Abstract
In Cloud computing deployments, specifically in the Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) model, networking is one of the core enabling facilities provided for the users. The IaaS approach ensures significant flexibility and manageability, since the networking resources and topologies are entirely under users’ control. In this context, considerable efforts have been devoted to promoting the Cloud paradigm as a suitable solution for managing IoT environments. Deep and genuine integration between the two ecosystems, Cloud and IoT, may only be attainable at the IaaS level. In light of extending the IoT domain capabilities’ with Cloud-based mechanisms akin to the IaaS Cloud model, network virtualization is a fundamental enabler of infrastructure-oriented IoT deployments. Indeed, an IoT deployment without networking resilience and adaptability makes it unsuitable to meet user-level demands and services’ requirements. Such a limitation makes the IoT-based services adopted in very specific and statically defined scenarios, thus leading to limited plurality and diversity of use cases. This article presents a Cloud-based approach for network virtualization in an IoT context using the de-facto standard IaaS middleware, OpenStack, and its networking subsystem, Neutron. OpenStack is being extended to enable the instantiation of virtual/overlay networks between Cloud-based instances (e.g., virtual machines, containers, and bare metal servers) and/or geographically distributed IoT nodes deployed at the network edge.
- Iqbal Alam, Kashif Sharif, Fan Li, Zohaib Latif, M. M. Karim, Sujit Biswas, Boubakr Nour, and Yu Wang. 2020. A survey of network virtualization techniques for internet of things using sdn and nfv. ACM Comput. Surv. 53, 2 (2020), 1–40. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Zakaria Benomar, Dario Bruneo, Salvatore Distefano, Khalid Elbaamrani, Noureddine Idboufker, Francesco Longo, Giovanni Merlino, and Antonio Puliafito. 2018. Extending openstack for cloud-based networking at the edge. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Internet of Things (iThings’18) and IEEE Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom’18) and IEEE Cyber, Physical and Social Computing (CPSCom’18) and IEEE Smart Data (SmartData’18). IEEE, 162–169.Google Scholar
- Z. Benomar, F. Longo, G. Merlino, and A. Puliafito. 2019. Enabling container-based fog computing with OpenStack. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Internet of Things (iThings’19) and IEEE Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom’19) and IEEE Cyber, Physical and Social Computing (CPSCom’19) and IEEE Smart Data (SmartData’19). IEEE, 1049–1056. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/iThings/GreenCom/CPSCom/SmartData.2019.00181Google Scholar
- Zakaria Benomar, Francesco Longo, Giovanni Merlino, and Antonio Puliafito. 2020. A Stack4Things-based web of things architecture. In Proceedings of the International Conferences on Internet of Things (iThings’20) and IEEE Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom’20) and IEEE Cyber, Physical and Social Computing (CPSCom’20) and IEEE Smart Data (SmartData’20) and IEEE Congress on Cybermatics (Cybermatics’20). IEEE, 113–120.Google Scholar
- Alessio Botta, Walter De Donato, Valerio Persico, and Antonio Pescapé. 2016. Integration of cloud computing and internet of things: A survey. Fut. Gener. Comput. Syst. 56 (2016), 684–700. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Dario Bruneo, Salvatore Distefano, Francesco Longo, Giovanni Merlino, and Antonio Puliafito. 2018. I/Ocloud: Adding an IoT dimension to cloud infrastructures. Computer 51, 1 (2018), 57–65.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Roberto Bruschi, Giacomo Genovese, Antonio Iera, Paolo Lago, Guerino Lamanna, Chiara Lombardo, and Sergio Mangialardi. 2017. OpenStack extension for fog-powered personal services deployment. In Proceedings of the 29th International on Teletraffic Congress (ITC’29), Vol. 2. IEEE, 19–23.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Roberto Bruschi, Paolo Lago, Guerino Lamanna, Chiara Lombardo, and Sergio Mangialardi. 2016. Openvolcano: An open-source software platform for fog computing. In Proceedings of the 28th International Teletraffic Congress (ITC’28), Vol. 2. IEEE, 22–27.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Franco Callegati, Walter Cerroni, and Chiara Contoli. 2016. Virtual networking performance in openstack platform for network function virtualization. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. (2016). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- N. M. Mosharaf Kabir Chowdhury and Raouf Boutaba. 2010. A survey of network virtualization. Comput. Netw. 54, 5 (2010), 862–876. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Manuel Díaz, Cristian Martín, and Bartolomé Rubio. 2016. State-of-the-art, challenges, and open issues in the integration of Internet of things and cloud computing. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 67 (2016), 99–117. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Salvatore Distefano, Giovanni Merlino, and Antonio Puliafito. 2017. Device-centric sensing: An alternative to data-centric approaches. IEEE Syst. J. 11, 1 (2017), 231–241.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Ian Fette and Alexey Melnikov. 2011. The Websocket Protocol. Technical Report.Google Scholar
- Andreas Fischer, Juan Felipe Botero, Michael Till Beck, Hermann De Meer, and Xavier Hesselbach. 2013. Virtual network embedding: A survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 15, 4 (2013), 1888–1906.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Stan Hanks, Tony Li, Dino Farinacci, and Paul Traina. 1994. Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 Networks. Technical Report. Google Scholar
- Jeroen Hoebeke, Eli De Poorter, Stefan Bouckaert, Ingrid Moerman, and Piet Demeester. 2011. Managed ecosystems of networked objects. Wireless Pers. Commun. 58, 1 (2011), 125–143. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Toke Høiland-Jørgensen, Carlo Augusto Grazia, Per Hurtig, and Anna Brunstrom. 2017. Flent: The flexible network tester. In Proceedings of the 11th EAI International Conference on Performance Evaluation Methodologies and Tools. ACM Digital Library, 120–125. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Muhammad Usman Ilyas, Muneeb Ahmad, and Sajid Saleem. 2020. Internet-of-things-infrastructure-as-a-service: The democratization of access to public Internet-of-Things infrastructure. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 33, 16 (2020), e4562.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Isam Ishaq, Jeroen Hoebeke, Ingrid Moerman, and Piet Demeester. 2012. Internet of things virtual networks: Bringing network virtualization to resource-constrained devices. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom’12). IEEE, 293–300. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- I. Khan, F. Belqasmi, R. Glitho, N. Crespi, M. Morrow, and P. Polakos. 2015. Wireless sensor network virtualization: Early architecture and research perspectives. IEEE Netw. 29, 3 (May 2015), 104–112. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/MNET.2015.7113233Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Diego Kreutz, Fernando M. V. Ramos, Paulo Esteves Verissimo, Christian Esteve Rothenberg, Siamak Azodolmolky, and Steve Uhlig. 2015. Software-defined networking: A comprehensive survey. Proc. IEEE 103, 1 (2015), 14–76.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Yong Li and Min Chen. 2015. Software-defined network function virtualization: A survey. IEEE Access 3 (2015), 2542–2553.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Peng Liu, Dale Willis, and Suman Banerjee. 2016. Paradrop: Enabling lightweight multi-tenancy at the network’s extreme edge. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM Symposium on Edge Computing (SEC’16). IEEE, 1–13.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Francesco Longo, Dario Bruneo, Salvatore Distefano, Giovanni Merlino, and Antonio Puliafito. 2015. Stack4things: An openstack-based framework for iot. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud. IEEE, 204–211. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Francesco Longo, Dario Bruneo, Salvatore Distefano, Giovanni Merlino, and Antonio Puliafito. 2017. Stack4Things: A sensing-and-actuation-as-a-service framework for IoT and cloud integration. Ann. Telecommun. 72, 1–2 (2017), 53–70.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Mallik Mahalingam, Dinesh Dutt, Kenneth Duda, Puneet Agarwal, Lawrence Kreeger, T. Sridhar, Mike Bursell, and Chris Wright. 2014. Virtual Extensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A Framework for Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks Over Layer 3 Networks. Technical Report.Google Scholar
- Daniele Miorandi, Sabrina Sicari, Francesco De Pellegrini, and Imrich Chlamtac. 2012. Internet of things: Vision, applications and research challenges. Ad hoc Netw. 10, 7 (2012), 1497–1516. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Nitin Naik. 2017. Choice of effective messaging protocols for IoT systems: MQTT, CoAP, AMQP and HTTP. In 2017 Proceedings of the IEEE International Systems Engineering Symposium (ISSE’17). IEEE, 1–7.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- United Nations. 2017. World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision. Retrieved from https://population.un.org/wpp/DataQuery/.Google Scholar
- Mark Patel, Jason Shangkuan, and Christopher Thomas. 2017. What’s New with the Internet of Things? Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/semiconductors/our-insights/whats-new-with-the-internet-of-things.Google Scholar
- Tamas Pflanzner and Attila Kertész. 2016. A survey of IoT cloud providers. In Proceedings of the 39th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO’16). IEEE, 730–735.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- V. Rajaravivarma. 1997. Virtual local area network technology and applications. In Proceedings of the 29th Southeastern Symposium on System Theory. IEEE, 49–52. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Howard A. Seid and ALbert Lespagnol. 1998. Virtual Private Network. US Patent 5,768,271.Google Scholar
- Xiang Sheng, Jian Tang, Xuejie Xiao, and Guoliang Xue. 2013. Sensing as a service: Challenges, solutions and future directions. IEEE Sens. J. 13, 10 (2013), 3733–3741.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- John Soldatos, Nikos Kefalakis, Manfred Hauswirth, Martin Serrano, Jean-Paul Calbimonte, Mehdi Riahi, Karl Aberer, Prem Prakash Jayaraman, Arkady Zaslavsky, Ivana Podnar Žarko, et al. 2015. Openiot: Open source internet-of-things in the cloud. In Interoperability and Open-source Solutions for the Internet of Things. Springer, 13–25.Google Scholar
- Statista. 2016. IoT: Number of Connected Devices Worldwide 2015-2025. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/471264/iot-number-of-connected-devices-worldwide/.Google Scholar
- Kenji Tei and Levent Gurgen. 2014. ClouT: Cloud of things for empowering the citizen clout in smart cities. In Proceedings of the IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT’14). IEEE, 369–370.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Ondrej Tomanek and Lukas Kencl. 2016. Security and privacy of using AllJoyn IoT framework at home and beyond. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Intelligent Green Building and Smart Grid (IGBSG). IEEE, 1–6.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Massimo Villari, Antonio Celesti, Maria Fazio, and Antonio Puliafito. 2014. AllJoyn Lambda: An architecture for the management of smart environments in IoT. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Smart Computing Workshops. IEEE, 9–14.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Arkady Zaslavsky, Charith Perera, and Dimitrios Georgakopoulos. 2013. Sensing as a service and big data. arXiv:1301.0159. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.0159.Google Scholar
Index Terms
Cloud-based Network Virtualization in IoT with OpenStack
Recommendations
An overview of openstack architecture
IDEAS '14: Proceedings of the 18th International Database Engineering & Applications SymposiumCloud Computing concept refers to both the applications delivered as services over the Internet and the servers and system software in the datacenters that provide those services. These solutions offer pools of virtualized computing resources, paid on a ...
Security Vulnerability Assessment of OpenStack Cloud
CICSYN '14: Proceedings of the 2014 Sixth International Conference on Computational Intelligence, Communication Systems and NetworksMigrating the virtual machines from on-premise to cloud raises new security challenges for a company. A potential threat to the tenants are not only the Internet hackers, but also the cloud service provider and the other co-tenants, due to the multi-...
Is your cloud elastic enough?: performance modelling the elasticity of infrastructure as a service (IaaS) cloud applications
ICPE '12: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance EngineeringElasticity, the ability to rapidly scale resources up and down on demand, is an essential feature of public cloud platforms. However, it is difficult to understand the elasticity requirements of a given application and workload, and if the elasticity ...






Comments