Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2022)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP22AWO-ART; ISBN: 978-1-6654-9634-6
Quality of Services in Hybrid SDN (hSDN): A Review
Samiullah Mehraban
Dept. Of Computer Science and
Engineering
Delhi Technological University
2022 7th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES) | 978-1-6654-9634-6/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ICCES54183.2022.9835774
Delhi, India
mehraban748@gmail.com
Abstract- As now a day we see that internet has become the
backbone of each and every digital society, smart devices as well
as the growth of new technology and concepts like IOT, Machine
learning 4G, 5G and social network that totally chanced all
network requirement. In the last decade Software Define
Networking (SDN) changed the Computer Network to an
important and significant model as it composed of three
different layer Data layer, Control layer and Application layer,
main Idea behind SDN is separation of Control layer and Data
layer and centralization of control layer to improve efficiency
and performance in the network. As Software Define N has lots
of benefit compare to legacy network but still deployment of
pure SDN is not an easy work and it has its own limitation and
some major challenges like financial challenge, technical
challenge, security Issue, downtime fear of the network and
quality of service degradation. These challenges slow down
deployment of fully SDN and cause the birth of Hybrid Software
Define Network (hSDN) which legacy devices coexist with SDN
devices and take advantage of both legacy and Software Define
Network robustness and programmability. In this paper we
explore a review of Quality of services in Hybrid SDN in an
approach which Quality of Service can benefit the most from the
concept of Hybrid Software Define Network.
Keywords— SDN, hSDN, IOT QOS, 4G ,5G.
I. INTRODUCTION
There has been an unbelievable growth in the
telecommunication area in the world in the earlier few years
as the development of internet is that much fast that nobody
can believe it and has totally changed Information Technology
requirements.as we know that the number of mobile and end
system is rapidly increasing hence use of internet is rushing
via these devices. Modern computer system is packet switched
and distributed network system which each and every digital
device in the world is connected to each other with the
increasing number of mobile and different devices different
services has created requirements for network traffic and it has
produced needs for flexibility and reliability in the network.
As professional and industries face difficulties in
managing todays network and to response this difficulty
design of SDN (Software Define Network) started in 2008 as
basic Idea behind SDN is separation of Data layer and Control
layer. In the past few years Software Define Network is among
one of the greatest discussed topics in the telecommunication
networks, it is a new and an important concept for network
architecture as it appeared in response to the development of
Virtualization, mobility, Internet of Things, etc. Software
Define Networking is a developed network architecture that
separates control layer and data layer[4].
978-1-6654-9634-6/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: DELHI TECHNICAL UNIV. Downloaded on August 07,2022 at 05:22:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
R K Yadav
Dept. Of Computer Science and
Engineering
Delhi Technological University
Delhi, India
rkyadav@dtu.nic.in
With worldwide view and centralized network control
Software Define Network provide reliable and flexible
network management, support advance Traffic Engineering
(TE), for improvement of link unitization and network
throughput of the network it supports smart flow scheduling
system. Software Define Network is widely used in different
scenario and states like Google [5], public cloud [6], NTT
gateway [7], and optical(IP/WDM) network [8]. Software
Define Network is used in almost every field of networking
from cloud network [9,10] to Data Center [11-13], wide Area
Network [14-16] to wireless network [17,18]. According to
the survey Software Define Network market is expecting to
observe a considerable growth from 8.8 billion USD in 2018
to 28.9 billion USD in 2023, at a Compound Annual Growth
Rate (CAGR) 26.8% during this period [19].
Deployment of pure Software Define Network have its
own limitation and there are some possible challenges (e.g.
financial challenges, technical challenges, lack of standards
for migration, security Issue, downtime fears in the network
and quality of service degradation) as Software Define
Network controllers and switches are not as much stable and
reliable and OpenFlow protocol is not developed sufficiently
[21]. These challenges hold up deployment of pure Software
Define Network and cause the birth of Hybrid Software
Define Network (hSDN) which Software Define Network and
traditional devices coexist [22].
In Hybrid Software Define Network both traditional
devices and Software Define Network devices work and
coexist together hence no need to upgrade all of our network
devices to Software Define Networks we can upgrade our
devices to Software Define Network according to our needs
and requirement, hybrid Software Define Network has many
benefits and it take advantage of both Software Define
Networks and traditional network as it take robustness of
traditional network that tradional devices provide robust
routing and programmability of Software Define Network as
Software Define Network device can emphasis on
optimization of the network, in order to provide traffic load
balance Software Define Network devices randomly divide
traffic flows and divide these flows via multiple path, so
network operators has the ability to manage network and
balance the load more easily. In the hybrid Software Define
Network Controller of network can only focus on traffic or
some useful flows, though lots of packets are attained by
robustness of traditional network protocols. At the same time,
the communication controls that how to control, when to
control and for effective and efficient working of the network
which devices to connect [23]. different integration level is
described in detail in this study [24] like integration in control
layer [25], integration in data layer and integration in both data
and control layers [26].
652
 Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2022)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP22AWO-ART; ISBN: 978-1-6654-9634-6
In this Paper we aim to make a picture of Quality of
Services in hybrid SDN network, related research studies are
organized as motivated in literature according to the
categories in a way which quality of service can benefit the
most from the concept of hybrid SDN network, scope of this
paper is to turn to those terms that QoS characterized by
network character like loss, delay, jitter and bandwidth with
different industries mechanisms and standards in order to
ensure high Quality performance for different application.
We have studied many paper regarding QoS in Hybrid
Software Define networking as many research in the literature
are done and proposed different methods to achieve , improve
and optimize Quality of Service in order to enhance network
performance like loss, delay, jitter and link utilization of the
network (e.g. minimizing delay, maximizing throughput ,
balancing link utilization of the network in real time network).
but in the very rare case we find that they propose a method to
increase all the parameters with good and acceptable
percentage as we will focus on maximizing throughput and
minimizing delay in Hybrid SDN network.
II. SDN ARCHITECTURE
Software Define Network is an emergent network model
that comes with different technologies like Network Function
Virtualization and Open Flow protocols. The foremost
impression behind Software Define Network architecture
intended for implementation and development of agility and
cost effectiveness of networks function and network
application. Main and key part behind Software Define
Network architecture is programmability of the network that
we can easily configure and troubleshoot our network within
less time, overall Software Define Network is considered by
seven important characters that is decoupling of Data layer
and control layer, simple devices, central control, automation
and virtualization of the network, independence vendor,
programmability, and openness and the main or basic idea
behind Software Define Network is control layer
centralization and decoupling of Data/forwarding layer and
control layer for better performance of the network
Fig.1 show the basic architecture of Software Define
Network that consist of three main layer that is
Application Layer
Control Layer
Data layer
978-1-6654-9634-6/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: DELHI TECHNICAL UNIV. Downloaded on August 07,2022 at 05:22:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 1: Software Define Network Basic Architecture
1. Data layer
First or bottom layer is Data layer or infrastructure layer
that consist of network devices like routers, access point,
physical switches or virtual switches etc. it is responsible for
data forwarding also collecting flow statistics and monitoring
of network information. Open Flow protocol is the most
prevalent standard CDPI (Controller-Data Plane Interfaces)
that is used for communication purpose among control layer
devices and data layer devices [27-28].
Secure channel is the interface that connect remote
controllers to data layer elements. As devices and switches are
configured and managed via controller through secure
channel.
2. Control layer
Second or central layer of Software Define Network is
called control layer which contain one or more than one
software based controller which are logically centralized, that
configure and manage data plane and carry control
functionality of the network. It forward logic table in data
layer and control the flow tables. Southbound interface(SBI)
is the interface that connect control layer to data layer [29].
Basically controllers contain two important components that
is control logic and functional elements as controllers contain
more then on function mechanisms like coordinator virtualize
etc. controller’s logic control map application requirements
of networking into orders network element resources [30].
3. Application layer
Third or last layer of Software Define Network is
application layer that have one or more than one network
application like security application, Routing Protocols,
visualization, Traffic Engineering, etc. as it hosts application
for introducing new network features, it helps control layer for
configuring network with these application requirements.
Northbound interface is the interface that used to connect
application layer with the control layer [31]. An Open Flow
switch in Software Define Network has three different parts:
Open Flow Protocol, Flow table and Secure channel
653
 Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2022)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP22AWO-ART; ISBN: 978-1-6654-9634-6
III. HYBRID SOFTWARE DEFINE NETWORK
Hybrid Software Define Network is a networking
architecture which both legacy devices and Software Define
Network devices work together or we can say that centralized
and decentralized models coexists and communicate with
each other with different degree to control, modify, configure
and managing network behavior for optimizing user
experience and network performance. as Hybrid Software
Define Network take advantage of both Software Define
Network and legacy Network, programmability of Software
Define Network and robustness of traditional network, no
need to upgrade all legacy device to Software Define
Network, both Traditional network device and Software
Define Network devices work together, as traditional network
device provide robust routing, though Software Define
Network devices work on optimization of the Network, in
traditional network legacy switches control traffic with
distributed algorithms like IGP ( Interior Gateway Protocol)
though in Software Define Network networks Controllers
route traffic based on the global view, but in case of Hybrid
Software Define Network architecture some part of traffic will
be controlled under control of legacy devices and other
remaining part of traffic will be controlled by Software Define
Network controllers.
In Hybrid SDN network traffics are forwarded based on
decision of switching mechanism and distributed routing,
control of traffic in Hybrid Software define network depend
on various deployment strategies like (Island based, service
based, class based, controller based, Hal based, Agent base
and overlay based) in some cases traffic control and forwarded
through SDN, in some cases some amount of traffic will be
controlled through SDN, others controlled with traditional
mechanisms, decisions on how to forward and process
network traffics are taken by logically centralized controllers.
In Hybrid Software Define Network tradional and legacy
devices still use traditional protocols like ECMP (Equal Cost
Multipath), Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) in order to
forward packets, only Software Define Network device will
be controlled by centralized controller. These benefits make
Hybrid Software Define Network much attractive to use
though hybrid Software Define Network has its own different
challenges that is not exists in pure Software Define Network.
According to different analyzed in recent surveys in hybrid
SDN network coexistence of different control plane can be
source of security issues, as Hybrid Software Define Network
is also open to wide range of security issues that inherited from
SDN network and traditional network. In real time security id
one of the main and important topic in any types of network
specially in SDN and hSDN network as it is open and it is
centralized network and chance of attack might be increased.
Research and surveyed work in this field still need too many
work and there are many challenges to be solved it need many
more practical research to solve these challenges in order to
make Hybrid SDN much better and perfect for every field of
networking.
978-1-6654-9634-6/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: DELHI TECHNICAL UNIV. Downloaded on August 07,2022 at 05:22:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IV. HSDN AND QOS
In today’s network supporting end to end quality of
services is a big issue and it is an ongoing problem so
Researcher have proposed different solution to solve Quality
of Service limitation of today’s networking models, several of
these solutions may failed or either not implemented properly
If we define Quality of service it is a skill of providing
required services for a selected network traffic in a network as
the key objective of Quality of services is providing
precedence with Quality of Service restrictions (bandwidth,
loss, delay and jitter) but not limited to these characteristics.
To satisfy Quality of Services requirements for different
applications SDN provide Open control interface in order to
support flexible network traffic scheduling as it is a perfect
way to satisfy Quality of Service requirement.
Bi et al. [33] They proposed a scheme that is not only
focusing on guarantees of Quality of Services of industrial
services but their scheme also focus on an efficient resource
bandwidth utilization through traffic load balancing in
SDN/OSPF hybrid network. In order to improve QoS for
industrial application they propose and intelligent QoS aware
forwarding strategy by using SPMC (Single Path Minimum
Cost) forwarding scheme and K path partition algorithm for
multipath forwarding. For intelligent traffic forwarding they
design hybrid network search path (HNSP). In HSNP, they
utilize SPMC( Single Oath Minimum Cost) forwarding if the
network load is light in OSPF domain, they utilized KPF( K
Path Forwarding) algorithm for overloaded links to search
multiple path for traffic forwarding. There result shows that
their approach guarantees Quality of Services requirements
for Hybrid Industrial Internet services, also they efficiently
used Open Shortest Path First(OSPF) link bandwidth and
balancing traffic load distribution in SDN/OSPF hybrid
industrial internet.
Huang et al. [34] for Quality of Services optimization in
hybrid Software Define Network they propose near optimal
traffic control method. They implemented Flow split ratio
approach via locating the Open Flow group bucket
restrictions. With open source traffic datasets, they evaluate
their proposed method, and their simulation result show that
through this method we can achieve an important
improvement in network Quality of Services performance. To
achieve and improve QoS performance like delay, jitter, loss,
and link utilization of network (minimizing delay, balancing
link utilization and maximizing throughput ) of the network in
real time network.
Line et al. [35] proposed QAR(Quality of Services award
adaptive routing) in a multilayer hierarchical SDN network.
They used distributed hierarchical control plane architecture
in large Software Define network for minimizing signaling
delay through three level strategy of controllers (Super,
domain and slave), with the help of RL(Reinforcement
Learning) and Quality of Services provisioning packet
forwarding they proposes QAR( Quality of Services aware
Adaptive Routing), their result confirm that QAR provides
fast convergences and overtakes the existing learning solution
with Quality of Services provisioning facilitating practical
deployment of SDN in large scale network. QAR algorithm is
proposed by the examination of action policy, long term
revenue, quality functions and system model with reward
functions. Specially to realize efficient adaptive QoS
654
 Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2022)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP22AWO-ART; ISBN: 978-1-6654-9634-6
provisioning routing they introduce with MDP (Markov
Decision Process) with QoS aware reward function.
Xu et al. [36] To optimize Quality of services for
deployment of hybrid Software Define Network under
economical constriction they propose heuristic algorithm and
proved the approximate factor of l-le. They applied
randomized rounding mechanism and depth first search
methor for throughput maximization. They show that both
simulation algorithms and analysis can obtain an important
performance improvement and perform much better than
other theoretical cases. there results show that it helps to
improve throughput around 40% compared to other scheme
and there proposed routing algorithm is able to improve
throughput of the network around 31% compared to ECMP
(Equal Cost Multipath) in Hybrid SDN network.
Mondel et al. [37] they explore problem of Quality of
Services aware data flow management in existence of
mixed flows, as this is a Network hard problem they proposed
game theory based mixed Data flow management structure,
their method has the ability of warranting 24%-47% increase
in throughput of the network and can reduce network delay by
77%-98%.
Galan et al. [38] They solve two optimization problem
load balance of traffic and network power consumption
reduction Their simulation result show which HSLA (Hybrid
Spreading Load Algorithm) overtake other methods that
challenge one objective only either saving of network power
consumption or traffic load balancing.
Guo et al. [39] Their aim was to find best migration system
for the traditional routers to migrate to Software Define
Network enabled routers that how many routers to migrate to
SDN and to decide where to migrate, they propose heuristic
algorithm for migration structure for the routers that gets
maximum benefit from Traffic Engineering perspective. They
evaluate their algorithm by comparing to static migration
algorithm and greedy migration algorithm and conducting
simulation experiments, there result shows that genetic
algorithm is performing very well compared to other
techniques in case of properly deployed migration of 40% of
router can obtains most of the benefits.
Lin et al. [40] They propose Hybrid Software define
network architecture by using Spanning Tree Protocol as they
propose Simulated Annealing base Quality of Services aware
Routing (SAQR) algorithm that has the ability to change
weight of bandwidth and loss rate of delay to find best path
for Quality of Services requirements, as they calculate their
projected algorithm in a hybrid Software Define Network that
runs different application with multiple Quality of Services
requirements, Their results show that this algorithm perform
much better than other related work MINA in terms of ration
of delay, loss and bandwidth with 88%, 90.8% and 86.5% of
flows meeting their respective Quality of Services
requirements.
Chienhung et al. [41] they propose hybrid Software Define
Network architecture that determine presence of traditional
network switch using Spanning Tree protocols. They allow
open flow Switch to collaborate with traditional switch
through using learning bridge protocol without requiring any
changes in traditional switches, by using this features of SDN
network Software Define Network application can find
routing path according to Quality of Service requirements and
Current network Status.
978-1-6654-9634-6/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: DELHI TECHNICAL UNIV. Downloaded on August 07,2022 at 05:22:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Louche et al. [42] proposed geographical routing protocol
for vehicular networks with clustering approachs.to send date
through selecting best rely it takes three different standard:
duration between vehicles, vehicle load, communication error
log. This approach allows selection of the most reliable
vehicle by ensuring connection availability and avoiding
communication problems. When hybrid control layers find
next eligible device, data layer is in charge of sending and
dividing the data. there model result shows that with respect
of packet drops, throughout and average routing overhead,
there proposed scheme achieves good performance.
Sanchez et al. [43] They developed MILP (Mixed Integer
Linear Programming) optimization Model and their aim was
to minimize routing and deployment cost and to maximized
controlled traffic in the Software Define network, as they
focus on deployments of software define network devices in
Hybrid Software Define Network incrementally. There result
shows that this method improves the Quality of traffic and rate
that managed by Software Define Network model, as they
proposed Genetic Algorithm as an execution to achieve
comparable performance to the propose MILP ( Mixed Integer
Linear Programming) model, they showed that Genetic
Algorithm is much scalable and strong than Mixed Integer
Linear Programming model as traffic volume rises though
improving percentage of Software Define Network flows up
to 37%.
Siew et al. [44] First in the networking domain they
summarize generic work flow for Machine Learning, then
from perspective of Machine Learning they study the
Problematic implementation of SDN in legacy network and
they propose Markov Decision process and Reinforcement
Learning Techniques for the deployment problem in Software
Define Network. They propose basic workflow of Machine
Learning in networking area to formulate Hybrid Software
Define Network deployment using Markov Decision process
in legacy network, further for model construction and
validation Q learning or SARSA technique of reinforcement
learning can be used.
Guo et al. [45] They propose RL (Reinforcement
Learning) based approach in hybrid Software Define Network
to achieve load balancing link they address traffic changing
dynamically and learns traffic splitting agent to create direct
link between traffic splitting and traffic demands, as traffic
splitting agent is designed to learn offline by manipulating
Reinforcement Learning, they emulate their work in different
topologies and real traffic so there evaluation shows that this
method can achieve similar network performance and
performs dominance in a fast generation routing schemes.
Table 1 shows literature of the most significant related
work Quality of Services and Traffic Engineering (TE) in
Hybrid ssoftware Define Networking .
655
 Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2022)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP22AWO-ART; ISBN: 978-1-6654-9634-6

Table 1
Traffic Engineering and Quality of Service in Hybrid SDN

Paper Title /year Method Analyze and Result Conclusion

[33] Intelligent Quality of K Path partition They proposed a scheme that is not only They proposed Quality of Services Aware Forwarding
Services aware traffic algorithm focusing on guarantees of Quality of strategy by adopting K path partition algorithm and
forwarding for Services of industrial services but their SPMC (single path minimum cost) algorithm for
SDN/OSPF industrial Single path minimum scheme also focus on and efficient resource improvement of industrial application Quality of
internet cost forwarding bandwidth utilization through traffic load Services .There result shows that their scheme
balancing in SDN/OSPF industrial internet. guarantees Quality of Services requirements for Hybrid
2020 Industrial Internet services also they efficiently used
Open Shortest Path First link bandwidth and distribution
of load balance traffic in SDN/OSPF industrial internet.

[34] Intelligent traffic Deep Reinforcement To optimize Quality of Services in hybrid with open source traffic datasets they evaluate their
control for Quality of Learning (DRL) Software Define Network they propose near proposed method and their simulation result show that
Service optimization optimal traffic control method. They through this method we can achieve an important
in hybrid SDN implemented Flow split ratio approach via improvement in network Quality of Service
locating the Open Flow group bucket performance.
2021 restrictions.

[36] Incremental Heuristic Algorithm, For deployment of hybrid Software Define They show that both simulation algorithms and analysis
deployment and depth first search Networking under economical constriction can obtain an important performance improvement and
throughput method they propose heuristic algorithm and proved perform much better than other theoretical cases. there
maximization routing the approximate factor of l-le. They applied result show that it help to improve throughput around
for hybrid SDN randomized rounding mechanism and 40% compared to other scheme and there proposed
Depth first search method for throughput routing algorithm is able to improve throughput of the
2017 maximization. network around 31% compared to ECMP(Equal cost
multipath) in Hybrid Software Define network.

[38] On the tradeoff B/W Hybrid Spreading They solve two optimization problem load Their simulation result shows that HSLA(Hybrid
load balancing and Load Algorithm balance of traffic and network power Spreading Load Algorithm) overtakes other state of the
energy efficiency in (HSLA) consumption reduction . art methods which challenge one objective only either
hybrid network saving of network power consumption or traffic load
balancing
2021

[40] QoS aware routing in Simulated annealing They propose Hybrid Software Define Their results show that this algorithm perform much
Hybrid SDN network based QoS aware network architecture by using spanning tree better rather than other related work MINA in terms of
routing algorithm protocol as they propose simulated ration of delay, loss, bandwidth with 88%,90.8% and
2017 annealing bas Quality of Service aware 86.5% of flows meeting their respective Quality of
routing (SAQR) algorithm that has the Service requirements.
ability to change weight of bandwidth and
loss rate of delay to find best path for
Quality of Service requirements, as they
calculate their projected algorithm in a
hybrid SDN Network that runs different
application with multiple Quality of
Service requirements

[43] Hybrid Incremental Mixed Integer Linear They developed MILP ( Mixed Integer There result shows that this method improve the Quality
Deployment hSDN Programming(MILP) Linear Programming) optimization Model of traffic and rate that managed by Software Define
Devices and there aim was to minimize routing and network model, as they proposed Genetic Algorithm as
Genetic Algorithm deployment cost and to maximized an execution to achieve comparable performance to the
2021 (GA) controlled traffic in the Software Define propose MILP(Mixed Integer Linear Programming)
network, as they focus deployments of model and they showed that Genetic Algorithm is much
Software Define Network devices in Hybrid more scalable and strong than the MILP(Mixed Integer
software define network incrementally. Linear Programming) model as traffic volume rises
though improving percentage of Software Define
Network Flows up to 37%.

[45] Hybrid SDN RL (Reinforcement They propose RL (Reinforcement As they emulate their work in different topologies and
deployment using Learning) Learning) based approach in hybrid real traffic so there evaluation shows that this method can
Machine learning Software Define network to achieve load achieve similar network performance and performs
balancing link they address traffic changing dominance in a fast generation routing schemes
2021 dynamically and learns traffic splitting
agent to create direct link between traffic
splitting and traffic demand, as traffic
splitting agents designed to learn offline by
manipulating Reinforcement Learning.

978-1-6654-9634-6/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE 656

Authorized licensed use limited to: DELHI TECHNICAL UNIV. Downloaded on August 07,2022 at 05:22:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2022)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP22AWO-ART; ISBN: 978-1-6654-9634-6

[44] Hybrid SDN Reinforcement First in the networking domain they
deployment using ML learning Techniques summarize generic workflow for Machin
Learning , then from the perspective of
2021 Machine Learning they study problem of
implementing of software define network in
tradional network, they proposed Markov
Decision process and Reinforcement
learning techniques for the deployment
problem in software define network.
[39] Incremental Heuristic algorithm Their aim was to find best migration system
Deployment for for the traditional routers to migrate to
traffic engineering in Software define network enabled routers
hybrid SDN that how many routers to migrate to
software define network and to decide
2015 where to migrate, they propose heuristic
algorithm for migration structure for the
routers that gets maximum benefit from
Traffic Engineering perspective.
They propose basic work flow of Machine Learning in
networking area to formulate Hybrid Software define
network deployment using Markov Decision process in
legacy network, further for model construction and
validation Q learning or SARSA technique of
reinforcement learning can be used.
they evaluate their algorithm by comparing to Static
migration algorithm and greedy migration algorithm and
conducting simulation experiments, there result shows
that genetic algorithm is performing very well compared
to other techniques in case of properly deployed
migration of 40% of router can obtains most of the
benefits.

In recent years many developing applications like video

conferencing, distance learning and many other applications
are leading the networking field in the world. Even with the
advantage of these Quality of Service needy application for
end users it still need work and it still undergo from some
issue regarding Quality of Services or Quality of Experience
requests to the clients, Quality Of Services between user and
service providers mostly relies on Service Level Agreement
(SLA) this method work very good for the best efforts services
and does not support liner granular traffic control though
there are others application which there Flows are sensitive
to delay, bandwidth ,jitter like online gaming, VOIP and video
conferencing thus requiring special handling technique for
these types of applications. Quality of Service are basically
applied into two different ways: Hard QoS and Soft QoS.
Hard Quality of Service method are used to guarantees the
Quality of Service requirement for connection but has
resource limitations, Integrated Services (IntServ) is an
example of hard Quality of Services, other Quality of Service
approach is Soft Quality of Service method that is not strict as
much as hard Quality of Service method, differentiated
services Diffserv is an example of Soft Quality of Service
method.
V. CONCLUSION
The main problem of today network is lack of Quality of
Services guarantee as supporting end to end support system is
an ongoing problem of today network, Software Define
Network come to solve this problem by decoupling of control
layer and data layers that provide dynamicity and flexibility to
improve network throughout and link utilization of the
network and control layer centralization make traffic
engineering much easier task. Software Define Network has
lots of benefit compare to legacy network but still deployment
of pure Software Define Network is not an easy work and it
has its own limitation and some challenges like financial
challenge, technical challenge, security Issue, downtime fears
in the network and quality of service degradation. These
challenges slow down deployment of fully SDN and cause the
birth of Hybrid Software Define Network (hSDN) which
legacy devices coexist with SDN devices and take advantage
of both legacy and Software Define Network robustness and
programmability. In this review paper we aim to make a
picture of Quality of Services in Hybrid SDN network that
motivated in literature, we organize related research and
surveys studies according to categories in a way which Quality
of Service can benefit the most from the concept of Hybrid
Software Define Network.
REFERENCES
[1] Khorsandroo, Sajad, et al. "Hybrid SDN evolution: A comprehensive
survey of the state-of-the-art." Computer Networks 192 (2021): 107981.
[2] Sinha, Yash, and K. Haribabu. "A survey: Hybrid sdn." Journal of
Network and Computer Applications 100 (2017): 35-55.
[3] Huang, Xinli, et al. "A survey of deployment solutions and optimization
strategies for hybrid SDN networks." IEEE Communications Surveys &
Tutorials 21.2 (2018): 1483-1507.
[4] W. Xia, Y. Wen, C. H. Foh, D. Niyato, and H. Xie, “A survey on
software-defined networking,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials,
vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 27–51, 2015.
[5] S. Jain, A. Kumar, S. Mandal, J. Ong, L. Poutievski, A. Singh, S.
Venkata, J. Wanderer, J. Zhou, M. Zhu, et al., “B4: Experience with a
globally-deployed software defined WAN,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer
Communication Review, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 3–14, 2013.
[6] C.-Y. Hong, S. Kandula, R. Mahajan, M. Zhang, V. Gill, M. Nanduri,
and R. Wattenhofer, “Achieving high utilization with software-driven
WAN,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 43, no.
4, pp. 15–26, 2013.
[7] S. Natarajan, A. Ramaiah, and M. Mathen, “A software defined cloud-
gateway automation system using OpenFlow,” in Proc. IEEE International
Conference on Cloud Networking (CloudNet), pp. 219– 226, IEEE, 2013.
[8] A. S. Thyagaturu, A. Mercian, M. P. McGarry, M. Reisslein, and W.
Kellerer, “Software defined optical networks (SDONs): A comprehensive
survey,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 18, no. 4, pp.
2738–2786, 2016.
[9] Mohammad Banikazemi, David Olshefski, Anees Shaikh, John Tracey,
Guohui Wang, Meridian: an SDN platform for cloud network services, IEEE
Commun. Mag. 51 (2) (2013) 120–127.
[10] Joe Mambretti, Jim Chen, Fei Yeh, Next generation clouds, the
chameleon cloud testbed, and software defined networking (sdn), in: 2015
International Conference on Cloud Computing Research and Innovation
(ICCCRI), IEEE, 2015, pp. 73–79.
[11] Tao Wang, Fangming Liu, Hong Xu, An efficient online algorithm for
dynamic SDN controller assignment in data center networks, IEEE/ACM
Trans. Netw. 25 (5) (2017) 2788–2801.
[12] L Velasco, A Asensio, JLl Berral, A Castro, Víctor López, Towards a
carrier SDN: An example for elastic inter-datacenter connectivity, Opt.
Express 22 (1) (2014) 55–61.
[13] Jing Liu, Jie Li, Guochu Shou, Yihong Hu, Zhigang Guo, Wei Dai, SDN
based load balancing mechanism for elephant flow in data center networks,
in: 2014 International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia
Communications (WPMC), IEEE, 2014, pp. 486–490.
[14] Sushant Jain, Alok Kumar, Subhasree Mandal, Joon Ong, Leon
Poutievski, Arjun Singh, Subbaiah Venkata, Jim Wanderer, Junlan Zhou,
Min Zhu, Jon Zolla, Urs Hölzle, Stephen Stuart, Amin Vahdat, B4:
Experience with a globallydeployed software defined wan, in: Proceedings
of the ACM SIGCOMM 2013 Conference on SIGCOMM,
SIGCOMM’13,2013,pp.3–14,.

978-1-6654-9634-6/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE 657

Authorized licensed use limited to: DELHI TECHNICAL UNIV. Downloaded on August 07,2022 at 05:22:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2022)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP22AWO-ART; ISBN: 978-1-6654-9634-6

[15] Xin Jin, Yiran Li, Da Wei, Siming Li, Jie Gao, Lei Xu, Guangzhi Li, [36] Xu, Hongli, et al. "Incremental deployment and throughput
Wei Xu, Jennifer Rexford, Optimizing bulk transfers with software-defined maximization routing for a hybrid SDN." IEEE/ACM Transactions on
optical WAN, in: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGCOMM Conference, Networking 25.3 (2017): 1861-1875.
2016, pp. 87–100. [37] A. Mondal, S. Misra, FlowMan: QoS-aware dynamic data flow
[16] Chi-Yao Hong, Subhasree Mandal, Mohammad Al-Fares, Min Zhu, management in software-defined networks, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 38
Richard Alimi, Kondapa Naidu B., Chandan Bhagat, Sourabh Jain, Jay (7) (2020) 1366–1373.
Kaimal, Shiyu Liang, Kirill Mendelev, Steve Padgett, Faro Rabe, Saikat Ray, [38] Galàn-Jimènez, Jaime, et al. "On the tradeoff between load balancing
Malveeka Tewari, Matt Tierney, Monika Zahn, Jonathan Zolla, Joon Ong, and energy-efficiency in hybrid IP/SDN networks." 2021 12th International
Amin Vahdat, B4 and after: Managing hierarchy, partitioning, and Conference on Network of the Future (NoF). IEEE, 2021.
asymmetry for availability and scale in google’s software-defined WAN, in:
Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on [39] Guo, Yingya, et al. "Incremental deployment for traffic engineering in
Data Communication, SIGCOMM ’18, 2018, pp. 74–87, hybrid SDN network." 2015 IEEE 34th international performance computing
and communications conference (IPCCC). IEEE, 2015.
[17] Salvatore Costanzo, Laura Galluccio, Giacomo Morabito, Sergio
[40] Lin, Chienhung, Kuochen Wang, and Guocin Deng. "A QoS-aware
Palazzo, Software defined wireless networks: Unbridling SDNs, in: 2012
European Workshop on Software Defined Networking, IEEE, 2012, pp.1-6. routing in SDN hybrid networks." Procedia Computer Science 110 (2017):
242-249.
[18] Roberto Riggio, Mahesh K Marina, Julius Schulz-Zander, Slawomir
[41] Chienhung Lin, Kuochen Wang, Guocin Deng, A QoS-aware routing in
Kuklinski, Tinku Rasheed, Programming abstractions for software-defined
wireless networks, IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manag. 12 (2) (2015) 146–162. SDN hybrid networks, Procedia Comput. Sci. 110 (2017) 242–249, 14th
International Conference on Mobile Systems and Pervasive Computing
[19] MARKETSANDMARKETS, Software defined networking market by (MobiSPC 2017) / 12th International Conference on Future Networks and
SDN type (open SDN, SDN via overlay, and SDN via API), component Communications (FNC 2017) / Affiliated Workshops.
(solutions and services), end user (data centers, service providers, and
enterprises), and region - global forecast to 2023, 2019, [42] Lylia Alouache, Nga Nguyen, Makhlouf Aliouat, Rachid Chelouah,
HSDN-GRA: A hybrid software-defined networking-based geographic
[20] N. McKeown, T. Anderson, H. Balakrishnan, G. Parulkar, L. Peterson, routing protocol with multi-agent approach, Int. J. Commun. Syst. 33 (15)
J. Rexford, S. Shenker, and J. Turner, “OpenFlow: enabling innovation in (2020) e4521.
campus networks,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review,
vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 69–74, 2008. [43]Cespedes-Sanchez, Pedro, et al. "Hybrid Incremental Deployment of
HSDN Devices." IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management
[21] S. Vissicchio, L. Vanbever, and O. Bonaventure, “Opportunities and (2021).
research challenges of hybrid software defined networks,” ACM SIGCOMM
Computer Communication Review, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 70–75, 2014. [44] Siew, Hong Wei, Saw Chin Tan, and Ching Kwang Lee. "Hybrid SDN
Deployment Using Machine Learning." Computational Science and
[22] L Velasco, A Asensio, JLl Berral, A Castro, Víctor López, Towards a Technology. Springer, Singapore, 2021. 215-225.
carrier SDN: An example for elastic inter-datacenter connectivity, Opt.
Express 22 (1) (2014) 55–61. [45] Guo, Yingya, et al. "Traffic Engineering in Hybrid Software Defined
Network via Reinforcement Learning." Journal of Network and Computer
[23] Stefano Vissicchio, Laurent Vanbever, and Olivier Bonaventure. Applications 189 (2021): 103116.
Opportunities and research challenges of hybrid software defined networks.
ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 44(2):70–75, 2014.
[24] Yash Sinha, K Haribabu, et al. A survey: hybrid sdn. Journal of Network
and Computer Applications, 100:35 55, 2017.
[25] Matthew Caesar, Donald Caldwell, Nick Feamster, Jennifer Rexford,
Aman Shaikh, and Jacobus van der Merwe. Design and implementation of a
routing control platform. In Proceedings of the 2nd conference on
Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation-Volume 2,
pages 15–28. USENIX Association, 2005.
[26] Cheng Jin, Cristian Lumezanu, Qiang Xu, Zhi-Li Zhang, and Guofei
Jiang. Telekinesis: Controlling legacy switch routing with openflow in
hybrid networks. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCOMM Symposium on
Software Defined Networking Research, pages 1–7, 2015.
[27] N. McKeown, T. Anderson, H. Balakrishnan, G. Parulkar, L. Peterson,
J. Rexford, S. Shenker, J. Turner, Openow: Enabling innovation in campus
networks, SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 38 (2) (2008) 69-74.
[28] S. J. Vaughan-Nichols, Openow: The next generation of the network?,
IEEE Computer 44 (8) (2011) 13{15.
[29] W. Xia, Y. Wen, C.H. Foh, D. Niyato, H. Xie, A survey on software-
defined networking, IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 17 (1) (2015) 27–51.
[30] SDN architecture, Tech. rep., Open Networking Foundation (ONF)
(June 2014).
[31] D. Kreutz, F. Ramos, P. Verissimo, C. Rothenberg, S. Azodolmolky,
S. Uhlig, Software-defined networking: A comprehensive survey, Proc.
IEEE 103 (1) (2015) 14–76.
[32] Mehraban, Samiullah, Komil B. Vora, and Darshan Upadhyay. "Deploy
multi protocol label switching (mpls) using virtual routing and forwarding
(vrf)." 2018 2nd International Conference on Trends in Electronics and
Informatics (ICOEI). IEEE, 2018.
[33]Bi, Yuanguo, et al. "Intelligent quality of service aware traffic
forwarding for software-defined networking/open shortest path first hybrid
industrial internet." IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 16.2 (2019)
[34] Huang, Xiaohong, Man Zeng, and Kun Xie. "Intelligent traffic control
for QoS optimization in hybrid SDNs." Computer Networks 189 (2021)
[35] S. Lin, I.F. Akyildiz, P. Wang, M. Luo, QoS-aware adaptive routing in
multi-layer software defined networks: a reinforcement learning approach,
in: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC),
2016, pp. 25–33.

978-1-6654-9634-6/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE 658

Authorized licensed use limited to: DELHI TECHNICAL UNIV. Downloaded on August 07,2022 at 05:22:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.