The GENI Book pp 513-544 | Cite as

Europe’s Mission in Next-Generation Networking with Special Emphasis on the German-Lab Project

  • Paul Müeller
  • Stefan Fischer


In this contribution we give a rough overview of the European and particularly the German approaches to next generation networking, or more specifically Future-Internet Research and Experimentation. We can identify three different classes of projects in these approaches. The first class is related to basic research that is covered by projects within Objective 1.1 (Future Networks) of Framework Program 7 (FP7) of the European Commission (EC). This can be compared to the Future-Internet Architecture (FIA) projects of the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the US. The second class of projects is related to experimentation. The FIRE (Future-Internet Research and Experimentation) projects of the EC can be considered in this context, which are more or less comparable to the GENI approach. The third class is more application-driven and covered by the Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects of the EC. This class of projects can be compared to the USIgnite program. A slightly different approach was taken by the German-Lab (G-Lab) project where basic research projects and experimentation were smoothly intertwined, and also covered application-oriented aspects like mobility, virtualization or security in its second phase. All these projects from the EU, and the G-Lab approach will be described in more detail throughout this contribution, based on typical examples.


Virtual Machine Experimental Facility Control Framework Work Package Future Network 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Internet Architecture Task Force. Internet Architecture for Innovation. European Commission. Information Society and Media Directorate-General (DG INFSO) (2011). doi: 10.2759/54224
  2. 2.
    Koponen, T., Shenker, S., Balakrishnan, H., Feamster, N., Ganichev, I., Ghodsi, A., Brighten Godfrey, P., McKeown, N., Parulkar, G., Raghavan, B., Rexford, J., Arianfar, S., Kuptsov, D.: Architecting for innovation. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 41(3), 24–36 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Handley, M.: Why the internet only just works. BT Technol. J. 24(3), 119–129 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mueller, P.: Software defined networking: bridging the gap between distributed-systems and networked-systems research. 6. DFN-Forum Kommunikationstechnologien. Lecture Notes in Informatics 217 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mueller, P., Reuther, B.: Future-internet architecture—a service oriented approach. IT—Inform. Technol. 50(6), 383–389 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Partridge, C.: Helping a future-internet architecture mature (this article is an editorial note submitted to CCR). ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 44(1), 50–52 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mueller, P., et~al.: Future-internet design principles. EC Future-Internet Architecture (FIArch) Experts Reference Group (ERG) (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Campowski, K., Magedanz, T., Wahle, S.: Resource management in large scale experimental facilities: technical approach to federate PanLab and PlanetLab. In: 12th IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS 2010), IEEE/IFIP (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Szegedi, P., Riera, J.F., García-Espín, J.A., Hidell, M., Sjödin, P., Söderman, P., Ruffini, M., O’Mahony, D., Bianco, A., Giraudo, L., de Leon, M.P., Power, G., Cervelló-Pastor, C., López, V., Naegele-Jackson, S.: Enabling future-internet research: the FEDERICA case. IEEE Commun. Mag. 49(7), 54–61 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schwerdel, D., Reuther, B., Zinner, T., Müller, P., Tran-Gia, P.: Future-internet research and experimentation: the G-lab approach. Comput. Netw. 61, 102–117 (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.bjp.2013.12.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schwerdel, D., Cappos, J., Mueller, P.: ToMaTo a virtual research environment for large scale distributed systems research. PIK—Praxis der Informationsverarbeitung und Kommunikation (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schwerdel, D., Günther, D., Henjes, R., Reuther, B., Müller, P.: German-lab experimental facility. In: Proceedings of FIS 2010—Third Future-Internet Symposium, pp. 1–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schwerdel, D., Hock, D., Günther, D., Reuther, B., Müller, P., Tran-Gia, P.: ToMaTo—a network experimentation tool. In: 7th International ICST Conference on Testbeds and Research Infrastructures for the Development of Networks and Communities (TridentCom 2011), Shanghai, China (April 2011) Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cappos, J., Beschastnikh, I., Krishnamurthy, A., Anderson, T.: Seattle: a platform for educational cloud computing. In: Proceedings of the 40th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hemminger, S.: Network emulation with netem. In: Linux Conf Au, Citeseer, 2005, pp. 18–23 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sterbenz, J.P.G., Hutchison, D., Müller, P., Elliott, C.: Special issue on future-internet testbeds—part I/II. Comput. Netw. 61/63(2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Integrated Communication Systems Lab., Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of KaiserslauternKaiserslauternGermany
  2. 2.Institute of TelematicsUniversity of LuebeckLuebeckGermany

Personalised recommendations