1 / 15

Virtualization Project Status

Virtualization Project Status. Gautam D. Bhanage, George Hadjichristofi, Ivan Seskar WINLAB. Last reported project status. Compared space and time separation approaches for channel multiplexing with testbed virtualization Evaluated the performance of UML as a testbed virtualization platform.

jbump
Download Presentation

Virtualization Project Status

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Virtualization Project Status Gautam D. Bhanage, George Hadjichristofi, Ivan Seskar WINLAB

  2. Last reported project status • Compared space and time separation approaches for channel multiplexing with testbed virtualization • Evaluated the performance of UML as a testbed virtualization platform

  3. Current Efforts • Frequency Division Multiplexing (FDM) based virtualization • Previous study used UML for FDM • Extend comparison with other platforms • Design for a virtualized platform for ORBIT • Understand requirements • Design proposal

  4. Platform Comparison For FDM Virtualization

  5. FDM Virtualization - Goals • Goals: • Compare existing platform virtualization approaches (UML, Xen, VMWare) • Determine the most suitable scheme for testbed virtualization prototype • Metrics: • Comparison is based on throughput, , jitter, and cross coupling characteristics

  6. FDM Virtualization - Status • Added the OpenVZ node virtualization scheme • Each node has two virtual private servers (VPS) which are mapped to two physical interfaces. • OpenVZ provides virtual network interfaces (venet) • Driver setting controllable from host operating system only.

  7. OpenVZ – Setup • Each virtualized node runs 2 VPS’s • Channel rate is fixed at 36M and we operate in 802.11a • Madwifi driver 0.9.4

  8. Some Results – 1 (Throughput) Average throughput with different setups when offered load is varied from 5 to 50Mbps. Packet size and tx rate are constant at 1470bytes and 36M respectively Average throughput performance with varying packet sizes. Channel rate and offered load are kept constant at 36M and 50Mbps respectively

  9. Some Results – 2 (Isolation) Transient response evaluation with both experiments running on OpenVZ. Experiment 1 pumps a constant 20Mbps while experiment 2 varies offered load from 5 to 1000Mbps Evaluation of cross coupling across experiments. Experiment 1 runs a constant offered load while experiment 2 varies from 5 to 1000Mbps

  10. OpenVZ - Preliminary Conclusions • OpenVZ works with a lower overhead and scales well • It also provides excellent isolation and we see little or no cross coupling making it ideal for deployment on our testbed. • Further comparison with a para-virtualization based platform like Xen necessary

  11. FDM Architecture • We propose an initial design for deployment with OpenVZ • Need a systematic control architecture that allows experimenters to setup and work with a virtualized testbed without interfering with each other.

  12. Software Architecture For FDM Virtualization

  13. Software Architecture

  14. Linux Kernel User Space Wireless Subsystem Agent Regulatory Domain Regulatory Database cfg80211 Wireless Driver 1 Wireless Driver 2

  15. Conclusions/Future Work • OpenVZ provides a sturdy platform for virtualization prototyping • Need a more detailed design with identification of critical components for deployment

More Related