Presentation Speech

Presentation Speech

Hello, my name is [Name]. I am going to take you through this presentation today. This presentation is about SDN (Software Defined Networking). I am going to discuss the opportunities and growth of SDN. This presentation is a summary of the OpenFlow paper: “Traffic Engineering in Software Defined Networking.” In this presentation, my main focus will be on SDN networks as it has come to be a flexible network, that offers opportunities to the research activities and more well-organized traffic engineering. Ways in which network research have had benefits from SDN will also be discussed in this presentation.

The following is slide 2, and the main objective is Developing a Software-Defined Networking (SDN) placement arrangement, which dynamically and adaptively achieves circulation in a network to house diverse circulation designs. The main contribution includes: Addresses Network performance issues in an SDN placed incrementally, formulation of SDN supervisor’s question of optimization and list FPTAS to compute the problem of controllers, SDN examination with simulations improvements that are considerable in loss and delay performance in a low SDN amounts elements positioned in a net, and outlining the algorithm for placement of forwarding elements determination.

The following shows slide 3. I am going to take you through the functions of SDN-FE include:

1. Forwarding – SDN works as a forwarding element. It is assumed that SDN-Fes can handle several hops that precede for a specific destination. If there are several preceding hops, the SDN-FEs can divide traffic to the terminus in a manner that is pre-specified across several preceding trips.
2. Measurement – The routing table has been modified a little, compared to other routing tables, to aid analysis at SDN-Fes. When SDN-FE handles a packet, it makes a long prefix match on the IP address it goes to for the determination of the previous hop.
3. Peering – SDN-C has routing logic and is coordinated with the routing of SDN-Fes so that excellent network performance is enhanced. The controller knows the actual weights of OSPF and the traffic flow amount on every link.
4. Route Computation – The controller computes the routing table for SDN-Fes in a network. Route computation computes the routing tables while considering the routing conducted by non-SDN-Fes, traffic at the link, and current traffic pattern.

Slide four shows the SDN Controller’s problem. SDN Controller’s problem assumes the net consists of node sets N unified to directed links E. We undertake that all connection masses are one and the hard links signify the straight path tree to node 13. Node 13 is the tree that will result if the SDN-FEs too use the normal straight path calculation. Remember that nodes 2, 9, 14 are the SDN-FEs. Note that NH (6, 13) = 10, NH (1, 13) = 2 and etc.

Slide five shows the preparation of the SDN-C problem. Single usual impartial for the SDN-C is to minimalize the supreme use of the associations in the net. In the development, the variables are x(P). Since the number of trails in the loss can be exponential in the name of arcs and nodes, the preparation is also exponential. We favour this trail to the denser node-arc development since it advances itself improved to the growth primal-dual estimate algorithms.

Slide six shows the computing dynamically and Iud and g (3). Using the two measures, the SDN-C computes the standards of (i) g(e) for all e ∈ E, and Iud for all u ∈ C for all d ∈ N, we do the following: We first sketch the calculation of Iud and Deliberate a fixed terminus node d. The SDN-C distinguishes the present direction-finding to this terminus node d. It recognizes all the following stages for all nodes D. At SDN-FEs, it does not identify all the subsequent steps for the terminus and the circulation divided if there are numerous later stages.

The seventh slide is the algorithm for computing values of Iud. Once the values of Iud are known for all u ∈ C for all d ∈ N, we use this to compute the values of the g(e) which is the uncontrollable traffic that flows on link e ∈ E. This is done as follows We inject one unit of flow at node u ∈ C for destination d ∈ N and computes αe (u, d) which is the fraction of this unit flow that is routed on link e.

The eighth slide is expressing (DRP) Dynamic Routing problem. SDN-C directs circulation towards the reduction of concentrated operation of relations that exists in the net. If the best λ > 1, the present traffic can rout at the SDN-FEs while safeguarding all link operations are fewer than any.

NB: The optimal answer to this scaling issue is the opposite of the best solution to the min-max use problematic. In spite of the detail that the unruly has the exponential sum of variables, we can resolve the issue to any wanted level of correctness by the use of the primal-dual algorithm.

In the ninth slide, is Writing the Duel with every Link Capacity Restraint and assuming that l(e) = e ∈ E in terms of weight: Weight is used in place of cost to elude any fundamental misperception from OSPF link costs. Point to note: from the initial set of constraints zud is the lightest track from u- d. Once more, we use the term brightest trail to avoid misperception with a short path by the use of OSPF costs.

In the tenth slide, is how the twin can be expressed. The method in which the twin can be shown has been indicated in the slide. In simple words, assumed any non-negative fixed of link weights l(e), it should be noted that the above equation is a higher bound on the current routing issue. The solution can be outlined about the dynamic traffic issue of management.

In the eleventh slide, is solving the dynamic routing problem. The aim for resolving the problem as an FPTAS instead of a standard linear programming issue is that FPTAS is simple to work out and runs meaningfully speedier than an over-all linear solver, particularly on common and large-sized issues. An FPTAS delivers the following presentation guarantees: (i)for any ϵ > 0, the problem has equal purpose value inside (1 + ϵ)-issue of the best, and the consecutively period is at most a polynomial purpose of the network scope and (ii) 1/ϵ. The FPTAS in our circumstance, is an original dual procedure.

The twelfth slide shows the experimental results. The experimental results will be displayed using the static performance measurement. The following trials were done: Sum of SDN-Fes Vs Normalized throughput and Robustness of SDN-FEs choice. The experiments were done to compute the improvement of performance because of the dynamic routing procedure. Under the Normalized throughput Vs. Number of SDN-Fes. The three topologies, we plan the regularized throughput as we upsurge the amount of SDN-FEs. The first worth when the amount of SDN-FEs is zero resembles OSPF routing. On the heftiness of SDN-FEs prime, the thoughtfulness of the presentation with deference to the actual traffic matrix was tried.

In the thirteenth slide, is the performance for different traffic matrices is under the first experiment, Normalized throughput Vs. Number of SDN-Fes.The second image, effects of figures of SDN-FEs, is under the second experiment, Robustness of SDN-FEs choice.

In the fourteenth slide, shows the opinion on traffic engineering in SDN. Software-Defined Networking (SDN) is a new networking model that differentiates network regulator plane from the packet advancing flat and delivers applications with an inattentive central opinion of the dispersed state of the network. Software-Defined Networks provides for flexibility, efficiency, and ease in functionality. Google has even decided to make use of SDN, showing that it is a good network option in the market today considering the status of the Google company.

This is the end of this presentation, and I am thrilled to be the one who has taken you through all this. You have been great listeners, and I appreciate your attentiveness.