receiving first frame after network
         re-convergence.
      4. Record the time of last received frame prior to the frame loss
         at TP2 (TP2-Tlfr) and the time of first frame received after
         the frame loss at TP2 (TP2-Tffr).
      5. Record the time of last received frame prior to the frame loss
         at TP1 (TP1-Tlfr) and the time of first frame received after
         the frame loss at TP1 (TP1-Tffr).

   Measurement:
      Forward Direction Path Re-Provisioning Time (FDRT)
                                                = (TP2-Tffr - TP2-Tlfr)

      Reverse Direction Path Re-Provisioning Time (RDRT)
                                                =  (TP1-Tffr - TP1-Tlfr)

      Network Re-Provisioning Time = (FDRT+RDRT)/2

      Forward Direction Packet Loss = Number of missing sequence frames
      at TP1

      Reverse Direction Packet Loss = Number of missing sequence frames
      at TP2

   Reporting Format:
      The Network Re-Provisioning Time results MUST be tabulated with
      the following information.
      - Number of nodes in the primary path
      - Number of nodes in the alternate path
      - Network Re-Provisioning Time
      - Forward Direction Packet Loss
      - Reverse Direction Packet Loss


7. References

7.1 Normative References

   [RFC2544]  S. Bradner, J. McQuaid, "Benchmarking Methodology for
              Network Interconnect Devices",RFC 2544, March 1999.

   [RFC2330]  V. Paxson, G. Almes, J. Mahdavi, M. Mathis,
              "Framework for IP Performance Metrics",RFC 2330,
              May 1998.



Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 24]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   [RFC6241]  R. Enns, M. Bjorklund, J. Schoenwaelder, A. Bierman,
              "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)",RFC 6241,
              July 2011.

   [RFC6020]  M. Bjorklund, "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
              the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
              October 2010

   [RFC5440]  JP. Vasseur, JL. Le Roux, "Path Computation Element (PCE)
              Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440, March 2009.

   [OpenFlow Switch Specification]  ONF,"OpenFlow Switch Specification"
              Version 1.4.0 (Wire Protocol 0x05), October 14, 2013.

   [I-D.sdn-controller-benchmark-term]  Bhuvaneswaran.V, Anton Basil,
              Mark.T, Vishwas Manral, Sarah Banks "Terminology for
              Benchmarking SDN Controller Performance",
              draft-bhuvan-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-term-00
             (Work in progress), March 23, 2015

   [I-D.i2rs-architecture]  A. Atlas, J. Halpern, S. Hares, D. Ward,
              T. Nadeau, "An Architecture for the Interface to the
              Routing System", draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-09
             (Work in progress), March 6, 2015


7.2 Informative References

   [OpenContrail]  Ankur Singla, Bruno Rijsman, "OpenContrail
                   Architecture Documentation",
   http://opencontrail.org/opencontrail-architecture-documentation

   [OpenDaylight]  OpenDaylight Controller:Architectural Framework,
   https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_Controller


8. IANA Considerations

    This document does not have any IANA requests.


9. Security Considerations

    Benchmarking tests described in this document are limited to the
    performance characterization of controller in lab environment with
    isolated network.





Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 25]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


10. Appendix A - Example Test Topologies

10.1. Leaf-Spine Topology - Three Tier Network Architecture

                              +----------+
                              |    SDN   |
                              |   Node   | (Core)
                              +----------+
                               /        \
                              /          \
                          +------+   +------+
                          |  SDN |   | SDN  |   (Spine)
                          | Node |.. | Node |
                          +------+   +------+
                               / \   / \
                              /   \ /   \
                          l1 /     /     \ ln-1
                            /     / \     \
                        +--------+   +-------+
                        |  SDN   |   |  SDN  |
                        |  Node  |.. |  Node | (Leaf)
                        +--------+   +-------+

10.2. Leaf-Spine Topology - Two Tier Network Architecture

                          +------+   +------+
                          |  SDN |   | SDN  |   (Spine)
                          | Node |.. | Node |
                          +------+   +------+
                               / \   / \
                              /   \ /   \
                          l1 /     /     \ ln-1
                            /     / \     \
                        +--------+   +-------+
                        |  SDN   |   |  SDN  |
                        |  Node  |.. |  Node | (Leaf)
                        +--------+   +-------+


11. Appendix A - Benchmarking Methodology using OpenFlow(OF) Controllers

   This section gives an overview of OpenFlow protocol and provides
   test methodology to benchmark SDN controllers supporting OpenFlow
   southbound protocol.

11.1. Protocol Overview

   OpenFlow is an open standard protocol defined by Open Networking
   Foundation (ONF), used for programming the forwarding plane of
   network switches or routers via a centralized controller.

Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 26]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


11.2. Messages Overview

   OpenFlow protocol supports three messages types namely controller-
   to-switch, asynchronous and symmetric.

   Controller-to-switch messages are initiated by the controller and
   used to directly manage or inspect the state of the switch. These
   messages allow controllers to query/configure the switch (Features,
   Configuration messages), collect information from switch (Read-
   State message), send packets on specified port of switch (Packet-
   out message), and modify switch forwarding plane and state (Modify-
   State, Role-Request messages etc.).

   Asynchronous messages are generated by the switch without a
   controller soliciting them. These messages allow switches to update
   controllers to denote an arrival of new flow (Packet-in), switch
   state change (Flow-Removed, Port-status) and error (Error).

   Symmetric messages are generated in either direction without
   solicitation. These messages allow switches and controllers to set
   up connection (Hello), verify for liveness (Echo) and offer
   additional functionalities (Experimenter).


11.3. Connection Overview

   OpenFlow channel is used to exchange OpenFlow message between an
   OpenFlow switch and an OpenFlow controller. The OpenFlow channel
   connection can be setup using plain TCP or TLS. By default, a
   switch establishes single connection with SDN controller. A switch
   may establish multiple parallel connections to single controller
   (auxiliary connection) or multiple controllers to handle controller
   failures and load balancing.



















Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 27]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


11.4 Performance Benchmarking Tests

11.4.1 Network Topology Discovery Time

   Procedure:

      SDN Nodes                     OpenFlow                    SDN
                                   Controller               Application
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |<Initialize controller     |
         |                            |app.,NB and SB interfaces> |
         |                            |                           |
         |<Deploy network with        |                           |
         | given no. of OF switches>  |                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |    OFPT_HELLO Exchange     |                           |
         |<-------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |    PACKET_OUT with LLDP    |                           |
         |      to all switches       |                           |
    (Tm1)|<---------------------------|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |         PACKET_IN with LLDP|                           |
         |          rcvd from switch-1|                           |
         |--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |         PACKET_IN with LLDP|                           |
         |          rcvd from switch-2|                           |
         |--------------------------->|                           |
         |            .               |                           |
         |            .               |                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |         PACKET_IN with LLDP|                           |
         |          rcvd from switch-n|                           |
    (Tmn)|--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |      <Wait for the expiry |
         |                            |     of Test Duration (Td)>|
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |   Query the controller for|
         |                            |   discovered n/w topo.(Di)|
         |                            |<--------------------------|
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |   <Compare the discovered |
         |                            |    & offered n/w topology>|
         |                            |                           |




Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 28]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Legend:
      NB: Northbound
      SB: Southbound
      OF: OpenFlow
      Tm1: Time of reception of first LLDP message from controller
      Tmn: Time of last LLDP message sent to controller

   Discussion:
      The Network Topology Discovery Time can be obtained by calculating
      the time difference between the first PACKET_OUT with LLDP message
      received from the controller (Tm1) and the last PACKET_IN with
      LLDP message sent to the controller (Tmn) when the comparison is
      successful.

11.4.2 Asynchronous Message Processing Time

   Procedure:

      SDN Nodes                     OpenFlow                    SDN
                                   Controller               Application
         |                            |                           |
         |PACKET_IN with single       |                           |
         |OFP match header            |                           |
     (T0)|--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         | PACKET_OUT with single OFP |                           |
         |              action header |                           |
     (R0)|<---------------------------|                           |
         |          .                 |                           |
         |          .                 |                           |
         |          .                 |                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |PACKET_IN with single OFP   |                           |
         |match header                |                           |
     (Tn)|--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         | PACKET_OUT with single OFP |                           |
         |               action header|                           |
     (Rn)|<---------------------------|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |<Wait for the expiry of     |                           |
         |Test Duration>              |                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |<Record the number of       |                           |
         |PACKET_INs/PACKET_OUTs      |                           |
         |Exchanged (Nrx)>            |                           |
         |                            |                           |




Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 29]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Legend:
      T0,T1, ..Tn are PACKET_IN messages transmit timestamps.
      R0,R1, ..Rn are PACKET_OUT messages receive timestamps.
      Nrx : Number of successful PACKET_IN/PACKET_OUT message exchanges

   Discussion:
      The Asynchronous Message Processing Time will be obtained by
      sum of ((R0-T0),(R1-T1)..(Rn - Tn))/ Nrx.

11.4.3 Asynchronous Message Processing Rate

   Procedure:

      SDN Nodes                     OpenFlow                    SDN
                                   Controller               Application
         |                            |                           |
         |PACKET_IN with multiple OFP |                           |
         |match headers               |                           |
         |--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         | PACKET_OUT with multiple   |                           |
         |          OFP action headers|                           |
         |<---------------------------|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |PACKET_IN with multiple OFP |                           |
         |match headers               |                           |
         |--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         | PACKET_OUT with multiple   |                           |
         |          OFP action headers|                           |
         |<---------------------------|                           |
         |            .               |                           |
         |            .               |                           |
         |            .               |                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |PACKET_IN with multiple OFP |                           |
         |match headers               |                           |
         |--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         | PACKET_OUT with multiple   |                           |
         |          OFP action headers|                           |
         |<---------------------------|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |<Wait for the expiry of     |                           |
         |Test Duration>              |                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |<Record the number of OFP   |                           |
    (Nrx)|action headers rcvd>        |                           |
         |                            |                           |


Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 30]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Discussion:
      The Asynchronous Message Processing Rate will be obtained by
      calculating the number of OFP action headers received in all
      PACKET_OUT messages during the test duration.

11.4.4 Reactive Path Provisioning Time

   Procedure:


     Test Traffic     Test Traffic         SDN Nodes         OpenFlow
     Generator TP1    Generator TP2                         Controller
         |             |                      |                   |
         |             |G-ARP (D1)            |                   |
         |             |--------------------->|                   |
         |             |                      |                   |
         |             |                      |PACKET_IN(D1)      |
         |             |                      |------------------>|
         |             |                      |                   |
         |Traffic (S1,D1)                     |                   |
   (Tsf1)|----------------------------------->|                   |
         |             |                      |                   |
         |             |                      |                   |
         |             |                      |                   |
         |             |                      |PACKET_IN(S1,D1)   |
         |             |                      |------------------>|
         |             |                      |                   |
         |             |                      |  FLOW_MOD(D1)     |
         |             |                      |<------------------|
         |             |                      |                   |
         |             |Traffic (S1,D1)       |                   |
         |       (Tdf1)|<---------------------|                   |
         |             |                      |                   |

   Legend:
      G-ARP: Gratuitous ARP message.
      Tsf1: Time of first frame sent from TP1
      Tdf1: Time of first frame received from TP2

   Discussion:
      The Reactive Path Provisioning Time can be obtained by finding the
      time difference between the transmit and receive time of the
      traffic (Tsf1-Tdf1).








Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 31]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


11.4.5 Proactive Path Provisioning Time

   Procedure:

   Test Traffic  Test Traffic    SDN Nodes       OpenFlow        SDN
   Generator TP1 Generator TP2                  Controller  Application
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |G-ARP (D1)     |                |              |
      |             |-------------->|                |              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |PACKET_IN(D1)   |              |
      |             |               |--------------->|              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |Traffic (S1,D1)              |                |              |
(Tsf1)|---------------------------->|                |              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |                | <Install flow|
      |             |               |                |  for S1,D1>  |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |  FLOW_MOD(D1)  |              |
      |             |               |<---------------|              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |Traffic (S1,D1)|                |              |
      |       (Tdf1)|<--------------|                |              |
      |             |               |                |              |

   Legend:
      G-ARP: Gratuitous ARP message.
      Tsf1: Time of first frame sent from TP1
      Tdf1: Time of first frame received from TP2

   Discussion:
      The Proactive Path Provisioning Time can be obtained by finding
      the time difference between the transmit and receive time of the
      traffic (Tsf1-Tdf1).
















Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 32]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


11.4.6 Reactive Path Provisioning Rate

   Procedure:

     Test Traffic     Test Traffic         SDN Nodes         OpenFlow
     Generator TP1    Generator TP2                         Controller
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |G-ARP (D1..Dn)      |                      |
         |             |--------------------|                      |
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |PACKET_IN(D1..Dn)     |
         |             |                    |--------------------->|
         |             |                    |                      |
         |Traffic (S1..Sn,D1..Dn)           |                      |
         |--------------------------------->|                      |
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |PACKET_IN(S1.Sn,D1.Dn)|
         |             |                    |--------------------->|
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |        FLOW_MOD(S1)  |
         |             |                    |<---------------------|
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |        FLOW_MOD(D1)  |
         |             |                    |<---------------------|
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |        FLOW_MOD(S2)  |
         |             |                    |<---------------------|
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |        FLOW_MOD(D2)  |
         |             |                    |<---------------------|
         |             |                    |             .        |
         |             |                    |             .        |
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |        FLOW_MOD(Sn)  |
         |             |                    |<---------------------|
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |        FLOW_MOD(Dn)  |
         |             |                    |<---------------------|
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             | Traffic (S1..Sn,   |                      |
         |             |             D1..Dn)|                      |
         |             |<-------------------|                      |
         |             |                    |                      |
         |             |                    |                      |





Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 33]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


   Legend:
      G-ARP: Gratuitous ARP
      D1..Dn: Destination Endpoint 1, Destination Endpoint 2 ....
              Destination Endpoint n
      S1..Sn: Source Endpoint 1, Source Endpoint 2 .., Source Endpoint n

   Discussion:
      The Reactive Path Provisioning Rate can be obtained by finding the
      total number of frames received at TP2 after the test duration.


11.4.7 Proactive Path Provisioning Rate

   Procedure:

   Test Traffic  Test Traffic    SDN Nodes       OpenFlow        SDN
   Generator TP1 Generator TP2                  Controller  Application
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |G-ARP (D1..Dn) |                |              |
      |             |-------------->|                |              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |PACKET_IN(D1.Dn)|              |
      |             |               |--------------->|              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |Traffic (S1..Sn,D1..Dn)      |                |              |
(Tsf1)|---------------------------->|                |              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |                | <Install flow|
      |             |               |                |  for S1,D1>  |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |                |       .      |
      |             |               |                | <Install flow|
      |             |               |                |  for Sn,Dn>  |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |  FLOW_MOD(S1)  |              |
      |             |               |<---------------|              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |  FLOW_MOD(D1)  |              |
      |             |               |<---------------|              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |       .        |              |
      |             |               |  FLOW_MOD(Sn)  |              |
      |             |               |<---------------|              |
      |             |               |                |              |
      |             |               |  FLOW_MOD(Dn)  |              |
      |             |               |<---------------|              |
      |             |               |                |              |




Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 34]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


      |             |Traffic (S1.Sn,|                |              |
      |             |         D1.Dn)|                |              |
      |       (Tdf1)|<--------------|                |              |
      |             |               |                |              |

   Legend:
      G-ARP: Gratuitous ARP
      D1..Dn: Destination Endpoint 1, Destination Endpoint 2 ....
              Destination Endpoint n
      S1..Sn: Source Endpoint 1, Source Endpoint 2 .., Source Endpoint n

   Discussion:
      The Proactive Path Provisioning Rate can be obtained by finding
      the total number of frames received at TP2 after the test duration

11.4.8 Network Topology Change Detection Time

   Procedure:

      SDN Nodes                     OpenFlow                    SDN
                                   Controller               Application
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |     <Bring down a link in |
         |                            |                 switch S1>|
         |                            |                           |
      T0 |PORT_STATUS with link down  |                           |
         | from S1                    |                           |
         |--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |First PACKET_OUT with LLDP  |                           |
         |to OF Switch                |                           |
      T1 |<---------------------------|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |       <Record time of 1st |
         |                            |   PACKET_OUT with LLDP T1>|

   Discussion:
      The Network Topology Change Detection Time can be obtained by
      finding the difference between the time the OpenFlow switch S1
      sends the PORT_STATUS message (T0) and the time that the OpenFlow
      controller sends the first topology re-discovery message (T1) to
      OpenFlow switches.









Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 35]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


11.5 Scalability

11.5.1 Control Sessions Capacity

   Procedure:

      SDN Nodes                              OpenFlow
                                            Controller
         |                                       |
         |    OFPT_HELLO Exchange for Switch 1   |
         |<------------------------------------->|
         |                                       |
         |    OFPT_HELLO Exchange for Switch 2   |
         |<------------------------------------->|
         |                  .                    |
         |                  .                    |
         |                  .                    |
         |    OFPT_HELLO Exchange for Switch n   |
         |X<----------------------------------->X|
         |                                       |

   Discussion:
      The value of Switch n-1 will provide Control Sessions Capacity.

11.5.2 Network Discovery Size

   Procedure:

      SDN Nodes                     OpenFlow                    SDN
                                   Controller               Application
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |     <Deploy network with  |
         |                            |given no. of OF switches N>|
         |                            |                           |
         |    OFPT_HELLO Exchange     |                           |
         |<-------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |    PACKET_OUT with LLDP    |                           |
         |      to all switches       |                           |
         |<---------------------------|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |         PACKET_IN with LLDP|                           |
         |          rcvd from switch-1|                           |
         |--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |






Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 36]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


         |         PACKET_IN with LLDP|                           |
         |          rcvd from switch-2|                           |
         |--------------------------->|                           |
         |            .               |                           |
         |            .               |                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |         PACKET_IN with LLDP|                           |
         |          rcvd from switch-n|                           |
         |--------------------------->|                           |
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |      <Wait for the expiry |
         |                            |     of Test Duration (Td)>|
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |   Query the controller for|
         |                            |   discovered n/w topo.(N1)|
         |                            |<--------------------------|
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |   <If N1==N repeat Step 1 |
         |                            |with N+1 nodes until N1<N >|
         |                            |                           |
         |                            |   <If N1<N repeat Step 1  |
         |                            | with N=N1 nodes once and  |
         |                            | exit>                     |
         |                            |                           |

   Legend:
      n/w topo: Network Topology
      OF: OpenFlow

   Discussion:
      The value of N1 provides the Network Discovery Size value. The
      test duration can be set to the stipulated time within which the
      user expects the controller to complete the discovery process.


11.5.3 Forwarding Table Capacity

   Procedure:

    Test Traffic        SDN Nodes          OpenFlow             SDN
    Generator TP1                         Controller        Application
         |                  |                   |                 |
         |                  |                   |                 |
         |G-ARP (H1..Hn)    |                   |                 |
  Step 1 |----------------->|                   |                 |
         |                  |                   |                 |
         |                  |PACKET_IN(D1..Dn)  |                 |
         |                  |------------------>|                 |



Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 37]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


         |                  |                   |                 |
  Step 2 |                  |                   |<Wait for 5 secs>|
         |                  |                   |                 |
         |                  |                   |  <Query for FWD |
         |                  |                   |          entry> |(F1)
         |                  |                   |                 |
         |                  |                   |<Wait for 5 secs>|
         |                  |                   |                 |
         |                  |                   |  <Query for FWD |
         |                  |                   |          entry> |(F2)
         |                  |                   |                 |
         |                  |                   |<Wait for 5 secs>|
         |                  |                   |                 |
         |                  |                   |  <Query for FWD |
         |                  |                   |          entry> |(F3)
         |                  |                   |                 |
         |                  |                   | <Repeat Step 2  |
         |                  |                   |until F1==F2==F3>|
         |                  |                   |                 |

   Legend:
      G-ARP: Gratuitous ARP
      H1..Hn: Host 1 .. Host n
      FWD: Forwarding Table

   Discussion:
      Query the controller forwarding table entries for multiple times
      until the three consecutive queries return the same value. The
      last value retrieved from the controller will provide the
      Forwarding Table Capacity value. The query interval is user
      configurable. The 5 seconds shown in this example is for
      representational purpose.



















Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 38]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


11.6 Security

11.6.1 Exception Handling

   Procedure:

   Test Traffic  Test Traffic    SDN Nodes       OpenFlow        SDN
   Generator TP1 Generator TP2                  Controller  Application
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |G-ARP (D1..Dn)     |                 |            |
       |          |------------------>|                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |PACKET_IN(D1..Dn)|            |
       |          |                   |---------------->|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
 Step 1|Traffic (S1..Sn,D1..Dn)       |                 |            |
       |----------------------------->|                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |PACKET_IN(S1..Sa,|            |
       |          |                   |          D1..Da)|            |
       |          |                   |---------------->|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |PACKET_IN(Sa+1.. |            |
       |          |                   |.Sn,Da+1..Dn)    |            |
       |          |                   |(1% incorrect OFP|            |
       |          |                   |    Match header)|            |
       |          |                   |---------------->|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   | FLOW_MOD(D1..Dn)|            |
       |          |                   |<----------------|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   | FLOW_MOD(S1..Sa)|            |
       |          |                   |      OFP headers|            |
       |          |                   |<----------------|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |Traffic (S1..Sa,   |                 |            |
       |          |            D1..Da)|                 |            |
       |          |<------------------|                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |  <Wait for |
       |          |                   |                 |      Test  |
       |          |                   |                 |   Duration>|
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |  <Record Rx|
       |          |                   |                 |   frames at|
       |          |                   |                 |  TP2 (Rn1)>|
       |          |                   |                 |            |




Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 39]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


       |          |                   |                 |    <Repeat |
       |          |                   |                 | Step1 with |
       |          |                   |                 |2% incorrect|
       |          |                   |                 | PACKET_INs>|
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |  <Record Rx|
       |          |                   |                 |   frames at|
       |          |                   |                 |  TP2 (Rn2)>|
       |          |                   |                 |            |

   Legend:
      G-ARP: Gratuitous ARP
      PACKET_IN(Sa+1..Sn,Da+1..Dn): OpenFlow PACKET_IN with wrong
            version number
      Rn1: Total number of frames received at Test Port 2 with
           1% incorrect frames
      Rn2: Total number of frames received at Test Port 2 with
           2% incorrect frames

   Discussion:
      The traffic rate sent towards OpenFlow switch from Test Port 1
      should be 1% higher than the Path Programming Rate. Rn1 will
      provide the Path Provisioning Rate of controller at 1% of
      incorrect frames handling and Rn2 will provide the Path
      Provisioning Rate of controller at 2% of incorrect frames
      handling.

      The procedure defined above provides test steps to determine the
      effect of handling error packets on Path Programming Rate. Same
      procedure can be adopted to determine the effects on other
      performance tests listed in this benchmarking tests.


11.6.2 Denial of Service Handling

   Procedure:

   Test Traffic  Test Traffic    SDN Nodes       OpenFlow        SDN
   Generator TP1 Generator TP2                  Controller  Application
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |G-ARP (D1..Dn)     |                 |            |
       |          |------------------>|                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |PACKET_IN(D1..Dn)|            |
       |          |                   |---------------->|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |





Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 40]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


       |Traffic (S1..Sn,D1..Dn)       |                 |            |
       |----------------------------->|                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |PACKET_IN(S1..Sn,|            |
       |          |                   |          D1..Dn)|            |
       |          |                   |---------------->|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |TCP SYN Attack   |            |
       |          |                   |from a switch    |            |
       |          |                   |---------------->|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |FLOW_MOD(D1..Dn) |            |
       |          |                   |<----------------|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   | FLOW_MOD(S1..Sn)|            |
       |          |                   |      OFP headers|            |
       |          |                   |<----------------|            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |Traffic (S1..Sn,   |                 |            |
       |          |            D1..Dn)|                 |            |
       |          |<------------------|                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |  <Wait for |
       |          |                   |                 |      Test  |
       |          |                   |                 |   Duration>|
       |          |                   |                 |            |
       |          |                   |                 |  <Record Rx|
       |          |                   |                 |   frames at|
       |          |                   |                 |  TP2 (Rn1)>|
       |          |                   |                 |            |

   Legend:
      G-ARP: Gratuitous ARP

   Discussion:
      TCP SYN attack should be launched from one of the
      emulated/simulated OpenFlow Switch. Rn1 provides the Path
      Programming Rate of controller uponhandling denial of service
      attack.

      The procedure defined above provides test steps to determine the
      effect of handling denial of service on Path Programming Rate.
      Same procedure can be adopted to determine the effects on other
      performance tests listed in this benchmarking tests.







Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 41]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


11.7 Reliability

11.7.1 Controller Failover Time

   Procedure:

   Test Traffic  Test Traffic    SDN Nodes       OpenFlow        SDN
   Generator TP1 Generator TP2                  Controller  Application
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |G-ARP (D1)   |                 |               |
       |             |------------>|                 |               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |             |PACKET_IN(D1)    |               |
       |             |             |---------------->|               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
 Step 1|Traffic (S1..Sn,D1)        |                 |               |
       |-------------------------->|                 |               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |             |PACKET_IN(S1,D1) |               |
       |             |             |---------------->|               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |             |FLOW_MOD(D1)     |               |
       |             |             |<----------------|               |
       |             |             |FLOW_MOD(S1)     |               |
       |             |             |<----------------|               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |Traffic (S1,D1)|               |               |
       |             |<------------|                 |               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |             |PACKET_IN(S2,D1) |               |
       |             |             |---------------->|               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |             |FLOW_MOD(S2)     |               |
       |             |             |<----------------|               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |             |PACKET_IN(Sn-1,D1)|              |
       |             |             |---------------->|               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |             |PACKET_IN(Sn,D1) |               |
       |             |             |---------------->|               |
       |             |             |       .         |               |
       |             |             |       .         |<Bring down the|
       |             |             |       .         |active control-|
       |             |             |                 |       ler>    |
       |             |             |  FLOW_MOD(Sn-1) |               |
       |             |             |    <-X----------|               |
       |             |             |                 |               |



Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 42]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


       |             |             |FLOW_MOD(Sn)     |               |
       |             |             |<----------------|               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |Traffic (Sn,D1)|               |               |
       |             |<------------|                 |               |
       |             |             |                 |               |
       |             |             |                 |<Stop the test |
       |             |             |                 |after recv.    |
       |             |             |                 |traffic upon   |
       |             |             |                 | failure>      |

   Legend:
      G-ARP: Gratuitous ARP.

   Discussion:
      The time difference between the last valid frame received before
      the traffic loss and the first frame received after the traffic
      loss will provide the controller failover time.

      If there is no frame loss during controller failover time, the
      controller failover time can be deemed negligible.


11.7.2 Network Re-Provisioning Time

   Procedure:

   Test Traffic  Test Traffic    SDN Nodes       OpenFlow         SDN
   Generator TP1 Generator TP2                  Controller   Application
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |G-ARP (D1)     |                 |              |
       |             |-------------->|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |PACKET_IN(D1)    |              |
       |             |               |---------------->|              |
       |              G-ARP (S1)     |                 |              |
       |---------------------------->|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |PACKET_IN(S1)    |              |
       |             |               |---------------->|              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |Traffic (S1,D1,Seq.no (1..n))|                 |              |
       |---------------------------->|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |PACKET_IN(S1,D1) |              |
       |             |               |---------------->|              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |Traffic (D1,S1,|                 |              |
       |             | Seq.no (1..n))|                 |              |
       |             |-------------->|                 |              |

Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 43]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |PACKET_IN(D1,S1) |              |
       |             |               |---------------->|              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |FLOW_MOD(D1)     |              |
       |             |               |<----------------|              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |FLOW_MOD(S1)     |              |
       |             |               |<----------------|              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |Traffic (S1,D1,|                 |              |
       |             |     Seq.no(1))|                 |              |
       |             |<--------------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |Traffic (S1,D1,|                 |              |
       |             |     Seq.no(2))|                 |              |
       |             |<--------------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |    Traffic (D1,S1,Seq.no(1))|                 |              |
       |<----------------------------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |    Traffic (D1,S1,Seq.no(2))|                 |              |
       |<----------------------------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |    Traffic (D1,S1,Seq.no(x))|                 |              |
       |<----------------------------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |Traffic (S1,D1,|                 |              |
       |             |     Seq.no(x))|                 |              |
       |             |<--------------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |  <Bring down |
       |             |               |                 | the switch in|
       |             |               |                 |active traffic|
       |             |               |                 |       path>  |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |PORT_STATUS(Sa)  |              |
       |             |               |---------------->|              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |Traffic (S1,D1,|                 |              |
       |             |   Seq.no(n-1))|                 |              |
       |             |  X<-----------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |  Traffic (D1,S1,Seq.no(n-1))|                 |              |
       |    X------------------------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |



Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 44]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015


       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |FLOW_MOD(D1)     |              |
       |             |               |<----------------|              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |FLOW_MOD(S1)     |              |
       |             |               |<----------------|              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |    Traffic (D1,S1,Seq.no(n))|                 |              |
       |<----------------------------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |Traffic (S1,D1,|                 |              |
       |             |     Seq.no(n))|                 |              |
       |             |<--------------|                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |              |
       |             |               |                 |<Stop the test|
       |             |               |                 |  after recv. |
       |             |               |                 |  traffic upon|
       |             |               |                 |   failover>  |

   Legend:
      G-ARP: Gratuitous ARP message.
      Seq.no: Sequence number.
      Sa: Neighbour switch of the switch that was brought down.

   Discussion:
      The time difference between the last valid frame received before
      the traffic loss (Packet number with sequence number x) and the
      first frame received after the traffic loss (packet with sequence
      number n) will provide the network path re-provisioning time.

      Note that the test is valid only when the controller provisions
      the alternate path upon network failure.

12. Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank the following individuals for
   providing their valuable comments to the earlier versions of this
   document: Al Morton (AT&T), Sandeep Gangadharan (HP),
   M. Georgescu (NAIST), Andrew McGregor (Google),
   Scott Bradner (Harvard University), Jay Karthik (Cisco),
   Ramakrishnan (Brocade).











Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016             [Page 45]


Internet Draft    SDN Controller Benchmarking Methodology      July 2015

13. Authors' Addresses

   Bhuvaneswaran Vengainathan
   Veryx Technologies Inc.
   1 International Plaza, Suite 550
   Philadelphia
   PA 19113

   Email: bhuvaneswaran.vengainathan@veryxtech.com

   Anton Basil
   Veryx Technologies Inc.
   1 International Plaza, Suite 550
   Philadelphia
   PA 19113

   Email: anton.basil@veryxtech.com

   Mark Tassinari
   Hewlett-Packard,
   8000 Foothills Blvd,
   Roseville, CA 95747

   Email: mark.tassinari@hp.com

   Vishwas Manral
   Ionos Corp,
   4100 Moorpark Ave,
   San Jose, CA

   Email: vishwas@ionosnetworks.com

   Sarah Banks
   VSS Monitoring
   930 De Guigne Drive,
   Sunnyvale, CA

   Email: sbanks@encrypted.net













Bhuvan, et al.            Expires January 18, 2016            [Page 46]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.123, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/