Source author record

Arsany Basta

Arsany Basta appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
1topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2015arXiv

Flexibility of Networks: a new measure for network design space analysis?

Flexibility is often claimed as a competitive advantage when proposing new network designs. However, most proposals provide only qualitative arguments for their improved support of flexibility. Quantitative arguments vary a lot among different proposals. A general understanding for flexibility is not yet clearly defined, leaving it to the reader to draw the right conclusions based on background information. The term flexibility is commonly defined as the ability to adapt to changes. For networks, flexibility would refer to the ability to adapt the available network resources, such as flows or topology, to changes of design requirements, e.g., shorter latency budgets or different traffic distributions. Recent concepts such as Software Defined Networking, Network Virtualization and Network Function Virtualization have emerged claiming to provide more flexibility in networks. Nevertheless, a deeper understanding of what flexibility means and how it could be quantified to compare different network designs remains open. In this paper, we ask whether flexibility can be a new measure for network design space analysis. As it is quite challenging to formulate a flexibility measure that covers all network aspects, we propose an initial set of flexibility aspects to start grounding guidelines. Our initial selection is backed up by an analysis of Software Defined Networking, Network Virtualization and Network Function Virtualization for their support of the selected flexibility aspects. Our research methodology is based on a systematic approach that leads to network design guidelines with respect to flexibility.

preprint2015arXiv

Survey on Network Virtualization Hypervisors for Software Defined Networking

Software defined networking (SDN) has emerged as a promising paradigm for making the control of communication networks flexible. SDN separates the data packet forwarding plane, i.e., the data plane, from the control plane and employs a central controller. Network virtualization allows the flexible sharing of physical networking resources by multiple users (tenants). Each tenant runs its own applications over its virtual network, i.e., its slice of the actual physical network. The virtualization of SDN networks promises to allow networks to leverage the combined benefits of SDN networking and network virtualization and has therefore attracted significant research attention in recent years. A critical component for virtualizing SDN networks is an SDN hypervisor that abstracts the underlying physical SDN network into multiple logically isolated virtual SDN networks (vSDNs), each with its own controller. We comprehensively survey hypervisors for SDN networks in this article. We categorize the SDN hypervisors according to their architecture into centralized and distributed hypervisors. We furthermore sub-classify the hypervisors according to their execution platform into hypervisors running exclusively on general-purpose compute platforms, or on a combination of general-purpose compute platforms with general- or special-purpose network elements. We exhaustively compare the network attribute abstraction and isolation features of the existing SDN hypervisors. As part of the future research agenda, we outline the development of a performance evaluation framework for SDN hypervisors.