skip to main content
10.1145/2620728.2620754acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Free access

Towards correct network virtualization

Published: 22 August 2014 Publication History

Abstract

In SDN, the underlying infrastructure is usually abstracted for applications that can treat the network as a logical or virtual entity. Commonly, the ``mappings" between virtual abstractions and their actual physical implementations are not one-to-one, e.g., a single "big switch" abstract object might be implemented using a distributed set of physical devices. A key question is, what abstractions could be mapped to multiple physical elements while faithfully preserving their native semantics? E.g., can an application developer always expect her abstract "big switch" to act exactly as a physical big switch, despite being implemented using multiple physical switches in reality?
We show that the answer to that question is "no" for existing virtual-to-physical mapping techniques: behavior can differ between the virtual "big switch" and the physical network, providing incorrect application-level behavior. We also show that that those incorrect behaviors occur despite the fact that the most pervasive and commonly-used correctness invariants, such as per-packet consistency, are preserved throughout. These examples demonstrate that for practical notions of correctness, new systems and a new analytical framework are needed. We take the first steps by defining end-to-end correctness, a correctness condition that focuses on applications only, and outline a research vision to obtain virtualization systems with correct virtual to physical mappings.

References

[1]
OpenFlow Switch Specification, version 1.4.0. Technical report, Open Networking Foundation, 2013.
[2]
ONS 2014 Keynote: A. Greenberg, Microsoft Azure, 2014.
[3]
ONS 2014 Keynote: A. Vahdat, Google, 2014.
[4]
M. Casado, M. J. Freedman, J. Pettit, J. Luo, N. Gude, N. McKeown, and S. Shenker. Rethinking Enterprise Network Control. CCR, 2009.
[5]
M. Casado, T. Koponen, R. Ramanathan, and S. Shenker. Virtualizing the network forwarding plane. In PRESTO, 2010.
[6]
A. Curtis, J. Mogul, J. Tourrilhes, P. Yalagandula, P. Sharma, and S. Banerjee. Devoflow: scaling flow management for high-performance networks. SIGCOMM, 2011.
[7]
S. Ghorbani and B. Godfrey. Towards Correct Network Virtualization. Technical report, CS UIUC, 2014. http://goo.gl/ks9Fp9.
[8]
S. Ghorbani, C. Schlesinger, M. Monaco, E. Keller, M. Caesar, J. Rexford, and D. Walker. Transparent, Live Migration of a Software-Defined Network. Technical report, CS UIUC, 2013. http://goo.gl/yzVgGN.
[9]
A. Greenberg, N. Jain, S. Kandula, C. Kim, P. Lahiri, D. Maltz, P. Patel, and S. Sengupta. VL2: A Scalable and Flexible Data Center Network. In SIGCOMM, 2009.
[10]
S. Ioannidis, A. D. Keromytis, S. M. Bellovin, and J. M. Smith. Implementing a distributed rewall. In CCS, 2000.
[11]
J. P. John, E. Katz-Bassett, A. Krishnamurthy, T. Anderson, and A. Venkataramani. Consensus routing: The Internet as a distributed system. In NSDI, 2008.
[12]
N. P. Katta, J. Rexford, and D. Walker. Incremental consistent updates. In HotSDN, 2013.
[13]
P. Kazemian, G. Varghese, and N. McKeown. Header Space Analysis: Static Checking For Networks. In NSDI, 2012.
[14]
A. Khurshid, X. Zou, W. Zhou, M. Caesar, and P. Godfrey. VeriFlow: Verifying Network-Wide Invariants in Real Time. In NSDI, 2013.
[15]
T. Koponen, K. Amidon, P. Balland, M. Casado, A. Chanda, B. Fulton, I. Ganichev, J. Gross, N. Gude, P. Ingram, et al. Network virtualization in multi-tenant datacenters. In NSDI, 2014.
[16]
L. Lamport. Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system. Communications of the ACM, 21(7):558--565, 1978.
[17]
M Ciosi et al. Network functions virtualization. Technical report, ETSI, 2013. http://goo.gl/Q84Bxi.
[18]
R. Mahajan and R. Wattenhofer. On Consistent Updates in Software-Defined Networks. In HotNets, 2013.
[19]
C. Monsanto, J. Reich, N. Foster, J. Rexford, and D. Walker. Composing software defined networks. In NSDI, 2013.
[20]
M. Reitblatt, N. Foster, J. Rexford, C. Schlesinger, and D. Walker. Abstractions for network update. In SIGCOMM, 2012.
[21]
R. Sherwood, G. Gibb, K.-K. Yap, G. Appenzeller, M. Casado, N. McKeown, and G. Parulkar. Can the production network be the testbed? In OSDI, 2010.
[22]
M. Yu, J. Rexford, M. J. Freedman, and J. Wang. Scalable flow-based networking with DIFANE. In SIGCOMM, 2011.
[23]
M. Yu, Y. Yi, J. Rexford, and M. Chiang. Rethinking virtual network embedding: substrate support for path splitting and migration. CCR, 2008.

Cited By

View all
  • (2019)Software defined networkingJournal of High Speed Networks10.3233/JHS-19060125:1(1-40)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2019
  • (2019)Minimizing Traffic Migration During Network Update in IaaS DatacentersIEEE Transactions on Services Computing10.1109/TSC.2016.262874012:4(577-589)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2019
  • (2019)ProFlow: Proportional Per-Bidirectional-Flow Consistent UpdatesIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2019.291008916:2(675-689)Online publication date: Jun-2019
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Towards correct network virtualization

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      HotSDN '14: Proceedings of the third workshop on Hot topics in software defined networking
      August 2014
      252 pages
      ISBN:9781450329897
      DOI:10.1145/2620728
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 22 August 2014

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. consistency
      2. correctness
      3. markov
      4. network virtualization
      5. one big switch
      6. one-to-many mapping
      7. software defined networking
      8. updates

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Funding Sources

      • NSA

      Conference

      SIGCOMM'14
      Sponsor:
      SIGCOMM'14: ACM SIGCOMM 2014 Conference
      August 22, 2014
      Illinois, Chicago, USA

      Acceptance Rates

      HotSDN '14 Paper Acceptance Rate 50 of 114 submissions, 44%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 88 of 198 submissions, 44%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)68
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6
      Reflects downloads up to 02 Mar 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2019)Software defined networkingJournal of High Speed Networks10.3233/JHS-19060125:1(1-40)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2019
      • (2019)Minimizing Traffic Migration During Network Update in IaaS DatacentersIEEE Transactions on Services Computing10.1109/TSC.2016.262874012:4(577-589)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2019
      • (2019)ProFlow: Proportional Per-Bidirectional-Flow Consistent UpdatesIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2019.291008916:2(675-689)Online publication date: Jun-2019
      • (2019)A Network Management Protocol for Sonification of Software-Defined Infrastructures2019 IEEE Conference on Network Function Virtualization and Software Defined Networks (NFV-SDN)10.1109/NFV-SDN47374.2019.9039998(1-7)Online publication date: Nov-2019
      • (2019)Survey of Consistent Software-Defined Network UpdatesIEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials10.1109/COMST.2018.287674921:2(1435-1461)Online publication date: Oct-2020
      • (2018)Waypoint Routing in Special Networks2018 IFIP Networking Conference (IFIP Networking) and Workshops10.23919/IFIPNetworking.2018.8696560(1-9)Online publication date: May-2018
      • (2018)Transiently Policy-Compliant Network UpdatesIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2018.287102326:6(2569-2582)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2018
      • (2018)Loop-Free Route Updates for Software-Defined NetworksIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2017.277842626:1(328-341)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2018
      • (2018)A Behavior-Driven Approach to Intent Specification for Software-Defined Infrastructure Management2018 IEEE Conference on Network Function Virtualization and Software Defined Networks (NFV-SDN)10.1109/NFV-SDN.2018.8725754(1-6)Online publication date: Nov-2018
      • (2017)COCONUTProceedings of the Twelfth European Conference on Computer Systems10.1145/3064176.3064201(32-47)Online publication date: 23-Apr-2017
      • Show More Cited By

      View Options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Login options

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media