LAYER 2 COMMUNICATION PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF AD- HOC MESH AND SOFTWARE-DEFINED VEHICULAR NETWORK OPENFLOW

• Main Author: Tiarma, Ribka
• Format: Final Project
• Language: Indonesia
• Online Access: https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/81601
• Institution: Institut Teknologi Bandung

Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) is a sophisticated application that aims to provide innovative services related to various modes of transportation and traffic management. Vehicular Network (VN) as vehicle communication network infrastructure implemented by ITS is still being developed and improved to this day for the benefit of driving assistants to autonomous vehicles. In general, the computer networks used still rely on conventional networks today where network administrators configure them by accessing device-to-device manually. The weakness of conventional networks in VN lies in the inability to see the entire network topology and carry out centralized actions from the large amount of dynamic data obtained in real-time. This is not a crucial problem for small-scale networks. However, as the network scales, configuration work becomes ineffective and error-prone to perform. Software-Defined Network (SDN) is a network architecture that provides the ability to perform centralized configuration and monitoring by pulling the control plane on a single device called a controller. Its capabilities open up opportunities for SDN to be applied to VN, commonly known as Software-Defined Vehicular Network (SDVN). SDVN unlocks the ability to launch real-time configuration and monitoring using just a controller—making the network more adaptive to changing dynamic VN conditions. Layer 2 communication of computer networks plays a crucial role in facilitating reliable communication between devices within the same network segment. This communication is fundamental for computer networks. In other words, communication performance at layer 2 is strong evidence of the feasibility of a communication technique for further testing. However, there has been no research that discusses this specifically. Departing from that understanding, this experiment focuses on examining the worthiness of applying SDN in VN by comparing l2 communication performance between Ad-hoc Mesh and SDVN OpenFlow. This is done by developing an SDVN testbed based on Mininet-Wifi software and testing the communication performance of the SDVN testbed against its traditional version - in Ad-hoc form - by implementing the mesh routing protocol and OpenFlow protocol in communication operations. Testing will be carried out using a quantitative approach to the values produced by several communication parameters consisting of delay, throughput, jitter, and PSR (Packet Success Ratio). Based on the results, Ad-hoc Mesh communication produces high delay and low overall delay. This result is expected to be the impact of high vehicle density, the large number of nodes participating in communication, the implementation of distributed control, and packet overhead. 4 In addition, the high jitter value in Ad-hoc Mesh is supported by the fact that all nodes participating in communication move at varying speeds compared to the OpenFlow SDVN protocol. Packet success ratio as the final testing parameter gets a lower value in Ad-hoc Mesh compared to SDVN OpenFlow as the final form of accumulation of the three testing parameters. As a result, SDVN OpenFlow is superior to Ad-hoc Mesh which is recognized in every parameter of the communication carried out. Reviewing the increase in communication performance by implementing SDN in VNs, SDN as a network architecture is a technology that deserves further testing.