Asian Journal of Research in Computer Science

9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

ISSN: 2581-8260

Comparison of Software Defined Networking with

Traditional Networking
Saad H. Haji1*, Subhi R. M. Zeebaree1, Rezgar Hasan Saeed2,
Siddeeq Y. Ameen1, Hanan M. Shukur3, Naaman Omar1,
Mohammed A. M.Sadeeq1, Zainab Salih Ageed4,
Ibrahim Mahmood Ibrahim1 and Hajar Maseeh Yasin1
1
Duhok Polytechnic University, Duhok, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.
2
Near East University, Cyprus.
3
Al-Kitab University, Kirkuk, Iraq.
4
Nawroz University, Duhok, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.

Authors’ contributions

This work was carried out in collaboration among all authors. All authors read and approved the final
manuscript.

Article Information
DOI: 10.9734/AJRCOS/2021/v9i230216
Editor(s):
(1) Dr. Xiao-Guang Lyu, Huaihai Institute of Technology, P. R. China.
Reviewers:
(1) Fatima Faydhe Al-Azzawi, Middle Technical University MTU, Iraq.
(2) Rositsa Velichkova, Technical University of Sofia, Bulgaria.
(3) Muhammad Akmal Bin, University Tun Husein Onn Malaysia (UTHM), Malaysia.
Complete Peer review History: http://www.sdiarticle4.com/review-history/68725

Received 20 March 2021

Accepted 24 May 2021
Review Article
Published 27 May 2021

ABSTRACT

The Internet has caused the advent of a digital society; wherein almost everything is connected and
available from any place. Thus, regardless of their extensive adoption, traditional IP networks are
yet complicated and arduous to operate. Therefore, there is difficulty in configuring the network in
line with the predefined procedures and responding to the load modifications and faults through
network reconfiguring. The current networks are likewise vertically incorporated to make matters far
more complicated: the control and data planes are bundled collectively. Software-Defined
Networking (SDN) is an emerging concept which aims to change this situation by breaking vertical
incorporation, promoting the logical centralization of the network control, separating the network
control logic from the basic switches and routers, and enabling the network programming. The
segregation of concerns identified between the policies concept of network, their implementation in
hardware switching and data forwarding is essential to the flexibility required: SDN makes it less
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

*Corresponding author: E-mail: saad.hikmat91@gmail.com;

 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021;; Article no.AJRCOS.68725
no.

complicated and facilitates to make and introduce new concepts in networking through breaking the
issue of the network control into tractable parts, simplifies the network management and facilitate
the development
elopment of the network. In this paper, the SDN is reviewed; it introduces SDN, explaining
its core concepts, how it varies from traditional networking, and its architecture principles.
Furthermore, we presented the crucial advantages and challenges of SDN, SDN, focusing on scalability,
security, flexibility, and performance. Finally, a brief conclusion of SDN is revised.

Keywords: SDN; control plane; open flow; traditional networking.

networking

1. INTRODUCTION The remaining parts of this paper describe SDN's

comparison with traditional networking, the need
As networks are increasingly growing in size and for SDN, the
he architecture of SDN, the benefits of
requirements, navigating hardware switches has SDN, and explaining the tools used in SDN.
become a challenge. Setting up individual Then the paper will be ended with a discussion
network software switches manually has been and conclusion.
very complicated and time-consuming
consuming for
businesses running highly virtual systems 2. BACKGROUND THEORY
alongside
e large networks. This is where SDN
comes into the game [1,2]. 2.1 Traditional Networking vs. SDN

SDN can be described as a network approach For the control plane, traditional networking
that enables network operators to implements a distributed paradigm. For each
programmatically set up, track, change and network device, protocols such as ARP, STP,
control network operation through open OSPF, EIGRP, BGP, and others operate
interfaces such as the OpenFlow protocolp [3]. independently [8].. These network devices
The SDN transforms the operation, connect, but no centralized machine manages
management, and configuration of the network the whole network or summarizes [9,10]. The
infrastructures. The SDN's view is based on most critical difference between conventional
separating the data plane from the control plane networking and SDN is that traditional networking
[4].. SDN proposes to concentrate network is hardware-based,
based, whereas SDN is usually
intelligence on a single network rk component by software-based [11,12].. SDN is more versatile
distinguishing the data packet forwarding since it is software-based, helping users better
mechanism (data plane) from the routing process control and ease handling resources remotely in
(control plane), as seen in Fig.1 [5-7]
7]. the control plane [13,14].

Fig. 1. SDN architecture [4]

2
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

Traditional networks utilize switches, routers, and hardware [28,29]. In SDN, management/control
other physical hardware to produce connections is provided for the hardware from a centralized
and operate the network [15-17]. A northbound software program. This software program is
interface that communicates with Application isolated from the hardware itself [30,31]. The
Programming Interfaces (APIs) is used in SDN prime focused need of SDN is an open source
controllers [18,19]. Because of this connectivity, framework standard and layered architecture.
device developers, as opposed to using the Because software can be produced via different
protocols required for conventional networking, vendors easily, it is more effective, more flexible
can explicitly program the network [9,20]. programmability, and more facilitating creativity
Conventional networks are used to mount all in computer networking [7,32]. In SDN, several
data planes and control aircraft in one physical issues need to be addressed, such as scalability
unit and then to share their capacity, increase the problems, virtualization, continuity of
traffic load and the burden on the CPU and connectivity, location of controllers, and so on
memory in two processes [21-23]. Detachments [33,34]. Reliability is one of the serious SDN
of control planes and data planes in SDN can be difficulties. Reliability is an especially important
easily monitored and managed by the controller issue for large-scale networks [22,35]. As the
and network to take the right ride decisions and SDN controller tends to be a single point of
thus enable the network to better configure with a failure, it is a technically unified control feature in
less traffic load, by separating these processes the SDN. Accordingly, steps need to be taken to
and having a dedicated server [9,24]. ensure that the reliability of modern technological
solutions is at least as high as or better than
SDN is considered a popular alternative to before [36,37]. SDN is one of the most important
traditional networking because it allows IT innovations for developing the new economy's
managers to provide extra physical infrastructure network infrastructure. However, unreliable
services and bandwidths without requiring an networks cannot be the basis of the digital
investment [25]. In order to expand the network economy [38,39].
power, traditional networking requires new
hardware [26,27]. Fig. 2 shows the traditional 2.3 Architecture of SDN
network and SDN.
The main differences between the traditional SDN Architecture explains how SDN operates at
networking architecture and SDN architecture as its different stages and ensures the stability and
clarified in Table 1. reliability of software. For software-defined
networking, there are primarily three layers:
2.2 Need for SDN Application plane, Data plane, and Control plane
[7,28,40]. SDN consists of 2 interfaces, one
SDN is defined as a modern paradigm that is between the southbound APIs (e.g., OpenFlow)
rapidly becoming the alternative for networks that and the other between the API's application layer
are unable to solve the shortages of traditional and the Northbound API's control layer. The SDN
networking via isolating software from the consists of 2 interfaces [41]. As shown in Fig.3.

Fig. 2. The architecture of SDN Vs Traditional Network [9]

3
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021;; Article no.AJRCOS.68725
no.

Table 1. The characteristics of SDN and traditional networking architecture

Characteristics SDN Traditional Network

Network Control Centralized  
Programmability  
Flexibility of Network  
Complex Control Network  
Performance Improved  
Configuration of Error-Prone  
Management Enhanced  
Configuration Efficiency  
Easy to use and implement  

Fig. 3. Centralizing control plane [41]

2.3.1 Control plane collection of resources—partpart of the SDN

architecture, which consists of software
It can be defined as a control layer. It implementing network services delivered to
encompasses a series of software-based
software SDN users/devices [46,47].. In order to achieve an
controllers that provide a centralized control abstract global view of the network they are
mechanism by a well-defined
defined API to oversee using and to express the network activity they
network forwarding actions through an open require at the moment, applications connect with
interface [42,43].. Generally, The control plane the SDN controller by APIs (northbound
consists of three primary layers: the device layer, interface) [44].
the network operating system layer, and the
network abstraction layer [44,45]. 2.3.4 Northbound APIs

2.3.2 Southbound APIs The relation between the applications and the
SDN controller is the northbound APIs. The
To connect with the SDN controller and network applications should inform the network what they
switches and routers, SDN DN southbound APIs are need, and those services can be given by the
used. In this interface, the most common protocol network or convey what it has [41,48]
48].
is the OpenFlow protocol [10,41].
2.3.5 Infrastructure plane
2.3.3 Application plane
The infrastructure plane is also known as the
The application layer consists of one or more data layer or data plane [44].. Like the OSI
programs, each of which has exclusive power model's physical layer, it comprises network
over one or more SDN controllers exposed to a components that interact with data traffic, such

4
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

as physical and virtual machines. It is an SDN 2.4.5 Automation

forwarding plane and responsible for forwarding
packet frames physically via the protocols used Today's network does not have to deal with
by the control plane from its entrance to the exit internet access, unlike before. With SDN, it is
interface [7,49]. also possible to adjust the cloud's automatic
responses. In environments like enterprise-wide
2.4 Benefits of SDN SD-WAN networks, the process works well [38].

2.5 Challenges of SDN

One of SDN's key benefits is that it provides a
platform for promoting more data-intensive Even though SDN is identified as the basic
software, for instance, virtualization and big data solution to the problems that the infrastructure of
[50,51]. the expanding network is facing major, it is still in
its infancy phase. In addition to many others,
2.4.1 Centralized networking management advantages such as better functionality, lower
SDN can control the whole network from a cost, and higher efficiency have been laid out,
centralized unit called a central node to automate but different challenges also demand attention.
network administration and security and ensure Challenges arise as SDN is generally accepted
that security and policy knowledge is reliably and new alternatives are being suggested [62].
communicated across the organization [7,52]. 2.5.1 Scalability
2.4.2 Reduced hardware costs The main problems faced by SDN are scalability.
From this single problem, two sub-issues can be
SDN uses the software principle to create a extracted: (a) scalability of the controller (b)
network with the minimal hardware available, scalability of the network node. A single
removing the need for manual assistance and controller can handle up to 6 million flows per
the expense of setup by leveraging the second [63]. Therefore, this demonstrates that
organizational performance and improving for a large number of data forwarding nodes, only
network usage by utilizing the virtualization one controller or several controllers can manage
concept [16, 26]. control plane services needed [64,65]. To
enhance scalability, rather than functioning on a
2.4.3 Cloud abstraction peer-to-peer basis, the logically centralized
controller should be physically distributed [66].
Cloud computing is here to remain, and a unified However, the problems faced by the controller
infrastructure is emerging. It is easier to unify when interaction happens will be shared between
cloud services by abstracting cloud infrastructure network nodes, whether it be a distributed or
using SDN. The networking elements that make peer-to-peer controller network [38]. Hyper
up large data center systems can all be Flow and Onix are known as efficient means of
controlled [53,54]. achieving scalability. Through allocating and
partitioning network status to separate physically
2.4.4 Security approach dispersed controllers, Onix runs. HyperFlow is an
application that allows for the interconnection of
It gets easier to track and control the security OpenFlow networks that are individually
features when there is a single management controlled [67]. Specifically, the events that allow
console for networking [54,55]. It may not have to changes to the network condition will be
deal with several applications around the system distributed by HyperFlow program, then all the
or dependent on them. It operates from one distributed events will be replayed by the other
central point easily and provides a better security controllers to reproduce the situation. As such,
strategy [56]. When there is a security-related with the same homogeneous network topology,
alarm, the same console may also be used to any controller will operate [64,68].
disperse information. In order to keep up with
network management, virtualization has made it 2.5.2 Flexibility and performance
more complex for IT administrators [57]. Applying
filtering rules and firewalls can be challenging for How to deal with high-level packet processing
many virtual devices connected to the physical flows proficiently is a fundamental problem of
networks [58]. With SDN, it is possible to monitor SDN. There are two main factors to be
and spread all information and safety measures considered in this regard: flexibility and
consistently within the organization [59-61]. performance [69]. Flexibility refers to the ability of

5
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

networks to respond to modern and your controller can crash due to the load on the
unprecedented functionality, such as software controller [41,78].
and facilities for the network. The performance
deals with the speed at which information is 2.5.3.3 Application plane layer security challenge
transmitted from the control plane via network
nodes in the data plane [70]. The hacker can flood malicious data into the
application layer to monitor a network node that
2.5.3 Security challenges can infect other connected network nodes [79].
By inserting malicious code to monitor network
In software-defined networking, security is a very packets' flow and steal valuable information, the
critical feature [71]. In order to provide usability, attacker may obtain unauthorized access to the
integrity, and protection to all elements and info, network node [1].
SDN protection needs to be integrated into the
architecture [72]. You will have to secure and
2.6 Implementation Tools for SDN
defend the device, rely on the SDN of each
component, make sure the controller does what
So many simulation tools have been developed
you want, and when a malfunction occurs, the
to test SDN performance, such as OMNET++
architecture should be able to detect, fix and
and Mininet. Ns-3 and Estinet are the other
expose the problem [41]. The division of the data
modeling instruments. These methods have their
and control aircraft allows for security breaches
capabilities. The comparison between the
and SDN safety issues. The optimal location of
various simulation tools is seen in the Table.2 [9].
SDN controllers, switches, and other devices is
This paper presented a review of SDN, its
an open challenge in SDN, which affects overall
definition, architecture, benefits, and challenges.
network security and performance [73,74]. Its
We also reviewed the SDN networking paradigm
integration is another security problem because
design with the related open study challenges
of the design of SDN as it is flat, Where
and revised some of the work performed with
monitoring systems and defense solutions need
each challenge, including scalability, security,
to be compliant to improve overall performance,
reliability, and performance. Moreover, several
energy savings, and network security [5,75].
certain issues in SDN still require additional
Fig.4 shows the potential SDN architecture
study attention to prevent inherited issues from
attacks.
the legacy networks, like standardizing the SDN
2.5.3.1 Data plane layer security challenge modules and introducing new unique procedures
developed for SDN.
The flood tables in the data plane lack space and
flow tables' storage flow entries generate 3. LITERATURE REVIEW
overhead on flow tables, leading to high cost and
low performance [75,76]. Using intelligent flow Software-defined networks are a sophisticated
table control techniques to store many low-cost network structure that detaches the network
and high-performance rules will overcome this control plane from the forwarding plane (Data
problem [41]. Switches or access points can plane); SDN frees network devices from a range
interrupt network activity, which results from of detailed properties, responsibilities and
malicious users initiating a Denial of Service provides a flexible model that can be managed
(DoS) attack resulting in the interruption or through a global central controller. This idea is
network loss [70]. meant to enhance the infrastructure of integrated
and programmable networks [80]. Due to the
2.5.3.2 Control plane layer security challenge SDN mentioned above, different researchers
concentrated on studying SDN.
Controllers are fundamental to SDN, but because
of their centralized decision-making that can Rahman, Islam, Montieri, Nasir, Reza, Band,
trigger networking in a security breach, it Pescape, Hasan, Sookhak and Mosavi [81]
becomes a single weakness [77]. The control presented a secure and optimized effective
layer is an attractive function for security attacks energy framework of Blockchain-enabled
due to its transparent environment. Another software-defined IoT for smart networks. In order
problem is how many switches to the controller to deploy a distributed efficient Blockchain-based
are attached, and requests are sent to the SDN-IoT framework, they proposed a layered
controller, waiting for a response. If you add architecture that ensures secure network
many switches to your controller's response time, communication and efficient cluster-head

6
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

Table. 2. The Simulation Tools Comparison [9]

Tool OMNET ++ NS-3 Estinet Mininet

Feature
Simulation Support    
Emulation Support    
Capability to use an actual controller    
Repeatable Outcomes    
Correctness of results outcome No Real Controller No Real Controller  Performance relies on resources
Supporting GUI Only for monitoring only Monitoring, C++ Only for monitoring only Monitoring, Python

Fig. 4. Probable Attacks on SDN Architecture [1]

7
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

selection. Finally, they evaluated the decomposition theory. The simulation findings
performance of the suggested framework within explored that the proposed TE-aware distributed
a simulation environment. The results showed routing (TEDR) algorithm can obtain maximum
that it could obtain optimized end-to-end delay, link utilization when 30% of the SDN nodes are
energy-utilization, and throughput compared to deployed comparable to full SDN. Also, it has a
classical Blockchain, i.e., capable of achieving limited impact on routing efficiency.
security and efficiency in the smart network.
Xu, Wang and Xu [85] explained that bringing
Vishnevsky, Pham, Kirichek, Elagin, Vladyko and
several possible bottlenecks that attackers can
Shestakov [82] discussed applying SDN to
leverage to reduce network efficiency or even
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) to monitor
interrupt the availability of networks. In addition,
sensor data, which provides abilities to manage
a more powerful and cost-effective saturation
sensor networks and UAV by a centralized SDN
strike, a table miss attack, is examined. Their
controller. They presented the SD-UAV
results were more than standard saturation. As
architecture framework and sensor networking.
protocol-independent security and efficient
They performed the comparison between the
platform for SDN/OpenFlow networks, they
networks without SDN and networks using the
proposed SDN Guardian to prevent missing table
SDN approach. The simulation findings showed
attacks. They also proposed SDN Guardian. It is
that using the SDN approach within networks
located between the router and other controller
decreases packet loss and increases the
deployments and protects the network using four
bandwidth as transmitted datagrams were lost in
functional modules: The packet sensitive fields
SDN-assisted networks at 3.3%. In comparison,
preprocessor module, which causes the
losses in SDN network datagrams were 16.6%.
controller's flow rules to emit; the threat detector
The result also showed that the proposed system
module to warn of the attack signal; a module of
could be scalable, flexible, and reusable for
traffic filter which classifies the targeted ports;
different applications.
and frequency-based filtering of traffic; the law
Ruaro, Caimi and Moraes [83] Proposed Stable sweeper in the turn flow table for deleting
and Systematic SDN Architecture outlining malicious rules. All SDN Guardian designs
necessary measures to support SDN in Many- comply with OpenFlow, requiring no alteration of
Core Systems on Chip (MCSoC), wherein only the protocol or external equipment. The
trustworthy SDN Controllers identify the contact assessment showed that, in terms of control
route. This work will help the MCSoCs designers channel bandwidth, machine CPU usage, and
incorporate stable SDN management for transfer flow table with minimal device overhead,
communications tools with the structural SDN Guardian could effectively ease the table-
information presented. Furthermore, the miss attack and protect network infrastructure
proposed framework phases cover the resources.
functionality specifics from hardware modules to
the OS and even analyze the impact on the Almohaimeed and Asaduzzaman [86] explained
user's role. Due to its co-design a new architecture for linking edge computing to
hardware/software, the techniques seen were software-based networking and showing
low overheads and are viable in the MCSoC improved performance in dealing with big data
design sense. The experimental results processing in SDN. The issue that has been
demonstrated the capacity of the proposed reduced by SDN's creation of high pressure on
architecture to prevent spoofing and DoS attacks the main controller affects the overall network
with a low overhead SDN router system. output, leading to longer latency as the data size
increases. They used a new model of SDN Edge
Ren, Bai, Wang and Li [84] proposed a Controlling that, by utilizing edge computing
formulation to minimize the maximum link technologies, overcomes the limitations of the
utilization as the Traffic Engineering (TE) performance. In order to reduce the burden on
objective. They complied with TCAM (Ternary the main SDN controller and decrease the delay
Content Addressable Memory) resource between the control plane and forward plane, the
limitation and SDN waypoint enforcement. They goal is to get the computer and computing
solved the TE problem in a centralized manner facilities close to the network equipment. The
by formulating it as an integer linear experimental results have shown that the main
programming model. In order to solve the TE controller's overall response time is reduced by
problem effectively, they developed a distributed almost 62 percent per 10,000 requests, and
algorithm derived from Lagrangian bandwidth is reduced by almost 45 percent.

8
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

Al-Tam and Correia [87] presented a study about existing, shortest path-based solutions in the
migrating devices from overloaded to considered scenarios by reducing the overall
underloaded controllers promotes network network initialization time by up to 55 percent
reliability and adaptability. However, at the same while providing comparable packet loss. They
time, it is a difficult challenge to determine which also revealed that algorithms would reduce the
switches can be transferred to which controllers average time to restore broken streams by 40
while retaining a balanced load on the network. A percent in a networked system with a fraction of
local search algorithm which is Migration a failed link.
Competency-Based Load Balancing (MCBLB), is
presented that takes a shift and swap Gao, Li, Xiao and Wei [90] discussed that
movements into account and implements a attackers might initiate different attacks from data
managed solution shaking scheme. The results planes against SDN, such as attacks by DoS,
revealed that the proposed algorithm could raise topology attacks by poisoning, and side-channel
the load balance by up to 14% relative to the attacks. Flow Keeper, a standard system for
latest work. creating a stable data plane against multiple
attacks, is proposed. Flow Keeper enforces the
Y. I. Khalid, M. Ismael and Baheej Al-Khalil [5] data plane's port control and lowers the control
showed that there are many security challenges plane's workload by screening out unauthorized
in traditional networks, some of them ended by packets. Experimental studies indicated that
SDN and some others remain, like Address Flow Keeper could be used to counteract various
Resolution Protocol (ARP) spoofing. The author kinds of attacks effectively.
discussed the solution to prevent ARP spoofing
without using any additional hardware and Chin, Xiong and Hu [91] clarified that a phishing
software but only by extending the SDN attack is a very popular approach to manipulating
controller by a module, this scans each ARP an enterprise and end-users in social
packet in the network to identify and avoid engineering. Nowadays, it has been one of the
potentially spoofed packets. The results of the most dangerous threats. As a new approach to
simulation showed that the suggested foil phishing threats, the author has suggested
mechanism is stable against the attack of ARP Phish Limiter. Can cope with network traffic
spoofing. dynamics to contain phishing threats and
improve traffic management as SDN has a global
Lawal and Nuray [4] presented a real-time networking view. The result showed that, with its
solution to detect and reduce Distributed Denial accuracy of 98.39 percent, Phish Limiter is an
of Service (DDoS) attacks on the SDN network. efficient and effective solution for detecting and
DDoS aims to overwhelm the network traffic and preventing phishing attacks.
stop the servers from being available all the time
[88]. The Flow real-time analyzer added to the Karakus and Durresi [26] Descript the unit costs
main controller, and the findings showed that the for a service with QoS criteria is specified, and
suggested approach detects and mitigates DDoS the unit cost for the service was characterized by
attacks effectively. CAPEX (capital expenses), OPEX (operating
expenses), and the network workload for a
Achleitner, Bartolini, He, Porta and Tootaghaj certain duration. The operational costs are
[89] discussed that SDN provides a mechanism determined. The authors also studied the relation
allowing the use of flow rules to modify and re- between the unit cost of service and the
program the data plane easily. The realization of scalability of a network. Experiments showed that
highly adaptive SDNs with the potential to the unit cost of service and the scalability of an
respond to evolving requirements or recover in a architectural control plane are interrelated: more
short period after a network outage depends on compact architectures lead to the lower unit cost
successful flow rules updates. To support fast- of service.
changing flow specifications in SDNs, the
optimization architecture and associated flow Dridi and Zhani [92] explained an application to
configuration algorithms have been developed, protect the SDN network upon DoS attack. DoS
considering calculating the current flow attacks are a considerable threat to such
configuration on the controller and the time of networks where the communication and
execution of this configuration on the switches. processing ability of the controller and flood
Via detailed simulations. The proposed switch CAM tables can be overwhelmed by DOS
algorithms have shown that they outperform attacks quickly. Furthermore, this will reduce the

9
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

general performance of the network. To protect SDN and have a small effect on routing
or solve this issue, the author proposed the SDN- efficiency. The research [85] explored that using
Guard application by rerouting possible malicious SD Guardian can reduce table-miss special
traffic, changing timeouts for flow, and attacks. The authors [86] showed that edge-
aggregating flow rules. The tests carried out based control on the centralized SDN controller
revealed that the SDN-Guard could decrease the could significantly handle higher network load
DoS effect by significantly decreasing the while maintaining lower latency. The reference
incoming output of the controller and the [87] found that by using the MCBLB algorithm in
bandwidth of the control plane by up to 32 the SDN network, the load balancing is increased
percent and reducing transfer memory by up to by up to 14 %. The authors [5] discussed how to
26 percent. prevent ARP spoofing without using any
additional hardware and software but only by
Cui, Yu and Yan [53] clarified that SDN's positive extending the SDN controller by a module. The
features would significantly facilitate collecting, results of the simulation showed that the
delivering, retrieving, and analyzing big data. Big suggested mechanism is stable against the
data, on the other hand, would have significant attack of ARP spoofing. The [4] clarified that
implications on SDN architecture and operation. using sFlow technology embedded in the
The authors showed that SDN could benefit from controller shows that the method can detect and
big data, including traffic modeling, cross-layer reduce DDoS attacks. The study [89] discussed
architecture, security threats defeat, and SDN- that SDN provides a mechanism allowing the use
based intra-and inter-data center networks. With of flow rules to modify and re-program the data
big data, a promising approach for networking plane easily. They developed optimization
will be big data and SDN joint architecture. architecture and associated flow configuration
algorithms that reduce the configuration time by
3.1 Survey Discussion and Analysis 55% and average time to recover interrupted
Traditional networks are complicated and difficult flows by 40 %. The [90] showed that under DoS
to control. Most of the reasons for this are that attacks, Flow Keeper maintains more than 80
data and control planes are vertically integrated percent bandwidth and can prevent unauthorized
and specific to the manufacturer. SDN provided topology changes by screening out forged LLDP
an opportunity to resolve these long-standing packets. The authors [91] explored that Phish
issues by decoupling the Data plane and Control Limiter is an efficient and effective solution for
plane, making the network more flexible and detecting and preventing phishing attacks within
centralized the control network. For this reason, SDN networks. The reference [26] demonstrated
many studies focused on SDN and its utilization an inverse relation between the unit cost of the
instead of traditional networking. Based on the service and the control scalability of the
literature review, each research studied SDN architecture where more scalable architecture
because of different features. Table 3 shows a contributes to lower unit cost of service. The
comparison among the researches mentioned in research [92] found that using SDN-Guard the
section 2. From the comparison table, it is DoS attacks on the performance of SDN
obvious that reference [81] showed that it could controller decreased by up to 32%. The authors
To guarantees the security and consistency to [53] showed that SDN can benefit from big data,
the network using a secure and optimized where big data and SDN joint design will become
effective energy framework of Blockchain- a promising approach for networking big data.
enabled software-defined IoT compared to
classical Blockchain. The authors [82] showed In the last decade, IT has improved considerably.
that using the SDN approach within networks The growth of cloud, social networking and other
decreases packet loss and increases the developments such as the internet of things has
bandwidth. The study [83] presented a secure made IT a server center. Therefore, the network
and systemic SDN framework capable of should be considered a competitive tool for IT
avoiding spoofing attacks and DoS with a and corporate leaders. Any issue that affects the
common SDN router configuration overhead. The network would thus have a direct effect on the
reference [84] proposed TEDR algorithms that enterprise, which will cost the company money
can achieve optimum connection use if the SDN and/or resources. It is essential for companies to
nodes are deployed as 30 percent as complete address today's top issues for the networks.

10
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

Table 3. Critical Analysis of Existing Studies

Ref. Year Achieved Objectives Significant Results Tool/Technique

[42] 2021 To guarantees security and The results showed that it could obtain optimized end-to-end delay, energy-utilization, MininetWi-Fi
consistency to the network. and throughput compared to classical Blockchain, i.e., capable of achieving security and emulator.
efficiency in the smart network.
[43] 2020 To provide abilities to manage The simulation findings showed that using the SDN approach within networks decreases Mininet Wi-Fi
sensor networks and UAV by packet loss and increases the bandwidth. emulation
a centralized SDN controller. platform.
[44] 2020 To present a secure and The experimental findings showed the capability of the proposed framework to avoid RTL (VHDL and
systemic SDN framework spoofing attacks and DoS with a common SDN router configuration overhead. System C) , C
describing the required steps code (maps-
to support SDN in MCSoC. GCC cross-
compiler)
[45] 2020 To minimize the maximum The simulation findings showed that the proposed TEDR algorithm could obtain TEDR
link utilization as the Traffic maximum link utilization when 30% of the SDN nodes are deployed, comparable to full algorithm.
Engineering (TE) objective. SDN. Also, it has a limited impact on routing efficiency.
[46] 2020 To reduce table-miss special By using SDN Guardian, the table-miss special attack was mitigated. Testbed
attacks.
[47] 2019 To retrieve processing and The results showed that higher network load cab is handled significantly by using edge- Python.
storage resources near based control while maintaining latency lower.
network devices using the
edge control system, the
burden on the centralized
SDN controller can be
minimized.
[48] 2019 To solve a Switch Migration The results showed an increase in load balancing by up to 14 %.
Problem for time computation, MATLAB
load balancing, and
robustness in SDN network
via applying MCBLB
algorithm.
[5] 2019 To prevent SDN Network The suggested mechanism proved its robustness against ARP attacks and is very easy
against Address Resolution to detect and avoid.
Protocol ARP spoofing Attack Mininet

11
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

Ref. Year Achieved Objectives Significant Results Tool/Technique

[3] 2018 To protect the SDN network The sFlow technology embedded in the controller showed that the method could detect Mininet
against DDoS attacks. and reduce DDoS attacks.
[50] 2018 To reduce the setup time of They showed reducing in configuration time by 55% and average time to recover Python
the SDN network in response interrupted flows by 40 %
to the changing requirements.
[51] 2018 To build a stable data Under DoS attacks, Flow Keeper maintains more than 80 percent bandwidth and can
plane against multiple attacks. prevent unauthorized topology changes by screening out forged LLDP packets. Mininet, Polaris
switch, Python
[52] 2018 To protect the SDN network The Results shows that Phish Limiter offers an effective and effective approach with an
against a Phishing attack. accuracy of 98.39%
GENI
[12] 2017 Describe unit price Experiments showed that the unit cost of a service is linked in reverse to the scalability of --------
assessment for a QoS- the control plane: more scalable architectures lead to the lower unit service cost.
parameter service and define
the unit cost of a service
concerning CAPEX, OPEX,
and network workload for a
certain period.
[53] 2016 Mitigate DoS attacks and Using SDN- Guard the DoS attacks on the performance of SDN controller decreased by Mininet
protect SDN network. up to 32%.
[24] 2016 Using the advantages of SDN Big data and SDN joint design will become a promising approach for networking big data. Python.
to boost the efficiency of large
data systems and how to use
big data to make SDN
operate quicker and more
efficiently are urgent issues
that need to be tackled.

12
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

Today, the network has the top five problems: to control network behavior. Since SDN is a
modern approach to networking, this architecture
- Network issues troubleshooting: The has been used to redesign various solutions to
challenge of wireless divided tunnel WAN classical network problems, while several issues
connections has always been challenging remain challenging. SDN provides efficient and
but has been especially difficult. automatic control of the network that meets the
- To ensure that the network is used need for increased complexity of the network and
appropriately. The main challenge is to many other software domains. This paper
ensure that the traffic on a network is reviewed the SDN networking paradigm design
business-related, in particular with WAN with the related open study challenges and
links. Consumer apps are becoming more revised some of the work performed with each
smart and there is increasing video traffic challenge, including scalability, security,
in real time and on demand. reliability, and performance. Moreover, several
- Ensure main applications tools. Often certain issues in SDN still require additional
network operations are a compromise study attention to prevent inherited issues from
game. Prioritize this service application. the legacy networks, like standardizing the SDN
Deploy performance protection. Spend modules and introducing new unique procedures
more budget than is required for the developed for SDN. To develop innovative ideas
network to be over-supplied for peak use. for controllers that are the brains of the SDN
- Reduce expenditure on broad area design, the study needs to concentrate more on
network. Nearly all CIOs have been the control plane. As the control plane is a point
responsible for reducing the costs of IT of failure for the entire network, several security
management. Given the high price that it measures should be considered. As a result,
makes sense to look at the WAN, given SDN plays a vital role in redesigning various
MPLS and other private network networks. solutions to classical network problems, while
- Vital IT projects support. For the very life of several issues remain challenging. It also
certain organisations, business resilience provides efficient and automatic control of the
is crucial. Companies who have the network that meets the need for increased
potential to rapidly introduce new services complexity of the network and many other
will be frozen. software domains.

The following are number of the newest research The question is "while we're building it, can you
in progress in the SDN field: (customers) come up?" A unsuccessful attempt
to invest in a new deal left a start-up cautious.
- SmartBlock-SDN: An Optimized We helped them to work out what the consumer
Blockchain-SDN Framework for Resource actually needs to buy with Service Design.
Management in IoT, by Rahman et al., at
[81]. The emphasis on customer travel actually
- BDF-SDN: A Big Data Framework for dominates the service architecture, such that the
DDoS Attack Detection in Large-Scale increasingly diverse problems facing public
SDN-Based Cloud, by Dinh et al. institutions and industries are not enough in
[93]. itself. The combination of structural architecture
- SmartBlock-SDN: An Optimized capability and an interdisciplinary approach is
Blockchain-SDN Framework for Resource vital for tackling diverse problems in the public
Management in IoT, by Haque et al. sector.
[94].
- Networks Modernization Using SDN and In the field of New York City, a good step passed
NFV Technologies, by Kundimana et al. towards helping to construct the New York
[95]. Chapter of the SDN, along with other leaders of
- DSF: A Distributed SDN Control Plane service architecture. In the years that followed, it
Framework for the East/West Interface, by been recognized that the related staff and
Almadani et al. [96]. chapter with honors for their chapter work and
took part in SDN's global campaigns in diversity,
4. CONCLUSION equity, and inclusion as part of a 2020 taskforce.
And they found time for the day's work:
SDN is an evolving networking paradigm that managing service architecture at Capital One,
enables a standardized programming capability the US banking giant.

13
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

COMPETING INTERESTS kurdistan region. International Journal of

Innovation, Creativity and Change.
Authors have declared that no competing 2020;13:349-365.
interests exist. 11. Alzakholi O, Shukur H, Zebari R, Abas S,
Sadeeq M. Comparison among cloud
REFERENCES technologies and cloud performance.
1. Lotlikar T, Shah D. A Defense Mechanism Journal of Applied Science and
for DoS Attacks in SDN (Software Defined Technology Trends. 2020;1:40-47.
Network). In 2019 International Conference 12. Zebari SR, Yaseen NO. Effects of parallel
on Nascent Technologies in Engineering processing implementation on balanced
(ICNTE). 2019;1-7. load-division depending on distributed
2. Karmakar KK, Varadharajan V, Tupakula memory systems. J. Univ. Anbar Pure Sci.
U. Mitigating attacks in Software Defined 2011;5:50-56.
Network (SDN). in 2017 Fourth 13. Mousa M, Bahaa-Eldin AM, Sobh M.
International Conference on Software Software defined networking concepts and
Defined Systems (SDS). 2017;112-117. challenges. in 2016 11th International
3. Zeebaree SR, Shukur HM, Hussan BK. Conference on Computer Engineering &
Human resource management systems for Systems (ICCES). 2016;79-90.
enterprise organizations: A review. 14. Xu H, Huang H, Chen S, Zhao G, Huang L.
Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Achieving high scalability through hybrid
Sciences (PEN). 2019;7:660-669,. switching in software-defined networking.
4. Lawal BH, Nuray AT. Real-time detection IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.
and mitigation of distributed denial of 2018;26:618-632.
service (DDoS) attacks in software defined 15. Sufiev H, Haddad Y. A dynamic load
networking (SDN). In 2018 26th Signal balancing architecture for SDN. In 2016
Processing and Communications IEEE International Conference on the
Applications Conference (SIU). 2018;1-4. Science of Electrical Engineering (ICSEE).
5. Khalid HYI, Ismael PM, Baheej Al-Khalil A. 2016;1-3.
Efficient mechanism for securing software 16. Kareem FQ, Zeebaree SR, Dino HI,
defined network against arp spoofing Sadeeq MA, Rashid ZN, Hasan DA, et al.
attack. Journal of Duhok University. A survey of optical fiber communications:
2019;22:124-131. challenges and processing time influences.
6. Mohammed AH, Hussein KRMMk, Asian Journal of Research in Computer
Abdulateef IA. A review software defined Science. 2021;48-58.
networking for internet of things. In 2020 17. Yazdeen AA, Zeebaree SR, Sadeeq MM,
International Congress on Human- Kak SF, Ahmed OM, Zebari RR. FPGA
Computer Interaction, Optimization and implementations for data encryption and
Robotic Applications (HORA). 2020;1-8. decryption via concurrent and parallel
7. Deepak Singh Rana SAD, Sushil Kumar computation: A review. Qubahan
Chamoli. Software defined networking Academic Journal. 2021;1:8-16.
(SDN) challenges, issues and Solution. 18. Zeebaree S, Zebari I. Multilevel
International Journal of Computer client/server peer-to-peer video
Sciences and Engineering. 2019;7:884- broadcasting system. International Journal
889. of Scientific & Engineering Research.
8. Zebari RR, Zeebaree S, Jacksi K, Shukur 2014;5.
HM. E-business requirements for flexibility 19. Zebari IM, Zeebaree SR, Yasin HM. Real
and implementation enterprise system: A Time Video Streaming From Multi-Source
review. International Journal of Scientific & Using Client-Server for Video Distribution.
Technology Research. 2019;8:655-660. In 2019 4th Scientific International
9. Prajapati A, Sakadasariya A, Patel J. Conference Najaf (SICN). 2019;109-114.
Software defined network: Future of 20. Zeebaree SR, Shukur HM, Haji LM, Zebari
networking. In 2018 2nd International RR, Jacksi K, Abas SM. Characteristics
Conference on Inventive Systems and and analysis of hadoop distributed
Control (ICISC). 2018;1351-1354. systems. Technology Reports of Kansai
10. Zeebaree S, Ameen S, Sadeeq M. Social University. 2020;62:1555-1564.
media networks security threats, risks and 21. Shukur H, Zeebaree S, Zebari R, Ahmed
recommendation: A case study in the O, Haji L, Abdulqader D. Cache coherence

14
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

protocols in distributed systems. Journal of multi-destinations broadcasting video-

Applied Science and Technology Trends. signals. in 2019 4th Scientific International
2020;1:92-97. Conference Najaf (SICN). 2019;103-108.
22. Ageed ZS, Zeebaree SR, Sadeeq MA, 32. AlShehri SMaMAR. Software defined
Abdulrazzaq MB, Salim BW, Salih AA, et networking: research issues, challenges
al. A state of art survey for intelligent and opportunities. Indian Journal of
energy monitoring systems. Asian Journal Science and Technology. 2017;10:1-9.
of Research in Computer Science. 33. Abdulraheem AS, Abdulla AI, Mohammed
2021;46-61. SM. Enterprise resource planning systems
23. Ageed ZS, Zeebaree SR, Sadeeq MM, and challenges.
Kak SF, Yahia HS, Mahmood MR, et al. 34. Ageed ZS, Zeebaree SR, Sadeeq MM,
Comprehensive survey of big data mining Kak SF, Rashid ZN, Salih AA, et al. A
approaches in cloud systems. Qubahan survey of data mining implementation in
Academic Journal. 2021;1:29-38. smart city applications. Qubahan
24. Perepelkin D, Tsyganov I. SDN Cluster Academic Journal. 2021;1:91-99.
Constructor: Software Toolkit for 35. Fonseca PC, Mota ES. A survey on fault
Structures Segmentation of Software management in software-defined networks.
Defined Networks. In 2019 XVI IEEE Communications Surveys &
International Symposium "Problems of Tutorials. 2017;19:2284-2321.
Redundancy in Information and Control 36. Salih AA, Zeebaree SR, Abdulraheem AS,
Systems (REDUNDANCY). 2019;195-198. Zebari RR, Sadeeq MA, Ahmed OM.
25. Abdulqadir HR, Zeebaree SR, Shukur HM, Evolution of mobile wireless
Sadeeq MM, Salim BW, Salih AA, et al. A communication to 5g revolution.
study of moving from cloud computing to Technology Reports of Kansai University.
fog computing. Qubahan Academic 2020;62:2139-2151.
Journal. 2021;1:60-70. 37. Hassan RJ, Zeebaree SR, Ameen SY, Kak
26. Karakus M, Durresi A. Service cost in SF, Sadeeq MA, Ageed ZS, et al. State of
software defined networking (SDN). in art survey for iot effects on smart city
2017 IEEE 31st International Conference technology: challenges, opportunities, and
on Advanced Information Networking and solutions. Asian Journal of Research in
Applications (AINA). 2017;468-475. Computer Science. 2021;32-48.
27. Shukur H, Zeebaree SR, Ahmed AJ, 38. Netes V, Kusakina M. Reliability
Zebari RR, Ahmed O, Tahir BSA, et al. A Challenges in Software Defined
state of art survey for concurrent Networking," presented at the Proceedings
computation and clustering of parallel of the 24th conference of open innovations
computing for distributed systems. Journal association fruct, Moscow, Russia; 2019.
of Applied Science and Technology 39. Yahia HS, Zeebaree SR, Sadeeq MA,
Trends. 2020;1:148-154. Salim NO, Kak SF, Adel AZ, et al.
28. Mubarakali A, Alqahtani AS. A Survey: Comprehensive survey for cloud
security threats and countermeasures in computing based nature-inspired
software defined networking. In 2019 IEEE algorithms optimization scheduling. Asian
2nd International Conference on Journal of Research in Computer Science.
Information and Computer Technologies 2021;1-16.
(ICICT). 2019;180-185. 40. Rawat DB, Reddy SR. Software defined
29. Abdullah PY, Zeebaree SR, Shukur HM, networking architecture, security and
Jacksi K. HRM system using cloud energy efficiency: A survey. IEEE
computing for small and medium Communications Surveys & Tutorials.
enterprises (SMEs). Technology Reports 2017;19:325-346.
of Kansai University. 2020;62:04. 41. Elazim NMA, Sobh MA, Bahaa-Eldin AM.
30. Dino HI, Zeebaree SR, Ahmad OM, Software defined networking: attacks and
Shukur HM, Zebari RR, Haji LM. Impact of countermeasures. in 2018 13th
load sharing on performance of distributed International Conference on Computer
systems computations. International Engineering and Systems (ICCES).
Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and 2018;555-567.
Publications (IJMRAP). 2020;3:30-37. 42. Zhong W, Yu R, Xie S, Zhang Y, Tsang
31. Zeebaree SR, Rajab H. Design and DHK. Software defined networking for
implement a proposed multi-sources to flexible and green energy internet. IEEE

15
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

Communications Magazine. 2016;54:68- 54. Sulaiman MA, Sadeeq M, Abdulraheem

75. AS, Abdulla AI. Analyzation Study for
43. Sallow AB, Sadeeq M, Zebari RR, Gamification Examination Fields. Technol.
Abdulrazzaq MB, Mahmood MR, Shukur Rep. Kansai Univ. 2020;62:2319-
HM, et al. An investigation for mobile 2328.
malware behavioral and detection 55. Swami R, Dave M, Ranga V. Software-
techniques based on android platform. defined networking-based DDoS defense
IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering mechanisms. ACM Comput. Surv.2019;52.
(IOSR-JCE). 22;14-20. 56. Jijo BT, Zeebaree SR, Zebari RR, Sadeeq
44. Huang H, Yin H, Min G, Jiang H, Zhang J, MA, Sallow AB, Mohsin S, et al. A
Wu Y. Data-driven information plane in comprehensive survey of 5g mm-wave
software-defined networking. IEEE technology design challenges. Asian
Communications Magazine. 2017;55:218- Journal of Research in Computer Science.
224. 2021;1-20.
45. Akhunzada A, Ahmed E, Gani A, Khan M, 57. Sallow A, Zeebaree S, Zebari R, Mahmood
Imran M, Guizani S. Securing the Software M, Abdulrazzaq M, Sadeeq M. Vaccine
Defined Networks: Taxonomy, tracker," SMS reminder system: Design
Requirements, and Open Issues. IEEE and implementation; 2020.
Communications Magazine. 2014;53. 58. Ageed ZS, Ibrahim RK, Sadeeq MA.
46. Hasan DA, Hussan BK, Zeebaree SR, Unified ontology implementation of cloud
Ahmed DM, Kareem OS, Sadeeq MA. The computing for distributed systems. Current
impact of test case generation methods on Journal of Applied Science and
the software performance: A review. Technology. 2020;82-97.
International Journal of Science and 59. Dacier MC, König H, Cwalinski R, Kargl F,
Business. 2021;5:33-44. Dietrich S. Security challenges and
47. Sadeeq MA, Zeebaree S. Energy opportunities of software-defined
management for internet of things via networking. IEEE Security & Privacy.
distributed systems. Journal of Applied 2017;15:96-100.
Science and Technology Trends. 60. D’Cruze H, Wang P, Sbeit R, Ray A. A
2021;2:59-71. software-defined networking (sdn)
48. Abdulraheem AS, Salih AA, Abdulla AI, approach to mitigating ddos attacks. ed,
Sadeeq MA, Salim NO, Abdullah H, et al. 2018;141-145.
Home automation system based on IoT; 61. Raghunath K, Krishnan P. Towards A
2020. Secure SDN Architecture. in 2018 9th
49. Abdulrahman LM, Zeebaree SR, Kak SF, International Conference on Computing,
Sadeeq MA, Adel AZ, Salim BW, et al. A Communication and Networking
state of art for smart gateways issues and Technologies (ICCCNT). 2018;1-7.
modification. Asian Journal of Research in 62. Ejaz S, Iqbal Z, Shah PA, Bukhari BH, Ali
Computer Science. 2021;1-13. A, Aadil F. Traffic Load Balancing Using
50. Shin S, Xu L, Hong S, Gu G. Enhancing Software Defined Networking (SDN)
network security through software defined Controller as Virtualized Network function.
networking (SDN). in 2016 25th IEEE Access. 2019;7:46646-46658,.
International Conference on Computer 63. Maulud DH, Zeebaree SR, Jacksi K,
Communication and Networks (ICCCN). Sadeeq MAM, Sharif KH. State of art for
2016;1-9. semantic analysis of natural language
51. Cox JH, Chung J, Donovan S, Ivey J, Clark processing. Qubahan Academic Journal.
RJ, Riley G, et al. Advancing software- 2021;1:21-28.
defined networks: a survey. IEEE Access. 64. Jefia A, Popoola S, Atayero A. Software-
2017;5:25487-25526. Defined Networking: Current Trends ,
52. Ibrahim IM. Task scheduling algorithms in Challenges , and Future Directions; 2018.
cloud computing: A review. Turkish Journal 65. Chippalkatti O, Nimbhorkar SU. An
of Computer and Mathematics Education approach for detection of attacks in
(TURCOMAT). 2021;12:1041-1053. software defined networks. in 2017
53. Cui L, Yu FR, Yan Q. When big data meets International Conference on Innovations in
software-defined networking: SDN for big Information. Embedded and
data and big data for SDN. IEEE Network. Communication Systems (ICIIECS).
2016;30:58-65. 2017;1-3.

16
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

66. Zeebaree S, Yasin HM. Arduino based 77. Gelberger A, Yemini N, Giladi R.
remote controlling for home: power saving, Performance analysis of software-defined
security and protection. International networking (SDN). In 2013 IEEE 21st
Journal of Scientific & Engineering International Symposium on Modelling,
Research. 2014;5:266-272. Analysis and Simulation of Computer and
67. Yasin HM, Zeebaree SR, Zebari IM. Telecommunication Systems. 2013;389-
Arduino based automatic irrigation system: 393.
monitoring and sms controlling. in 2019 4th 78. Dargahi T, Caponi A, Ambrosin M, Bianchi
Scientific International Conference Najaf G, Conti M. A survey on the security of
(SICN). 2019;109-114. stateful sdn data planes. IEEE
68. Kalghoum A, Gammar SM, Saidane LA. Communications Surveys & Tutorials.
Towards a novel cache replacement 2017;19:1701-1725.
strategy for named data networking based 79. Kalkan K, Gur G, Alagoz F. Defense
on software defined networking. Mechanisms against DDoS Attacks in SDN
Computers & Electrical Engineering. Environment. IEEE Communications
2018;66:98-113. Magazine. 2017;55:175-179.
69. Priyadarsini M, Bera P, Bampal R. 80. Ujcich BE, Sanders WH. Data protection
Performance analysis of software defined intents for software-defined networking. in
network controller architecture—A 2019 IEEE Conference on Network
simulation based survey. in 2017 Softwarization (NetSoft). 2019;271-275.
International Conference on Wireless 81. Rahman A, Islam MJ, Montieri A, Nasir
Communications, Signal Processing and MK, Reza MM, Band SS, et al. Smart
Networking (WiSPNET). 2017:1929-1935. block-sdn: an optimized blockchain-sdn
70. Iqbal M, Iqbal F, Mohsin F, Rizwan M, framework for resource management in
Ahamd F. Security issues in software IoT. IEEE Access. 2021;9:28361-28376.
defined networking (sdn): risks, challenges 82. Vishnevsky V, Pham VD, Kirichek R,
and potential solutions;2019. Elagin V, Vladyko A, Shestakov A. SDN-
71. Liu Y, Zhao B, Zhao P, Fan P, Liu H. A assisted unmanned aerial system for
survey: Typical security issues of software- monitoring sensor data. in 2020 12th
defined networking. China International Congress on Ultra Modern
Communications. 2019;16:13-31. Telecommunications and Control Systems
72. Abdullah SMSA, Ameen SYA, Sadeeq MA, and Workshops (ICUMT). 2020:313-317.
Zeebaree S. Multimodal emotion 83. Ruaro M, Caimi LL, Moraes FG. A
recognition using deep learning. Journal of systemic and secure sdn framework for
Applied Science and Technology Trends. noc-based many-cores. IEEE Access.
2021;2:52-58. 2020;8:105997-106008.
73. Sadeeq M, Abdulla AI, Abdulraheem AS, 84. Ren C, Bai S, Wang Y, Li Y. Achieving
Ageed ZS. Impact of electronic commerce near-optimal traffic engineering using a
on enterprise business. Technol. Rep. distributed algorithm in hybrid SDN. IEEE
Kansai Univ. 2020;62:2365-2378. Access. 2020;8:29111-29124.
74. Abdulla AI, Abdulraheem AS, Salih AA, 85. Xu J, Wang L, Xu Z. An enhanced
Sadeeq MA, Ahmed AJ, Ferzor BM, et al. saturation attack and its mitigation
Internet of things and smart home security. mechanism in software-defined
Technol. Rep. Kansai Univ. 2020;62:2465- networking. Computer Networks.
2476. 2019;169:107092.
75. Parashar M, Poonia A, Satish K. A survey 86. Almohaimeed A, Asaduzzaman A.
of attacks and their mitigations in software Introducing edge controlling to software
defined networks. in 2019 10th defined networking to reduce processing
International Conference on Computing, time. in 2019 IEEE 9th Annual Computing
Communication and Networking and Communication Workshop and
Technologies (ICCCNT). 2019;1-8. Conference (CCWC), Las Vegas, NV,
76. Kaljic E, Maric A, Begovic P, Hadzialic M. USA;2019.
A survey on data plane flexibility and 87. Al-Tam F, Correia N. On Load Balancing
programmability in software-defined via Switch Migration in Software-Defined
networking. IEEE Access. 2019;7:47804- Networking. IEEE Access. 2019;7:95998-
47840. 96010.

17
 Haji et al.; AJRCOS, 9(2): 1-18, 2021; Article no.AJRCOS.68725

88. Aleroud A, Alsmadi I. Identifying DoS 93. Dinh PT, Park M. BDF-SDN: A big data
attacks on software defined networks: A framework for ddos attack detection in
relation context approach. In NOMS 2016 - large-scale sdn-based cloud. in 2021 IEEE
2016 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Conference on Dependable and Secure
Management Symposium. 2016;853-857. Computing (DSC). 2021;1-8.
89. Achleitner S, Bartolini N, He T, Porta TL, 94. Haque MR, Tan SC, Yusoff Z, Nisar K, Lee
Tootaghaj DZ. Fast network configuration CK, Chowdhry B, et al. SDN architecture
in software defined networking. IEEE for UAVs and EVs using Satellite: A
Transactions on Network and Service hypothetical model and new challenges for
Management. 2018;15:1249-1263,. future. in 2021 IEEE 18th Annual
90. Gao S, Li Z, Xiao B, Wei G. Security Consumer Communications & Networking
threats in the data plane of software- Conference (CCNC). 2021;1-6.
defined networks. IEEE Network. 95. Kundimana G, Vyukusenge A, Tsym A.
2018;32:108-113. Networks modernization using sdn and nfv
91. Chin T, Xiong K, Hu C. Phishlimiter: A technologies. in 2021 Systems of
phishing detection and mitigation approach Signals Generating and Processing in the
using software-defined networking. IEEE Field of on Board Communications.
Access. 2018;6:42516-42531. 2021;1-5.
92. Dridi L, Zhani MF. SDN-Guard: DoS
96. Almadani B, Beg A, Mahmoud A. DSF: A
attacks mitigation in SDN network. in 2016
distributed sdn control plane framework for
5th IEEE International Conference on
the east/west interface. IEEE Access.
Cloud Networking (Cloudnet). 2016;212-
2021;9:26735-26754.
217.
_________________________________________________________________________________
© 2021 Haji et al.; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer-review history:
The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:
http://www.sdiarticle4.com/review-history/68725

18