See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/366291707

Effect of Traditional and Software-Defined Networking on Performance of

Computer Network

Article  in  Scientific Journal of Informatics · October 2022

DOI: 10.15294/sji.v9i2.31315

CITATIONS READS

0 21

5 authors, including:

Wilson Sakpere
Lead City University
18 PUBLICATIONS   226 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Application of ML, AI and modern computing techniques in 3D image and point cloud analyses View project

PNgAS (Special Edition on COVID-19) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Wilson Sakpere on 09 January 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Scientific Journal of Informatics
Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022
p-ISSN 2407-7658 http://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/sji e-ISSN 2460-0040

Effect of Traditional and Software-Defined Networking on

Performance of Computer Network
Isiaka Babatunde Sadiku1* , Wumi Ajayi2, Wilson Sakpere3, Temilola John-Dewole4, R. A. Badru5
1

1,2,3,4,5
Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Natural and Applied Sciences,
Lead City University, Ibadan, Nigeria

Abstract.
Purpose: Computer networks and the Internet are changing how we communicate, learn, work, and even play.
Conventional computer networks are not smart enough towards processes that contribute to improving online control
transactions of services and demand for unlimited communication services. Hence, computer networking has to go
smart.
Methods: This paper explores the effect of different computer networking types - traditional computer networking
(D0) and Software-Defined Networking (D1). The paper combined traditional computer networking (D0) with
Software-Defined Network (D2) running applications (A1, A2, A3, A4, and A5) with the host sending five packets
(P1, P2, P3, P4, and P5) across the networks emulated using Mininet network emulation to observe various performance
parameters on the network.
Result: It was observed that Application A1 recorded the highest bandwidth, throughput, and latency. The least
bandwidth, throughput, and latency were observed in A4. The result showed that, below 80% of the running
application's IPv4 packet size (65,507 bytes), the higher the bandwidth, the higher the throughput. Also, the lower the
latency, the more statistically similar the jitter experienced. Packet P1 has the highest bandwidth and throughput usage
with high latency. The results indicate that the higher the bandwidth and throughput, the higher the latency observed in
the packet sent across the network. Traditional computer networking (D1) recorded the highest bandwidth and
throughput with the highest jitter. The correlation result showed that the jitter decreases with increasing bandwidth and
throughput.
Novelty: This study provides information on traditional computer networking and Software-Defined Networking. The
result validates studies that observed significant F-value and stability in the SDN application-awareness experiment.

Keywords: Smart Network, Bytes Size, Bandwidth, Throughput, Latency, Jitter

Received July 2021 / Revised March 2022 / Accepted October 2022

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

INTRODUCTION
Computer networks and the Internet are changing how people communicate, learn, work, and play.
Computer networks come in different sizes. These technologies are constantly evolving while the demand
for unlimited communication services continues to increase for various purposes such as research,
education, businesses, online banking, online gaming, shopping, and the new social networking
applications [1]–[4]. As a result, the Internet networks architecture would become too complicated and
gigantic if the communication network fails to become smart. An Intelligent system or smart software
enables control, easy and quick accessibility, and automates operation of different gadgets through which
the user can manage and perform the required function at the immediate or remote point [5].

Furthermore, Software-Defined Networking (SDN) enables continuous network development. SDN is a

networking paradigm that segregates packet forwarding and accounting (performed on switches) from the
routing decisions and advanced protocols (executed on a central controller). In other words, SDN decouples
the control plane and data plane from the network core devices for operating purposes. The control plane
(i.e., SDN controller) acts as the Network Operating System (NOS). The data plane resides inside the
network core devices and is only responsible for forwarding data packets controlled by the central

*Corresponding author.
Email addresses: sibsadiku@gmail.com (Sadiku), wumiajayi1@yahoo.com (Ajayi),
sakpere.wilson@lcu.edu.ng (Sakpere), dejob_j@yahoo.com (John-Dewole), olasunkonmi@yahoo.com
(Badru)
DOI: 10.15294/sji.v9i2.31315

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022 | 111

controller. This segregation increases the networking infrastructure's agility and flexibility and reduces
operational expenses [6]. In SDN network, routing and traffic management decisions are made by a
centralized controller and communicated to switches via a control channel.

The traditional computer network does not allow a fast evolution towards a process that contributes to
improving the online transaction of services. The traditional networks mostly implement devices where the
control plane is distributed and mixed with the data plane. Traditional networking consists of computer
networking that is primarily implemented from dedicated devices using one or more switches, routers and
application delivery controllers. Traditional networking functionality is largely implemented in dedicated
hardware, such as application-specific integrated circuits (ASIC). Moreover, SDN is more flexible,
allowing users greater control and ease of managing resources virtually throughout the control plane. In
contrast, traditional networks use switches, routers, and other physical infrastructure to create connections
and run the network. The SDN controller communicates with applications like firewalls or load balancers
via its northbound APIs. The controller talks with individual network devices using a southbound interface
to configure network devices and choose the optimal network path for application traffic. As a result of this
communication, application developers directly program the network, as opposed to using the protocols
required by traditional networking. SDN uses open, flexible, and dynamic architecture that is defined
through the use of different software programming languages.

In addition, simulation and emulation network platforms play an important role in studying and evaluating
different networks' design and performance [7]. Mininet is the most popular SDN platform in the form of
a virtual testbed used for testing network tools and protocols [8]–[10]. Also, Quality of Service (QoS) is a
set of technologies on a computer network that guarantees its ability to dependably run high-priority
applications and traffic under limited network capacity [11]. QoS technologies provide differentiated
handling and capacity allocation to specific flows in network traffic to assign handling of packets and afford
the bandwidth to that application or traffic flow. The performance parameters commonly measured in QoS
are bandwidth (throughput), latency (delay), jitter (variance in latency), and error rate. IPv4 packet
(including pings) size ranges from 1 to 65,507 bytes. Ping is the most common network administration
utility used to test the reachability of a host on IP networks and to measure the round-trip time for messages
sent from the originating host to a destination computer. Ping sends ICMP echo requests/replies to test the
connectivity to other hosts. Standard ICMP ping shows that the computer host is responding or otherwise
unreachable. In this study, we investigate the effect of traditional and Software-Defined Networking on the
performance parameters of computer networks.

Open-Source Hybrid IP/SDN (OSHI) networking has been proposed as a hybrid approach that allows the
coexistence of traditional IP routing with SDN-based forwarding within the same provider domain [12].
Wei et al. [13] studied the energy-efficient traffic engineering problem in hybrid SDN/IP networks. They
noted that IP routers perform the shortest path routing using the distributed OSPF link weight. The SDNs
perform the multi-path routing with traffic flow splitting by the global SDN controller. Thus, the
underutilized links can be turned off to save energy [13]. Yang et al. [14] proposed a mechanism for
decoupling wireless resource allocation from a mobile terminal by mapping different IP flows to different
virtual wireless nodes to support integrated management in wired and wireless networks. The researchers
extended the SDN framework to support the virtual network interface so that the traditional controller has
a global view of the network and calculates the IP stream policy for the mobile terminal with multiple
virtual network interfaces. The result shows that the mechanism achieves efficient IP flow-level
management in both wired and wireless networks.

Nacshon et al. [6] proposed 'Floware,' an OpenFlow application that allows discovery and monitoring of
active flows at any required aggregation level by monitoring overhead among many switches to reduce its
negative effect on network performance. Floware integrates with monitoring systems based on legacy
protocols such as NetFlow. Duque et al. [15] observed that due to the centralized control of Software-
Defined Networking, forwarding functions with the quality-of-service features are enabled in data networks
based on layer-2 devices. The researchers determined the aspects that enable Software-Defined Networking
to provide quality of service features in data networks using network simulation over the same base network
and under the same working conditions by carrying out measurements of the packet forwarding response
time and management of the transported bandwidth. Nugroho et al. [16] reported that the QoS analysis of
the Software-Defined Network architecture performed better than conventional traditional network
architectures with the value of latency delay on the Software-Defined Network ranging from 0.019ms to

112 | Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022

0.084ms, and with 0% packet loss when it addressed network traffics of 10-100Mbps. The authors reported
the Quality of Service (QoS) performances between the two networks employing SDN-based architecture
and without SDN-based architecture using Mininet as a software emulator. Hu et al. [17] proposed an
application-awareness mechanism including three phases, i.e., traffic collection, data pre-processing, and
application awareness, which outperforms the three benchmarks on recall ratio, precision ratio, F-value,
and stability. The researchers used Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) based on a deep learning
mechanism for application awareness. They also noted that the traditional Internet can only obtain the local
network view, which belongs to the offline awareness mode and cannot adapt to the dynamical network
environment.

METHODS
To investigate the effects of traditional and Software-Defined Networking on the performance parameters
of a computer network, fifty hosts from each switch (s1, s2, s3, s4, and s5) were attached to different
computer networks. The computer networks are traditional computer networking (D0), Software-Defined
Networking (D1), and a combination of traditional and Software-Defined Network (D2) emulated using
the default Mininet emulation tool version 2.3.0. Each of the connected links has an optimum bandwidth
allocation (10 Mbps) following the procedure of Chaudhari [18]. Figures 1- 3 show the conceptual topology
for this experiment. Figure 1 consists of traditional switches (s1, s2, s3, s4, and s5) connected to coordinated
switch s6. Figure 2 consists of a controller (c0) connected to the OpenFlow switch as switch s6 coordinating
switches s1, s2, s3, s4, and s5. Figure 3 consists of the controller (c0) connected to OpenFlow switches s1,
s2, s3, s4, and s5. The experiments were emulated using Mininet running on Ubuntu 20.04 LTS operating
system on Lenovo Thinkpad X201t with 8 GB RAM, Intel Core i5 CPU, 2.9 GHz (see Figure 4).

Figure 1. Traditional computer networking (D0)

Figure 2. Software-Defined Networking (D1)

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022 | 113

 Figure 3. Combined traditional with Software-Defined Network (D2)

The three factors of a factorial experiment were set up in a completely randomized design (D3 × A5 × P5)
with ten replicates each on the performance of the computer network based on traditional and Software-
Defined Networking. The network type (D0, D1, and D2) is the first factor. The second factor is the Packet
Internet groper (Ping) command representing a running application on a host under s1 that sends five (5)
different levels (100, 90, 80, 70 % of 65,507 bytes, and 10,000 bytes) engaging the server's services.
According to IETF RFC 793 and 768, the theoretical maximum size for Transmission Control Protocol
(TCP) and User Datagram Protocol (UDP) is about 64 kB (TCP 65535 bytes and UDP 65507 bytes ) [19].
But packets of this size are not commonly used due to the Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU), the
maximum data size that can be sent at a time. This means that data with a size larger than the MTU is
passed from the transport layer to the network layer, and the data are fragmented into smaller packages that
are provided with the IP header with the final destination address. The third factor is the number of packets
(32, 64, 128, 256 and 512) sent across the network. To generate traffic, the Iperf command was executed
using 'sudo iperf -s -p 5566 -i 1', to set up the Iperf server for TCP on a server's host command-line interface
(CLI) on s5, and 'sudo iperf -s -u -p 5566 -i 1', for setting Iperf server for UDP traffic on server's host CLI
on s5. Iperf client connection from PC3 and PC4 were connected to the TCP and UDP server using ‘sudo
iperf -c <server address> -p 5566 -i 1’ and ‘sudo iperf -c <server address> -u -b 10M –t 15 -p 5566’
respectively. The experiment was carried out using the Mininet emulation tool. Mininet runs the collection
of end devices (like Laptops and PC), intermediary devices (like switches and routers), and links on a single
Linux kernel. The results from Mininet emulation are the same as an entire computer network [19]. A
cleanup process for the experiment is run at the end of every new network topology execution to avoid any
previous logs and cache data building up with the current experiment.

114 | Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022

 Figure 4. Tests conducted during the experimental study

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

A total of 750 tests were conducted during the experimental study. Table 1 shows that the F-value is high
and the Pr > F-value is less than 0.05. The ANOVA results indicate that all the factors used in the tests had
a significant effect on latency, bandwidth, throughput, and jitter except the number of packets sent, the
interaction of the application running, and the type of network used (see Table 1).

Table 1. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) table

Factor Latency Bandwidth Throughput Jitter

F-value Pr(>F) F-value Pr(>F) F-value Pr(>F) F-value Pr(>F)

APPLICATION (A) 27.426* < 2.2e-16 7.107* 1.316e-05 8.651* 8.199e-07 2.342* 0.0536275
DEFINED_
NETWORK (D) 102.907* < 2.2e-16 335.257* < 2.2e-16 187.435* < 2.2e-16 391.088* < 2.2e-16

PACKET (P) 6.889* 1.945e-05 81.706* < 2.2e-16 45.340* < 2.2e-16 1.721ns 0.14ns

A×D 12.638* < 2.2e-16 9.582* 1.284e-12 12.560* < 2.2e-16 1.398ns 0.19ns

A×P 4.506* 1.380e-08 5.985* 2.051e-12 5.903* 3.360e-12 3.006* 0.00006978

D×P 6.331* 6.217e-08 44.419* < 2.2e-16 32.167* < 2.2e-16 2.957* 0.0029410

A×D×P 4.368* 9.819e-14 5.452* < 2.2e-16 4.263* 2.944e-13 2.236* 0.0001371
Note: "*" means "is significant", "ns" means "is not significant at p≥0.05"

From Table 2, the influence of the running application on the bandwidth shows that A2 and A3 are
statistically similar, as well as A4 and A5. Also, D0 and D1, as well as P3, P4, and P5, are similar. Generally,
all the performance parameters are significantly influenced by the types of running applications, defined
networks, and packets. The influence of the types of running applications on the bandwidth shows that A1
is the highest, while A4 is the lowest. However, A2 and A3 are statistically similar, as well as A4 and A5.
The defined network D0 has the greatest influence on the bandwidth, while D2 has the least influence.
Generally, D0 and D1 are statistically similar. The influence of packets on the bandwidth showed that P1,
P2, and P3 have the greatest influence on bandwidth. However, P3, P4, and P5 are statistically similar in
their influence on bandwidth.

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022 | 115

 Table 2. Result of duncan's new multiple range tests, provides significance levels for the difference
between pair of means
Bandwidth (Gbps) Throughput (GB) Latency (ms) Jitter

APPLICATION A1 9.47 ± 0.473a 16.55 ± 0.82a 0.241 ± 0.190a 0.0046 ± 0.0025a

b
A2 9.38 ± 0.429 ab
16.37 ± 0.73 ab
0.202 ± 0.120 0.0050 ± 0.0028a
c
A3 9.37 ± 0.44 ab
16.35 ± 0.78 ab
0.169 ± 0.054 0.0049 ± 0.0025a
c
A4 9.33 ± 0.54 b
16.29 ± 0.94 b
0.162 ± 0.033 0.0048 ± 0.0024a
A5 9.35 ± 0.34b 16.18 ± 1.12b 0.157 ± 0.049c 0.0046 ± 0.0023a
DEFINED NETWORK D0 9.54 ± 0.42a 16.57 ± 1.06a 0.152 ± 0.031b 0.0023 ± 0.0014c
b
D1 9.56 ± 0.27 a
16.69 ± 0.48 a
0.161 ± 0.013 0.0062 ± 0.0020a
a
D2 9.04 ± 0.43 b
15.78 ± 0.75 b
0.247 ± 0.175 0.0058 ± 0.0020b
bc
PACKET P1 9.67 ± 0.48 a
16.89 ± 0.85 a
0.180 ± 0.108 0.0046 ± 0.0026a
P2 9.45 ± 0.33b 16.36 ± 1.14b 0.175 ± 0.103c 0.0048 ± 0.0027a
P3 9.29 ± 0.40c 16.21 ± 0.69bc 0.202 ± 0.117ab 0.0047 ± 0.0027a
c
P4 9.22 ± 0.46 c
16.09 ± 0.81 c
0.167 ± 0.033 0.0050 ± 0.0023a
a
P5 9.26 ± 0.40 c
16.19 ± 0.69 bc
0.208 ± 0.154 0.0047 ± 0.0023a
Note: The mean with the same letter is not significantly different along the column at p≥0.05

The influence of the type of running application and defined network on throughput follows a similar trend
as that of bandwidth. Applications A2 and A3, A4 and A5, have a similar statistical influence on bandwidth,
respectively. Also, the defined network D0 and D1 are similar, and packets P3 and P5 have a similar
influence on the throughput.

Effect of application on latency showed that A3, A4, and A5 are similar, as well as D0 and D1 having a
similar influence on the defined network, while P2 and P4 are similar for the influence of packet on latency.
The results of the influence of the variables are quite different on the jitter. All the levels of the running
applications as well as packets, have a similar influence on the jitter. However, there are significant
variations in the influence of the defined network on the jitter. Application A1 recorded the highest
bandwidth, throughput, and latency under the running application. The least bandwidth, throughput, and
latency are observed in A4. The result shows that, from 80% downward of the IPv4 packet size (65,507
bytes), the higher the bandwidth, the higher the throughput, and the lower and statistically similar the
latency and jitter experienced.

Packet P1 has the highest bandwidth and throughput usage with the highest latency. The results indicate
that the higher the bandwidth and throughput, the higher the latency observed in the application running
and the packet sent across the network. Traditional computer networking (N0) recorded the highest
bandwidth, while N1 recorded the highest throughput and significant impact on the jitter column. The result
corroborated [16] as they observed significant F-value and stability in the SDN application-awareness
experiment.

The combined traditional with Software-Defined Network (D2) recorded the least bandwidth usage and
least throughput, but the highest latency with statistical significance. Jitter in the defined networking is not
statistically similar. This suggests that a combined traditional with Software-Defined Network may add to
the latency and jitter experience in computer networking. Nugroho et al. note that the QoS parameters are
better observed in SDN-based networking [15].

Latency has an insignificant negative correlation with bandwidth, throughput and an insignificant positive
correlation with jitter, as seen in Table 3. Bandwidth has a significant positive correlation with throughput
but an insignificant negative correlation with jitter. Throughput had a negative insignificant correlation with
jitter. The result implies that the higher the bandwidth, the lower the latency; the higher the throughput, the
lower the latency. On the other hand, the higher the bandwidth, the higher the throughput. However, the
jitter decreases with increasing bandwidth and throughput. The result supports the findings of [19].

116 | Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022

 Table 3. Correlation matrix
Latency Bandwidth Throughput Jitter

Latency 1
Bandwidth -0.25 1
Throughput -0.2 0.86 ** 1
Jitter 0.12 -0.21 -0.15 1

Figures 5-8 show that regression analysis produced a linear relationship between application, packet, and
responses (bandwidth, throughput, latency, and jitter).

Figure 5. Regression for bandwidth showing relationship between application, packet and defined network

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022 | 117

Figure 6. Regression for throughput showing relationship between application, packet and defined network

118 | Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022

Figure 7. Regression for latency showing relationship between application, packet and defined network

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022 | 119

Figure 8. Regression for jitter showing relationship between application, packet and defined network

120 | Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022

CONCLUSION
The fact that computer networking has to go smart and the growing popularity of SDN within computing
environments has led to an interest in observing the effect of different computer networking types. The
traditional computer networking (D0), Software-Defined Networking (D1), and combined traditional with
Software-Defined Network (D2) were emulated using Mininet network emulation to observe various
performance parameters on the network. It was revealed that Application A1 recorded the highest
bandwidth, throughput, and latency under the running application. The least bandwidth, throughput, and
latency were observed in A4. The result showed that at less than IPv4 packet size of 65,507 bytes, the higher
the bytes size of the application running at high bandwidth and throughput, the higher the latency. Packet
P1 has the highest bandwidth and throughput usage with the highest latency. The results indicate that the
higher the bandwidth and throughput, the higher the latency observed in the application running and the
packet sent across the network. Traditional computer networking (N0) recorded the highest bandwidth, and
N1 recorded the highest throughput and significant impact on the jitter column. The result supports Hu et
al. (2020), as they observed significant F-value and stability in the SDN application-awareness experiment.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors are grateful to the Mininet 2.3.0 core team led by Bob Lantz, the Mininet Contributors, as well
as other organizations that have supported the Mininet effort financially or otherwise. We thank the
anonymous reviewers for their comments on this paper.

REFERENCES
[1] S. Makridakis, "The forthcoming Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolution: Its impact on society and
firms," Futures, vol. 90, pp. 46–60, 2017.
[2] M. Meeker, Internet trends. Kleiner Perkins, 2018.
[3] J. Firth et al., "The 'online brain': how the Internet may be changing our cognition," World
Psychiatry, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 119–129, 2019.
[4] W. Sakpere, M. Adeyeye-Oshin, and N. B. W. Mlitwa, "A state-of-the-art survey of indoor
positioning and navigation systems and technologies," S. Afr. Comput, J., vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 145–
197, 2017.
[5] W. S. Ajayi and O. Awodele, "Evolution of Digital Edifices: from Shanks and Adobe to Smart and
Intelligent Edifice; a Trail to the Future," Int. J. Multidiscip. Sci. Eng., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 11–17,
2017.
[6] L. Nacshon, R. Puzis, and P. Zilberman, "Floware: Balanced flow monitoring in software defined
networks," arXiv:1608.03307, pp. 1–13, 2016.
[7] D. V. Khoa and T. N. N. Khanh, "Emulation of software-defined network using mininet," Dalat
Univ. J. Sci., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 80–92, 2021.
[8] E. Sturzinger and S. Cilenti, "A Hybrid Software Defined Network Platform for Undergraduate
Research and Education," in West Point Res. Pap. Proc. Natl. Conf. Undergrad. Res. (NCUR) 2019,
2019, pp. 11–13.
[9] M. Jadin, O. Tilmans, M. Mawait, and O. Bonaventure, "Educational Virtual Routing Labs with IP
Mininet," in ACM SIGCOMM Educ. Workshop 2020, 2020, pp. 1–5.
[10] X. Yuan, Z. Liu, Y. Park, H. Hu, and H. Li, "Teaching SDN Security Using Hands-on Labs in
CloudLab," J. Colloq. Inf. Syst. Secur. Educ., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–6, 2020.
[11] V. Koryachko, D. Perepelkin, M. Ivanchikova, V. Byshov, and I. Tsyganov, "Analysis of QoS
metrics in software defined networks," in 2017 6th Mediterr. Conf. Embed. Comput. (MECO),
2017, pp. 1–5.
[12] S. Salsano et al., "Hybrid IP/SDN Networking: Open Implementation and Experiment Management
Tools," IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manag., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 138–153, 2016.
[13] Y. Wei, X. Zhang, L. Xie, and S. Leng, "Energy-aware traffic engineering in hybrid SDN/IP
backbone networks," J. Commun. Networks, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 559–566, 2016.
[14] H. Yang, H. Li, and Q. Wu, "IP-Stream Oriented Management Mechanism in 802.11 Wireless
Network by Extending SDN," in 2017 IEEE Wirel. Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC), 2017, pp. 1–6.
[15] J. H. P. Duque, D. O. D. Beltrán, and G. A. P. Leguizamón, "On the features of Software Defined
Networking for the QoS provision in data networks," INGE CUC, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 106–115, 2018.
[16] H. P. Nugroho, M. Irfan, and A. Faruq, "Software Defined Networks: A Comparative Study and
Quality of Services Evaluation," Sci. J. Informatics, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 181–192, 2019.
[17] N. Hu, F. Luan, X. Tian, and C. Wu, "A Novel SDN-Based Application-Awareness Mechanism by
Using Deep Learning," IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 160921–160930, 2020.

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022 | 121

 [18] J. P. Chaudhari, D. K. Kirange, K. S. Bhagat, and S. D. Patil, "Evaluation of Bandwidth Utilization
in SDN," J. Xi'an Shiyou Univ., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 21–30, 2019.
[19] L. L. Zulu, K. A. Ogudo, and P. O. Umenne, "Emulating Software Defined Network Using Mininet
and OpenDaylight Controller Hosted on Amazon Web Services Cloud Platform to Demonstrate a
Realistic Programmable Network," in 2018 Int. Conf. Intell. Innov. Comput. Appl. (ICONIC), 2018,
pp. 1–7.

122 | Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 9, No. 2, Nov 2022

View publication stats