Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3551659.3559045acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmswimConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Performance Analysis of General P4 Forwarding Devices with Controller Feedback

Published: 24 October 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Software-Defined Networking (SDN) lays the foundation for the operation of future networking applications. The separation of the control plane from the programmable data plane increases the flexibility in network operation. One of the most used languages for describing the packet behavior in the data plane is P4. It allows protocol and hardware independent programming. With the expanding deployment of P4 programmable devices, it is of utmost importance to understand their performance behavior and limitations in order to design a network and provide Quality of Service (QoS) guarantees. One of the most important performance metrics is the packet mean sojourn time in a P4 device. While previous works already modeled the sojourn time in P4 devices with controller feedback, those models were rather simplified and could not capture the system behavior for general cases, resulting in a potential highly inaccurate performance prediction. To bridge this gap, in this paper, we consider the system behavior of P4 devices for the general case, i.e., under general assumptions. To that end, we model the behavior with a queueing network with feedback. As it is impossible to provide closed-form solutions, we consider different approximations for the mean sojourn time. We validate our results against extensive realistic simulations, capturing different behaviors in the data and control planes. Results show that the most accurate approximation in almost all cases is the one in which the queues are decoupled and considered as independent despite the fact that there are dependencies. The level of discrepancy in the worst case does not exceed 18.2% for service times distributions with a coefficient of variation not greater than 1.

References

[1]
J. Ansell, W. K. G. Seah, B. Ng, and S. Marshall. 2016. Making queueing theory more palatable to SDN/OpenFlow-based network practitioners. In NOMS 2016 - 2016 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium, 1119--1124.
[2]
Gunter Bolch, Stefan Greiner, Hermann de Meer, and Kishor S. Trivedi. 1998. Queueing Networks and Markov Chains: Modeling and Performance Evaluation with Computer Science Applications. Wiley-Interscience, USA. isbn: 0471193666.
[3]
Pat Bosshart et al. 2014. P4: programming protocol-independent packet processors. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 44, 3.
[4]
Huynh Tu Dang, Han Wang, Theo Jepsen, Gordon Brebner, Changhoon Kim, Jennifer Rexford, Robert Soulé, and Hakim Weatherspoon. 2017. Whippersnapper: a p4 language benchmark suite. In Proceedings of the Symposium on SDN Research, 95--101.
[5]
Erol Gelenbe. 1975. On approximate computer system models. J. ACM, 22, 2, (Apr. 1975), 261--269.
[6]
Y. Goto, H. Masuyama, B. Ng, W. K. G. Seah, and Y. Takahashi. 2016. Queueing analysis of Software Defined Network with realistic OpenFlow--based switch model. In 2016 IEEE 24th International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems (MASCOTS), 301--306.
[7]
Donald Gross, John F. Shortle, James M. Thompson, and Carl M. Harris. 2008. Fundamentals of Queueing Theory. (4th ed.). Wiley-Interscience.
[8]
Mor Harchol-Balter. 2013. Performance Modeling and Design of Computer Systems: Queueing Theory in Action. (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press, USA. isbn: 1107027500.
[9]
Hasanin Harkous, Michael Jarschel, Mu He, Rastin Pries, andWolfgang Kellerer. 2021. P8: P4 with predictable packet processing performance. IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, 18, 3.
[10]
Hasanin Harkous, Nicolai Kröger, Michael Jarschel, Rastin Pries, andWolfgang Keller. 2021. Modeling and performance analysis of p4 programmable devices. In 2021 IEEE Conference on Network Function Virtualization and Software Defined Networks (NFV-SDN), 67--73.
[11]
Hasanin Harkous, Khaled Sherkawi, Michael Jarschel, Rastin Pries, Mu He, and Wolfgang Kellerer. 2021. P4RCProbe for evaluating the performance of P4Runtime-based controllers. In Proc. of IEEE NFV-SDN.
[12]
Michael Jarschel, Simon Oechsner, Daniel Schlosser, Rastin Pries, Sebastian Goll, and Phuoc Tran-Gia. 2011. Modeling and performance evaluation of an openflow architecture. In 2011 23rd International Teletraffic Congress (ITC). IEEE, 1--7.
[13]
Hisashi Kobayashi. 1973. Application of the diffusion approximation to queuing networks: part i equilibrium queue distributions. In Proceedings of the 1973 ACM SIGME Symposium (SIGME '73). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 54--62. isbn: 9781450379427.
[14]
Kashif Mahmood, Ameen Chilwan, Olav Østerbø, and Michael Jarschel. 2015. Modelling of OpenFlow-based software-defined networks: the multiple node case. IET Networks, 4, 5, 278--284.
[15]
Kashif Mahmood, Ameen Chilwan, Olav N Sterb, and Michael Jarschel. 2014. On the modeling of OpenFlow-based SDNs: The single node case. Computer Science & Information Technology.
[16]
Nick McKeown, Tom Anderson, Hari Balakrishnan, Guru Parulkar, Larry Peterson, Jennifer Rexford, Scott Shenker, and Jonathan Turner. 2008. OpenFlow: Enabling innovation in campus networks. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 38, 2.
[17]
U. Mitzlaff. 1997. Diffusionsapproximationen vonWarteschlangensystemen. Ph.D. Dissertation. Technical University Clausthal.
[18]
Netronome. 2022. Netronome agilio smartnics. Retrieved June 11, 2022 from https://www.netronome.com/products/smartnic/overview/.
[19]
M. Reiser and H. Kobayashi. 1974. Accuracy of the diffusion approximation for some queuing systems. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 18, 2, 110--124.
[20]
Dominik Scholz, Henning Stubbe, Sebastian Gallenmüller, and Georg Carle. 2020. Key Properties of Programmable Data Plane Targets. In Teletraffic Congress (ITC 32), 2020 32nd International. Osaka, Japan.
[21]
Péter Vörös, Dániel Horpácsi, Róbert Kitlei, Dániel Leskó, Máté Tejfel, and Sándor Laki. 2018. T4P4S: A target-independent compiler for protocol-independent packet processors. In Proc. of IEEE HPSR.
[22]
W. Whitt. 1983. The queueing network analyzer. The Bell System Technical Journal, 62, 9.
[23]
Noa Zilberman, Yury Audzevich, G. Adam Covington, and Andrew W. Moore. 2014. Netfpga sume: toward 100 Gbps as research commodity. IEEE Micro, 34, 5.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Performance Modeling and Analysis of P4 Programmable Devices With General Service TimesIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2024.340481321:4(4543-4562)Online publication date: Aug-2024
  • (2024)P4+NFV: Optimal offloading from P4 switches to NFV for diverse traffic streamsComputer Networks10.1016/j.comnet.2024.110907(110907)Online publication date: Nov-2024
  • (2023)Performance analysis of general P4 forwarding devices with controller feedbackComputer Communications10.1016/j.comcom.2023.07.003209:C(102-119)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2023

Index Terms

  1. Performance Analysis of General P4 Forwarding Devices with Controller Feedback

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      MSWiM '22: Proceedings of the 25th International ACM Conference on Modeling Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems
      October 2022
      243 pages
      ISBN:9781450394826
      DOI:10.1145/3551659
      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 ACM 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: 24 October 2022

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. P4
      2. SDN
      3. queueing networks with feedback

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Funding Sources

      Conference

      MSWiM '22
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      MSWiM '22 Paper Acceptance Rate 27 of 117 submissions, 23%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 398 of 1,577 submissions, 25%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)9
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
      Reflects downloads up to 16 Feb 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Performance Modeling and Analysis of P4 Programmable Devices With General Service TimesIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2024.340481321:4(4543-4562)Online publication date: Aug-2024
      • (2024)P4+NFV: Optimal offloading from P4 switches to NFV for diverse traffic streamsComputer Networks10.1016/j.comnet.2024.110907(110907)Online publication date: Nov-2024
      • (2023)Performance analysis of general P4 forwarding devices with controller feedbackComputer Communications10.1016/j.comcom.2023.07.003209:C(102-119)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2023

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media