Software Defined Radio Definition
Software-defined radio (SDR) is a radio communication system where components that have been typically implemented in hardware (e.g. Mixers, filters, amplifiers, modulators/demodulators, detectors, etc.) are instead implemented by means of software on a personal computer or embedded system. Software Defined Everything (SDx) Series: What is SDx? Many of the hot terms in IT technology today are software-defined networking (SDN), software-defined storage (SDS), and software-defined data.
Software-defined networking (SDN) technology is an approach to network management that enables dynamic, programmatically efficient network configuration in order to improve network performance and monitoring making it more like cloud computing than traditional network management.[1] SDN is meant to address the fact that the static architecture of traditional networks is decentralized and complex while current networks require more flexibility and easy troubleshooting. SDN attempts to centralize network intelligence in one network component by disassociating the forwarding process of network packets (data plane) from the routing process (control plane). The control plane consists of one or more controllers which are considered as the brain of SDN network where the whole intelligence is incorporated. However, the intelligence centralization has its own drawbacks when it comes to security,[1] scalability and elasticity[1] and this is the main issue of SDN.
Software-defined radio is a radio communication system where components that have been traditionally implemented in hardware are instead implemented by means of software on a personal computer or embedded system. While the concept of SDR is not new, the rapidly evolving capabilities of digital electronics render practical many processes which were once only theoretically possible. A basic SDR system may consist of a personal computer equipped with a sound card, or other analog-to-digital convert. Software Defined Radio - Benefits: The benefits of SDR are compelling. For Radio Equipment Manufacturers and System Integrators, SDR Enables:. A family of radio “products” to be implemented using a common platform architecture, allowing new products to be more quickly introduced into the market. Software defined radio definition. It is also necessary to produce a robust definition for many reasons including regulatory applications, standards issues, and for enabling the SDR technology to move forwards more quickly. Many definitions have appeared that might cover a definition for a software defined radio, SDR. Software Defined Radio - Defined: A number of definitions can be found to describe Software Defined Radio, also known as Software Radio or SDR. The SDR Forum, working in collaboration with the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) P1900.1 group, has worked to establish a definition of SDR. Software-Defined Radios. It's important to understand that this is a virtual radio, not a physical one — it does what an old fashioned radio does (and more), but it's not part of physical reality. Essentially, the 'radio' is defined by a set of mathematical equations designed to imitate an earlier, physical device.
SDN was commonly associated with the OpenFlow protocol (for remote communication with network plane elements for the purpose of determining the path of network packets across network switches) since the latter's emergence in 2011. However, since 2012[2][3] OpenFlow for many companies is no longer an exclusive solution, they added proprietary techniques. These include Cisco Systems' Open Network Environment and Nicira's network virtualization platform.
SD-WAN applies similar technology to a wide area network (WAN).[4]
- 7Applications
History[edit]
The history of SDN principles can be traced back to the separation of the control and data plane first used in the public switched telephone network as a way to simplify provisioning and management well before this architecture began to be used in data networks.
The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) began considering various ways to decouple the control and forwarding functions in a proposed interface standard published in 2004 appropriately named 'Forwarding and Control Element Separation' (ForCES).[5] The ForCES Working Group also proposed a companion SoftRouter Architecture.[6] Additional early standards from the IETF that pursued separating control from data include the Linux Netlink as an IP Services Protocol[7] and A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture.[8]
These early attempts failed to gain traction for two reasons. One is that many in the Internet community viewed separating control from data to be risky, especially owing to the potential for a failure in the control plane. The second is that vendors were concerned that creating standard application programming interfaces (APIs) between the control and data planes would result in increased competition.
The use of open source software in split control/data plane architectures traces its roots to the Ethane project at Stanford's computer sciences department. Ethane's simple switch design led to the creation of OpenFlow.[9] An API for OpenFlow was first created in 2008.[10] That same year witnessed the creation of NOX—an operating system for networks.[11]
Work on OpenFlow continued at Stanford, including with the creation of testbeds to evaluate use of the protocol in a single campus network, as well as across the WAN as a backbone for connecting multiple campuses.[12] In academic settings there were a few research and production networks based on OpenFlow switches from NEC and Hewlett-Packard; as well as based on Quanta Computer whiteboxes, starting from about 2009.[13]
Beyond academia, the first deployments were by Nicira in 2010 to control OVS from Onix, co-developed with NTT and Google. A notable deployment was Google's B4 deployment in 2012.[14][15] Later Google acknowledged their first OpenFlow with Onix deployments in their Datacenters at the same time.[16] Another known large deployment is at China Mobile.[17]
The Open Networking Foundation was founded in 2011 to promote SDN and OpenFlow.
At the 2014 Interop and Tech Field Day, software-defined networking was demonstrated by Avaya using shortest path bridging (IEEE 802.1aq) and OpenStack as an automated campus, extending automation from the data center to the end device, removing manual provisioning from service delivery.[18][19]
Concept[edit]
SDN architectures decouple network control and forwarding functions, enabling network control to become directly programmable and the underlying infrastructure to be abstracted from applications and network services.[20]
The OpenFlow protocol can be used in SDN technologies. The SDN architecture is:
- Directly programmable: Network control is directly programmable because it is decoupled from forwarding functions.
- Agile: Abstracting control from forwarding lets administrators dynamically adjust network-wide traffic flow to meet changing needs.
- Centrally managed: Network intelligence is (logically) centralized in software-based SDN controllers that maintain a global view of the network, which appears to applications and policy engines as a single, logical switch.
- Programmatically configured: SDN lets network managers configure, manage, secure, and optimize network resources very quickly via dynamic, automated SDN programs, which they can write themselves because the programs do not depend on proprietary software.
- Open standards-based and vendor-neutral: When implemented through open standards, SDN simplifies network design and operation because instructions are provided by SDN controllers instead of multiple, vendor-specific devices and protocols.
The need for a new network architecture[edit]
The explosion of mobile devices and content, server virtualization, and advent of cloud services are among the trends driving the networking industry to re-examine traditional network architectures.[21] Many conventional networks are hierarchical, built with tiers of Ethernet switches arranged in a tree structure. Canon printer software download lbp2900b. This design made sense when client-server computing was dominant, but such a static architecture is ill-suited to the dynamic computing and storage needs of today's enterprise data centers, campuses, and carrier environments.[22] Some of the key computing trends driving the need for a new network paradigm include:
- Changing traffic patterns
- Within the enterprise data center, traffic patterns have changed significantly. In contrast to client-server applications where the bulk of the communication occurs between one client and one server, today's applications access different databases and servers, creating a flurry of 'east-west' machine-to-machine traffic before returning data to the end user device in the classic 'north-south' traffic pattern. At the same time, users are changing network traffic patterns as they push for access to corporate content and applications from any type of device (including their own), connecting from anywhere, at any time. Finally, many enterprise data centers managers are contemplating a utility computing model, which might include a private cloud, public cloud, or some mix of both, resulting in additional traffic across the wide area network.
- The 'consumerization of IT'
- Users are increasingly employing mobile personal devices such as smartphones, tablets, and notebooks to access the corporate network. IT is under pressure to accommodate these personal devices in a fine-grained manner while protecting corporate data and intellectual property and meeting compliance mandates.
- The rise of cloud services
- Enterprises have enthusiastically embraced both public and private cloud services, resulting in unprecedented growth of these services. Enterprise business units now want the agility to access applications, infrastructure, and other IT resources on demand and à la carte. To add to the complexity, IT's planning for cloud services must be done in an environment of increased security, compliance, and auditing requirements, along with business reorganizations, consolidations, and mergers that can change assumptions overnight. Providing self-service provisioning, whether in a private or public cloud, requires elastic scaling of computing, storage, and network resources, ideally from a common viewpoint and with a common suite of tools.
- 'Big data' means more bandwidth
- Handling today's 'big data' or mega datasets requires massive parallel processing on thousands of servers, all of which need direct connections to each other. The rise of mega datasets is fueling a constant demand for additional network capacity in the data center. Operators of hyperscale data center networks face the daunting task of scaling the network to previously unimaginable size, maintaining any-to-any connectivity without going broke.[23]
Architectural components[edit]
The following list defines and explains the architectural components:[24]
- SDN Application
- SDN Applications are programs that explicitly, directly, and programmatically communicate their network requirements and desired network behavior to the SDN Controller via a northbound interface (NBI). In addition they may consume an abstracted view of the network for their internal decision-making purposes. An SDN Application consists of one SDN Application Logic and one or more NBI Drivers. SDN Applications may themselves expose another layer of abstracted network control, thus offering one or more higher-level NBIs through respective NBI agents.
- SDN Controller
- The SDN Controller is a logically centralized entity in charge of (i) translating the requirements from the SDN Application layer down to the SDN Datapaths and (ii) providing the SDN Applications with an abstract view of the network (which may include statistics and events). An SDN Controller consists of one or more NBI Agents, the SDN Control Logic, and the Control to. Security and Communication Networks. 9 (18): 5803–5833. doi:10.1002/sec.1737.
- ^'Software-defined networking is not OpenFlow, companies proclaim'. searchsdn.techtarget.com.
- ^'InCNTRE's OpenFlow SDN testing lab works toward certified SDN product'.
- ^'Predicting SD-WAN Adoption'. gartner.com. 2015-12-15. Retrieved 2016-06-27.
- ^L. Yang (Intel Corp.), R. Dantu (Univ. of North Texas), T. Anderson (Intel Corp.) & R. Gopal (Nokia.) (April 2004). 'Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES) Framework'.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^T. V. Lakshman, T. Nandagopal, R. Ramjee, K. Sabnani, and T. Woo (Nov 2004). 'The SoftRouter Architecture'(PDF).CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^J. Salim (Znyx Networks), H. Khosravi (Intel), A. Kleen (Suse), and A. Kuznetsov (INR/Swsoft) (July 2003). 'Linux Netlink as an IP Services Protocol'.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^A. Farrel (Old Dog Consulting), J. Vasseur (Cisco Systems, Inc.), and J. Ash (AT&T) (August 2006). 'A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture'.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^Martìn Casado, Michael J. Freedman, Justin Pettit, Jianying Luo, and Nick McKeown (Stanford University) (August 2007). 'Ethane: Taking Control of the Enterprise'(PDF).CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^N. McKeown, T. Anderson, H. Balakrishnan, G. Parulkar, L. Peterson, J. Rexford, S. Shenker, and J. Turner. (April 2008). 'OpenFlow: Enabling Innovation in Campus Networks'(PDF).CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^N. Gude, T. Koponen, J. Pettit, B. Pfaff, M. Casado, N. McKeown, and S. Shenker. (July 2008). 'NOX: Towards an Operating System for Networks'(PDF).CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^'GENI. Campus OpenFlow topology'. 2011.
- ^Kuang-Ching “KC” Wang (Oct 3, 2011). 'Software Defined Networking and OpenFlow for Universities: Motivation, Strategy, and Uses'(PDF).
- ^Sushant Jain, Alok Kumar, Subhasree Mandal, Joon Ong, Leon Poutievski, Arjun Singh, Subbaiah Venkata, Jim Wanderer, Junlan Zhou, Min Zhu, Jonathan Zolla, Urs Hölzle, Stephen Stuart and Amin Vahdat (Google) (August 12–16, 2013). 'B4: Experience with a Globally-Deployed Software Defined WAN'(PDF).CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^brent salisbury (May 14, 2013). 'Inside Google's Software-Defined Network'.
- ^Arjun Singh, Joon Ong, Amit Agarwal, Glen Anderson, Ashby Armistead, Roy Bannon, Seb Boving, Gaurav Desai, Bob Felderman, Paulie Germano, Anand Kanagala, Jeff Provost, Jason Simmons, Eiichi Tanda, Jim Wanderer, Urs Hölzle, Stephen Stuart, Amin Vahdat (2015). 'Jupiter Rising: A Decade of Clos Topologies and Centralized Control in Google's Datacenter Network'.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^''MPLS-TP OpenFlow Protocol Extensions for SPTN' becomes a formal ONF standard by unanimous approval'. June 27, 2017.
- ^Camille Campbell (February 6, 2014). 'Avaya Debuts Networking Innovations at 'Tech Field Day''.
- ^Elizabeth Miller Coyne (September 23, 2016). 'Huawei Exec: SDN's Become a 'Completely Meaningless Term''.
- ^'Software-Defined Networking (SDN) Definition'. Opennetworking.org. Retrieved 26 October 2014.
- ^'White Papers'. Opennetworking.org. Retrieved 26 October 2014.
- ^Montazerolghaem, Ahmadreza.; Yaghmaee, M. H.; Leon-Garcia, A. (2017). 'OpenSIP: Toward Software-Defined SIP Networking'. IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management. PP (99): 184–199. arXiv:1709.01320. Bibcode:2017arXiv170901320M. doi:10.1109/tnsm.2017.2741258. ISSN1932-4537.
- ^Vicentini, Cleverton; Santin, Altair; Viegas, Eduardo; Abreu, Vilmar (January 2019). 'SDN-based and multitenant-aware resource provisioning mechanism for cloud-based big data streaming'. Journal of Network and Computer Applications. 126: 133–149. doi:10.1016/j.jnca.2018.11.005.
- ^'SDN Architecture Overview'(PDF). Opennetworking.org. Retrieved 22 November 2014.
- ^S.H. Yeganeh, Y. Ganjali, 'Kandoo: A Framework for Efficient and Scalable Offloading of Control Applications,' proceedings of HotSDN, Helsinki, Finland, 2012.
- ^R. Ahmed, R. Boutaba, 'Design considerations for managing wide area software defined networks,' Communications Magazine, IEEE, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 116–123, July 2014.
- ^T. Koponen et al, 'Onix: A Distributed Control Platform for Large scale Production Networks,' proceedings USENIX, ser. OSDI’10, Vancouver, Canada, 2010.
- ^D. Tuncer, M. Charalambides, S. Clayman, G. Pavlou, 'Adaptive Resource Management and Control in Software Defined Networks,' Network and Service Management, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 18–33, March 2015.
- ^B. Heller, R. Sherwood, and N. McKeown, 'The Controller Placement Problem,' proceedings of HotSDN’12, 2012.
- ^Y.N. Hu, W.D. Wang, X.Y. Gong, X.R. Que, S.D. Cheng, 'On the placement of controllers in software-defined networks,' Journal of China Universities of Posts and Telecommunications, vol. 19, Supplement 2, no. 0, pp. 92 – 171, 2012.
- ^F.J. Ros, P.M. Ruiz, 'Five nines of southbound reliability in software defined networks,' proceedings of HotSDN’14, 2014.
- ^D. Tuncer, M. Charalambides, S. Clayman, G. Pavlou, 'On the Placement of Management and Control Functionality in Software Defined Networks,' proceedings of 2nd IEEE International Workshop on Management of SDN and NFV Systems (ManSDN/NFV), Barcelona, Spain, November 2015.
- ^'OpenFlow: Proactive vs Reactive'. NetworkStatic.net. 2013-01-15. Retrieved 2014-07-01.
- ^'Reactive, Proactive, Predictive: SDN Models F5 DevCentral'. Devcentral.f5.com. 2012-10-11. Retrieved 2016-06-30.
- ^Pentikousis, Kostas; Wang, Yan; Hu, Weihua (2013). 'Mobileflow: Toward software-defined mobile networks'. IEEE Communications Magazine. 51 (7): 44–53. doi:10.1109/MCOM.2013.6553677.
- ^Liyanage, Madhusanka (2015). Software Defined Mobile Networks (SDMN): Beyond LTE Network Architecture. UK: John Wiley. pp. 1–438. ISBN978-1-118-90028-4.
- ^Jose Costa-Requena, Jesús Llorente Santos, Vicent Ferrer Guasch, Kimmo Ahokas, Gopika Premsankar, Sakari Luukkainen, Ijaz Ahmed, Madhusanka Liyanage, Mika Ylianttila, Oscar López Pérez, Mikel Uriarte Itzazelaia, Edgardo Montes de Oca, SDN and NFV Integration in Generalized Mobile Network Architecture , in Proc. of European Conference on Networks and Communications (EUCNC), Paris, France. June 2015.
- ^Madhusanka Liyanage, Mika Ylianttila, Andrei Gurtov, Securing the Control Channel of Software-Defined Mobile Networks , in Proc. of IEEE 15th International Symposium on World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks (WoWMoM), Sydney, Australia. June 2014.
- ^Haranas, Mark (8 October 2016). '16 Hot Networking Products Putting The Sizzle In SD-WAN'. CRN. Retrieved 1 November 2016.
- ^'SD-WAN: What it is and why you'll use it one day'. networkworld.com. 2016-02-10. Retrieved 2016-06-27.
- ^Serries, William (12 September 2016). 'SD-LAN et SD-WAN : Deux Approches Différentes pour le Software Defined Networking'. ZDNet. Retrieved 1 November 2016.
- ^Kerravala, Zeus (13 September 2016). 'Aerohive Introduces the Software-defined LAN'. Network World. Retrieved 1 November 2016.
- ^Kreutz, Diego; Ramos, Fernando; Verissimo, Paulo (2013). 'Towards secure and dependable software-defined networks'. Proceedings of the second ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Hot topics in software defined networking. pp. 50–60.
- ^Scott-Hayward, Sandra; O'Callaghan, Gemma; Sezer, Sakir (2013). 'SDN security: A survey'. Future Networks and Services (SDN4FNS), 2013 IEEE SDN for. pp. 1–7.
- ^Benton, Kevin; Camp, L Jean; Small, Chris (2013). 'Openflow vulnerability assessment'. Proceedings of the second ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Hot topics in software defined networking. pp. 151–152.
- ^Abdou, AbdelRahman; van Oorschot, Paul; Wan, Tao (May 2018). 'A Framework and Comparative Analysis of Control Plane Security of SDN and Conventional Networks'. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials. to appear. arXiv:1703.06992. Bibcode:2017arXiv170306992A.
- ^Giotis, K; Argyropoulos, Christos; Androulidakis, Georgios; Kalogeras, Dimitrios; Maglaris, Vasilis (2014). 'Combining OpenFlow and sFlow for an effective and scalable anomaly detection and mitigation mechanism on SDN environments'. Computer Networks. 62: 122–136. doi:10.1016/j.bjp.2013.10.014.
- ^Braga, Rodrigo; Mota, Edjard; Passito, Alexandre (2010). 'Lightweight DDoS flooding attack detection using NOX/OpenFlow'. Local Computer Networks (LCN), 2010 IEEE 35th Conference on. pp. 408–415.
- ^Feamster, Nick (2010). 'Outsourcing home network security'. Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Home networks. pp. 37–42.
- ^Jin, Ruofan & Wang, Bing (2013). 'Malware detection for mobile devices using software-defined networking'. Research and Educational Experiment Workshop (GREE), 2013 Second GENI. 81-88.
- ^Jafarian, Jafar Haadi; Al-Shaer, Ehab; Duan, Qi (2012). 'Openflow random host mutation: transparent moving target defense using software defined networking'. Proceedings of the first workshop on Hot topics in software defined networks. pp. 127–132.
- ^Kampanakis, Panos; Perros, Harry; Beyene, Tsegereda. SDN-based solutions for Moving Target Defense network protection(PDF). Retrieved 23 July 2014.
- ^ abSherwood, Rob; Gibb, Glen; Yap, Kok-Kiong; Appenzeller, Guido; Casado, Martin; McKeown, Nick; Parulkar, Guru (2009). 'Flowvisor: A network virtualization layer'. OpenFlow Switch Consortium, Tech. Rep.
- ^Al-Shaer, Ehab & Al-Haj, Saeed (2010). 'FlowChecker: Configuration analysis and verification of federated OpenFlow infrastructures'. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM workshop on Assurable and usable security configuration. pp. 37–44.
- ^Canini, Marco; Venzano, Daniele; Peresini, Peter; Kostic, Dejan; Rexford, Jennifer; et al. (2012). A NICE Way to Test OpenFlow Applications. NSDI. pp. 127–140.
- ^Bernardo and Chua (2015). Introduction and Analysis of SDN and NFV Security Architecture (SA-SECA). 29th IEEE AINA 2015. pp. 796–801.
- ^B. Pfaf; et al. (February 28, 2011). 'OpenFlow Switch Specification'(PDF). Retrieved July 8, 2017.
- ^T. Zhu; et al. (October 18, 2016). 'MCTCP: Congestion-aware and robust multicast TCP in Software-Defined networks'. 2016 IEEE/ACM 24th International Symposium on Quality of Service (IWQoS). IEEE. pp. 1–10. doi:10.1109/IWQoS.2016.7590433. ISBN978-1-5090-2634-0. Retrieved July 3, 2017.
- ^M. Noormohammadpour; et al. (July 10, 2017). 'DCCast: Efficient Point to Multipoint Transfers Across Datacenters'. USENIX. Retrieved July 3, 2017.
- ^M. Noormohammadpour; et al. (2018). QuickCast: Fast and Efficient Inter-Datacenter Transfers using Forwarding Tree Cohorts. arXiv:1801.00837. Bibcode:2018arXiv180100837N. doi:10.31219/osf.io/uzr24. Retrieved January 23, 2018.
- ^ abWilliam, Stalling (2016). 'Foundations of Modern Networking: SDN, NFV, QoE, IoT, and Cloud'. Pearson Education.
- ^Rowayda, A. Sadek (May 2018). 'An Agile Internet of Things (IoT) based Software Defined Network (SDN) Architecture'. Egyptian Computer Science Journal. 42 (2): 13–29.
- ^Platform to Multivendor Virtual and Physical Infrastructure
- ^Graham, Finnie (December 2012). 'The Role Of DPI In An SDN World'. White Paper.
- ^Series, Y. (May 2015). 'Global Information Infrastructure, Internet Protocol Aspects And NextGeneration Networks'. ITU-T Y.2770 Series, Supplement on DPI Use Cases and Application Scenarios.