SEGMENT ROUTING IPV6 (SRV6) PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR SERVICE FUNCTION CHAINING (SFC)

The need for networks due to increasing demand for capacity has also driven the evolution of networks into an architecture that can direct data traffic more flexibly. Segment Routing (SR) is one of the solutions for directing traffic. It has a source routing concept that can apply a list of instr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Sofiyati, Mitra
Format: Theses
Language:Indonesia
Online Access:https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/77938
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Institut Teknologi Bandung
Language: Indonesia
Description
Summary:The need for networks due to increasing demand for capacity has also driven the evolution of networks into an architecture that can direct data traffic more flexibly. Segment Routing (SR) is one of the solutions for directing traffic. It has a source routing concept that can apply a list of instructions in the packet header, so the packet is forwarded and given service according to the list of instructions. The SRv6 header architecture (SRH) is like the Network Service Header (NSH) used in the Service Function Chaining (SFC) process. Therefore, SRv6 can be used in SFC implementations. The source routing approach is SRv6's ability to add information in the packet header while avoiding and minimizing information that needs to be configured and maintained by other nodes. This ability makes SRv6 have high scalability. In addition, using SRv6 for SFC provides a 50.3% faster delay increase than NSH with overlay tunneling. In addition, SRv6 can utilize the maximum hardware capacity to transmit data up to 80%. Meanwhile, overlay tunneling on NSH limits the use of this capacity if no additional configuration is given, namely only 7% in this study. SFC with SRv6 requires less state and does not require further information on each network node if services are added. Using NSH for SFC still requires overlay tunneling, thus providing more overhead than SRv6. However, in the worst case, the overhead with SRv6 will be worse because each additional segment requires 128 bits for one IPv6.