Analisis Perbandingan Link Failover Menggunakan Controller RYU & ONOS pada Jaringan Berbasis SDN

Ghalda Azzahra Dwitami, Mutia Istiqomah, Galura Muhammad Suranegara

Abstract


Dalam Software Defined Network (SDN), terjadinya gangguan merupakan hal yang sering terjadi. Gangguan tersebut lah yang menyebabkan terjadinya kegagalan komunikasi antar jaringan. Salah satu gangguan yang dapat terjadi adalah link failure, keadaan di mana suatu link dalam jaringan mengalami down atau tidak aktif. Untuk itu, diperlukan sistem yang high availability. Implementasi high availability dalam SDN melibatkan penggunaan mekanisme seperti failover. Untuk mengetahui perbandingan kinerja mekanisme failover pada controller Ryu dan ONOS, penelitian ini melakukan skenario pemutusan jalur terpendek antara host dan server menggunakan dua controller tersebut. Pengujian dilakukan dengan mengukur downtime, response time, dan packet loss. Hasil yang didapatkan dari penelitian ini yaitu pada controller Ryu terjadi down selama 15.753 milidetik, sedangkan controller ONOS tidak. Response time jaringan yang menggunakan controller ONOS lebih cepat yaitu dengan rata-rata 4.5222 milidetik, dibandingkan dengan controller Ryu yaitu 112.797 milidetik. Selain itu, rata-rata packet loss menggunakan controller ONOS lebih besar yaitu 1.44% persen, dibandingkan dengan controller Ryu yaitu 0.762%.

In Software Defined Network (SDN), interference is a common occurrence. These disruptions cause communication failures between networks. One of the disruptions that can occur is link failure, a situation where a link in the network is down or inactive. For this reason, a high availability system is required. The implementation of high availability in SDN involves the use of mechanisms such as failover. To compare the performance of the failover mechanism on the Ryu and ONOS controllers, this study conducted a scenario of breaking the shortest path between the host and the server using the two controllers. Tests were conducted by measuring downtime, response time, and packet loss. The results obtained from this study are that the Ryu controller is down for 15,753 milliseconds, while the ONOS controller is not. The network response time using the ONOS controller is faster, with an average of 4.5222 milliseconds, compared to the Ryu controller which is 112.797 milliseconds. In addition, the average packet loss using the ONOS controller is greater at 1.44% percent, compared to the Ryu controller which is 0.762%


Keywords


Failover, Link failure, Ryu controller, ONOS controller, Mesh topology, Downtime, Response time, Packet loss.

References


W. Y. A. B. Maskur Purwiadi, “High Availability Controller Software Defined Network Menggunakan Heartbeat dan DRBD,” JPTIIK, 2018.

R. N. D. D. S. Andre Rizki Dewo Nugraha, “High Availability Performance on OpenDayLight SDN Controller Platform (OSCP) Clustering and OpenDayLight with Heartbeat-Distributed Replicated Block Device (DRBD),” Jurnal Infotel, vol. 10, pp. 149-156, 2018.

Z. S. ,. I. ,. I. R. N. Muh. Nadzir, “Analisis Performansi Link Aggregation Control Protocol (LACP) Antar Perangkat Switch,” Seminar Nasional Teknik Elektro dan Informatika (SNTEI), pp. 355-360, 2018.

M. Yagus Cahyadi S.T., “Implementasi Simulator Mininet Sebagai Pendukung Jaringan Komputer Masa Depan berbasis Software Defined Network di STMIK AKAKOM.,” pp. 3-4, 10 November 2014.

W. Y. D. P. K. Muhammad Aji Wibowo, “Implementasi Link Fast-Failover Pada Multipath Routing Jaringan Software-Defined Network,” Jurnal Pengembangan Teknologi Informasi dan Ilmu Komputer, vol. 2, no. 10, pp. 3968-3975, 2018.

T. F. Y. A. H. S. Rui Kubo, “Ryu SDN Framework Open-source SDN Platform Software,” Technological Development for Network Virtualization.

S. R. A. W. Y. Dea Asmara Gita, “Implementasi Server Failover Pada Software Defined Network,” Jurnal Pengembangan Teknologi Informasi dan Ilmu Komputer, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 133-139, 2019.

J. Bailey, “GitHub,” 10 June 2022. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/faucetsdn/ryu. [Accessed 25 December 2023].

M. B. A.-S. Fidha Ezzaldin Aslan, “Performance Analysis of Various SDN Controllers with Different Network Size in SDWN,” IMDC-IST, no. DOI 10.4108/eai.7-9-2021.2314875, 2021.

G. Palukar, “ONOS: SDN gets real,” HUAWEI, May 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.huawei.com/en/huaweitech/publication/76/onos-sdn-gets-real. [Accessed 27 December 2023].

L. A. S. I. A. A. R. Hartono Fiyono, “MONITORING PING REPLY PADA SAAT KEGIATAN INSTALASI JARINGAN ANTENA MENGGUNAKAN SMS GATEWAY”.

“iPerf - The ultimate speed test tool for TCP, UDP and SCTP,” iperf.fr, [Online]. Available: https://iperf-fr.translate.goog/contact.php?_x_tr_sl=en&_x_tr_tl=id&_x_tr_hl=id&_x_tr_pto=tc. [Accessed 1 January 2024].

T. H. M. Y. P. S. A. M.Makhrus Ali, “Metodologi Penelitian Kuantitatif Dan Penerapan Nya Dalam Penelitian,” Education Journal, vol. 2, no. 2, 2022.

I. F. A. I. Fahmi Apriliansyah, “Implementasi Load Balancing Pada Web Server Menggunakan Nginx,” Jurnal Teknologi dan Manajemen Informatika, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 18-26, 2020.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/telnect.v4i1.66428

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 CC BY SA

TELNECT https://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/TELNECT/index di lisensikan di bawah Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.