Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Performance evaluation of an HTTP proxy implemented as a virtual network function

  • Published:
Annals of Telecommunications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Network functions virtualization (NFV) is an important approach in the telecommunications industry. One of the main features of NFV is the execution of network functions in software rather than using specific hardware. These functions can run on virtualization platforms, which can increase service elasticity and reduce infrastructure costs. However, virtualization imposes performance penalties, which can severely impact NFV services. In this work, we analyze this performance impact when the virtualized network function is an HTTP proxy. We then compare two virtualization solutions, i.e., KVM and Docker, under different configurations. Our results show that Docker containers yield performance close to that of native Linux for HTTP proxies since Docker does not employ a hypervisor. We show that KVM incurs a severe performance penalty, which a paravirtualization approach can reduce. We also evaluate how much load balancing in Docker can improve the performance of virtual proxies. We show that, for our scenario, two parallel proxies significantly improve performance. However, we observe a negative impact when increasing the number of proxies since they interfere with each other.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Apache (2020) Jmeter 3.1. http://jmeter.apache.org

  2. Babu A, Hareesh MJ, Martin JP, Cherian S, Sastri Y (2014) System performance evaluation of para virtualization, container virtualization and full virtualization using Xen, OpenVZ and XenServer. In: International conference on advances in computing and communications, pp 247–250

  3. Bachiega NG, Souza PSL, Bruschi SM, de Souza SRS (2018) Container-based performance evaluation: A survey and challenges. In: IEEE International conference on cloud engineering, pp 398–403

  4. Barham P, Dragovic B, Fraser K, Hand S, Harris T, Ho A, Neugebauer R, Pratt I, Warfield A (2003) Xen and the art of virtualization. In: ACM symposium on operating systems principles (SOSP), pp 164–177

  5. Bondan L, dos Santos CRP, Granville LZ (2016) Comparing virtualization solutions for NFV deployment: A network management perspective. In: IEEE Symposium on computers and communication (ISCC), pp 669–674

  6. Bui T (2015) Analysis of Docker security. Tech. rep., Aalto University School of Science, Finland. http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.02967

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chang HC, Qiu BJ, Chen JC, Tan TJ, Ho PF, Chiu CH, Lin BSP (2018) Empirical experience and experimental evaluation of Open5GCore over hypervisor and container. Wirel Commun Mob Comput 2018

  8. Citrix (2020) Citrix hypervisor. https://www.citrix.com/products/citrix-hypervisor/

  9. Combe T, Martin A, Pietro RD (2016) To Docker or not to Docker: A security perspective. IEEE Cloud Comput 3(5):54–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Couto RS, Campista MEM, Costa LHMK (2014) Network resource control for Xen-based virtualized software routers. Comput Netw 64:71–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Docker (2020) CoreOS: Open source projects for Linux containers. https://coreos.com

  12. Docker (2020) Docker - build, ship and run any app anywhere. https://www.docker.com

  13. Dua R, Raja AR, Kakadia D (2014) Virtualization vs containerization to support PaaS. In: IEEE international conference on cloud engineering (IC2E), pp 610–614

  14. Eiras RSV, Couto RS, Rubinstein MG (2016) Performance evaluation of a virtualized HTTP proxy using KVM and Docker. In: International conference on the network of the future (NoF), pp 1–5

  15. ETSI N (2013) Network functions virtualisation (NFV) architectural framework. ETSI GS NFV 2(2):V1

    Google Scholar 

  16. Felter W, Ferreira A, Rajamony R, Rubio J (2015) An updated performance comparison of virtual machines and Linux containers. Tech. rep., IBM. IBM Research Report - RC25482 (AUS1407-001)

  17. Fernandes NC, Moreira MDD, Moraes IM, Ferraz LHG, Couto RS, Carvalho HET, Campista MEM, Costa LHMK, Duarte OCMB (2011) Virtual networks: Isolation, performance, and trends. Ann Telecommun 66(5-6):339–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Heideker A, Kamienski C (2017) Managing elasticity in an NFV-based IaaS environment. In: Workshop of IEEE latin-american conference on communications

  19. Kim HC, Lee D, Chon K, Jang B, Kwon T, Choi Y (2010) Performance impact of large file transfer on web proxy caching: A case study in a high bandwidth campus network environment. J Commun Netw 52:52–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kivity A, Laor D, Costa G, Enberg P, Har’El N, Marti D, Zolotarov V (2014) OSv — optimizing the operating system for virtual machines. In: USENIX annual technical conference (ATC), pp 61–72

  21. Kubernetes (2020) Kubernetes. https://kubernetes.io

  22. KVM (2020) Kernel-based virtual machine.https://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Main_Page

  23. Martins J, Ahmed M, Raiciu C, Olteanu V, Honda M (2014) ClickOS and the art of network function virtualization. In: USENIX symposium on networked systems design and implementation (NSDI), pp 459–473

  24. Microsoft (2017) Microsoft Hyper-V. https://msdn.microsoft.com/pt-br/library/hh831531(v=ws.11).aspx

  25. Mijumbi R, Serrat J, Gorricho JL, Bouten N, Turck FD, Boutaba R (2016) Network function virtualization: State-of-the-art and research challenges. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 18(1):236–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Nakajima Y, Masutani H, Takahashi H (2015) High-performance vNIC framework for hypervisor-based NFV with userspace vswitch. In: Fourth european workshop on software defined networks, pp 43–48

  27. Oracle (2020) Virtualbox. https://www.virtualbox.org

  28. Rasmusson L, Corcoran D (2014) Performance overhead of KVM on Linux 3.9 on ARM cortex-a15. ACM SIGBED Rev 11(2):32–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Shantharama P, Thyagaturu AS, Reisslein M (2020) Hardware-accelerated platforms and infrastructures for network functions: A survey of enabling technologies and research studies. IEEE Access 8:132021–132085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Squid (2020) Squid proxy. http://www.squid-cache.org/Intro

  31. VirtIO (2020) Virtio - paravirtualized drivers for KVM/Linux. http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Virtio

  32. VMware (2020) Vmware - official site. https://www.vmware.com/

  33. Yang J, Lan Y (2015) A performance evaluation model for virtual servers in KVM-based virtualized system. In: IEEE international conference on smart city/socialcom/sustaincom (SmartCity), pp 66–71

Download references

Funding

This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001. It was also supported by CNPq, FAPERJ, and FAPESP Grant 15/24494-8.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Rodrigo S. V. Eiras

    Present address: IesBrazil Consulting and Services - IT Section, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro - FEN/DETEL/PEL, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    Rodrigo S. V. Eiras & Marcelo G. Rubinstein

  2. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro - COPPE/PEE/GTA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    Rodrigo S. Couto

Authors
  1. Rodrigo S. V. Eiras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rodrigo S. Couto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marcelo G. Rubinstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rodrigo S. Couto.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This work is based on our paper published in Portuguese in the Proceedings of the XXXVI Simpósio Brasileiro de Redes de Computadores e Sistemas Distribuídos (SBRC) available at https://sol.sbc.org.br/index.php/sbrc/article/view/2402/2366.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eiras, R.S.V., Couto, R.S. & Rubinstein, M.G. Performance evaluation of an HTTP proxy implemented as a virtual network function. Ann. Telecommun. 77, 611–619 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12243-021-00886-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12243-021-00886-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation