OFLOPS: An Open Framework for OpenFlow Switch Evaluation

  • Charalampos Rotsos
  • Nadi Sarrar
  • Steve Uhlig
  • Rob Sherwood
  • Andrew W. Moore
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7192)


Recent efforts in software-defined networks, such as OpenFlow, give unprecedented access into the forwarding plane of networking equipment. When building a network based on OpenFlow however, one must take into account the performance characteristics of particular OpenFlow switch implementations. In this paper, we present OFLOPS, an open and generic software framework that permits the development of tests for OpenFlow-enabled switches, that measure the capabilities and bottlenecks between the forwarding engine of the switch and the remote control application. OFLOPS combines hardware instrumentation with an extensible software framework.

We use OFLOPS to evaluate current OpenFlow switch implementations and make the following observations: (i) The switching performance of flows depends on applied actions and firmware. (ii) Current OpenFlow implementations differ substantially in flow updating rates as well as traffic monitoring capabilities. (iii) Accurate OpenFlow command completion can be observed only through the data plane. These observations are crucial for understanding the applicability of Open- Flow in the context of specific use-cases, which have requirements in terms of forwarding table consistency, flow setup latency, flow space granularity, packet modification types, and/or traffic monitoring abilities.


Data Plane Open Framework Insertion Time Space Granularity Forward Information Base 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Openflow switch specification (version 1.0.0) (December 2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agilent. N2X router tester,
  3. 3.
    Arlos, P., Fiedler, M.: A Method to Estimate the Timestamp Accuracy of Measurement Hardware and Software Tools. In: Uhlig, S., Papagiannaki, K., Bonaventure, O. (eds.) PAM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4427, pp. 197–206. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balestra, G., Luciano, S., Pizzonia, M., Vissicchio, S.: Leveraging router programmability for traffic matrix computation. In: Proc. of PRESTO Workshop (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Covington, G.A., Gibb, G., Lockwood, J.W., Mckeown, N.: A packet generator on the NetFPGA platform. In: FCCM (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Curtis, A.R., Mogul, J.C., Tourrilhes, J., Yalagandula, P., Sharma, P., Banerjee, S.: Devoflow: scaling flow management for high-performance networks. In: ACM SIGCOMM (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freedman, D.A., Marian, T., Lee, J.H., Birman, K., Weatherspoon, H., Xu, C.: Exact temporal characterization of 10 gbps optical wide-area network. In: IMC 2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gude, N., Koponen, T., Pettit, J., Pfaff, B., Casado, M., McKeown, N., Shenker, S.: Nox: towards an operating system for networks. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. (July 2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Handigol, N., Seetharaman, S., Flajslik, M., McKeown, N., Johari, R.: Plug-n-Serve: Load-Balancing Web Traffic using OpenFlow. ACM SIGCOMM Demo (August 2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ixia. Interfaces,
  11. 11.
    Jose, L., Yu, M., Rexford, J.: Online measurement of large traffic aggregates on commodity switches. In: Proc. of the USENIX HotICE Workshop (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Naous, J., Erickson, D., Covington, G.A., Appenzeller, G., McKeown, N.: Implementing an openflow switch on the netfpga platform. In: ANCS (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Olsson, R.: Pktgen the linux packet generator. In: Proceedings of Linux Symposium (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pettit, J., Gross, J., Pfaff, B., Casado, M., Crosby, S.: Virtualizing the network forwarding plane. In: DC-CAVES (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shaikh, A., Greenberg, A.: Experience in black-box ospf measurement. In: ACM IMC (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sherwood, R., Gibb, G., Yap, K.-K., Cassado, M., Appenzeller, G., McKeown, N., Parulkar, G.: Can the production network be the test-bed? In: OSDI (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tootoonchian, A., Ghobadi, M., Ganjali, Y.: OpenTM: Traffic Matrix Estimator for OpenFlow Networks. In: Krishnamurthy, A., Plattner, B. (eds.) PAM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6032, pp. 201–210. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yap, K.-K., Kobayashi, M., Underhill, D., Seetharaman, S., Kazemian, P., McKeown, N.: The stanford openroads deployment. In: Proceedings of ACM WINTECH (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yu, M., Rexford, J., Freedman, M.J., Wang, J.: Scalable flow-based networking with difane. In: ACM SIGCOMM (August 2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charalampos Rotsos
    • 1
  • Nadi Sarrar
    • 2
  • Steve Uhlig
    • 3
  • Rob Sherwood
    • 4
  • Andrew W. Moore
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CambridgeUK
  2. 2.T-LabsTU BerlinGermany
  3. 3.Queen Mary, University of LondonUK
  4. 4.Big Switch NetworksUK

Personalised recommendations