A Comprehensive Review on Service Function Chaining in Network Environments
Subject Areas : Computer Networks
1 - Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Shahrekord Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrekord, Iran.
Keywords: Service Function Chaining, Networking, Virtualization, Orchestration, Network Function Virtualization,
Abstract :
Service Function Chaining (SFC) has emerged as a critical technology in networking environments to provide efficient and flexible service delivery. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the current state of research and development in the field of SFC, covering key concepts, architectures, challenges, and trends. We first introduce the concept of SFC and its importance in modern networking environments. We then discuss different SFC architectures and their advantages and drawbacks. Furthermore, we analyze the challenges and opportunities in the deployment of SFC in real-world scenarios. Finally, we discuss the emerging trends and future directions in the field of SFC. This review aims to provide researchers and practitioners with a deeper understanding of the current landscape of SFC and guide future research efforts in this area.
ETSI. "Network Functions Virtualization (NFV); Architectural Framework (ETSI GS NFV 002 V1.2.1)." 2013.
Kreutz, D., Ramos, F. M. V., Veríssimo, P. E., Rothenberg, C. E., Azodolmolky, S., and Uhlig, S. "Software-Defined Networking: A Comprehensive Survey." Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 103, no. 1, 2015, pp. 14-76.
IETF. "Service Function Chaining (SFC) Architecture (RFC 7665)." 2015.
Jain, S., Kumar, A., Mandal, S., Ong, J., Poutievski, L., Singh, A., Vahdat, A., Bahl, P., and S. S. "B4: Experience with a Globally-deployed Software Defined WAN." ACM SIGCOMM, 2013.
Chowdhury, N. M. M. K., Boutaba, R., Aib, I., and Ayoubi, S. "VHCP: Virtual Home Carrier Gateway placement in the cloud." IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS), 2014.
Boyd, P., Lancaster, C., and Guo, Y. "Software-Defined Networking (SDN) and Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) Integration in a Real-time Decision-making Platform." IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, vol. 17, no. 4, 2020, pp. 2029-2042.
Cisco. "Service Function Chaining: Service Chaining in Provider Networks." 2019.
Lantz, B., Heller, B., McKeown, N., and Rexford, J. "A network in a laptop: rapid prototyping for software-defined networks." ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 43, no. 3, 2013, pp. 63-74.
Barr, J., Baudoin, G., Bognar, A., Ciciliano, F., Heijenk, G., Pascucci, F., and Skoldstrom, P. "Description and Definition of Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV) Management and Orchestration." ETSI GS NFV-MAN 001 V1.1.1, 2019.
Nakagawa, E., Tomida, T., and Banerjee, A. N. "A Service Function Chaining Framework for Software-Defined Networks." IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 56, no. 8, 2018, pp. 104-109.
Dhamdhere, A., Dovrolis, C., Feamster, N., Huffaker, B., and Gao, L. "A Longitudinal Study of Cloud Network Traffic Characteristics." ACM Internet Measurement Conference, 2014.
Jain, S., Kumar, A., Mandal, S., Ong, J., Poutievski, L., Singh, A., Subramanya, V. S., Vahdat, A., Jon Feldman, M., and Zhaogang Wang. "B4: Experience with a Globally-deployed Software Defined WAN." ACM SIGCOMM, 2013.
Kreutz, D., Ramos, F. M., Esteves Verissimo, P., Rothenberg, C. E., Azodolmolky, S., and Uhlig, S. "Software-Defined Networking: A Comprehensive Survey." Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 103, no. 1, 2015, pp. 14-76.
OASIS. "Topology and Orchestration Specification for Cloud Applications Version 1.0." 2016.
Surendran, A., Sibi, R. T., and Yavuz, A. A. "Software Defined Networking (SDN): An Architectural Framework for Virtualized Resource Management." IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 52, no. 4, 2014, pp. 168-175.
Check Point Software Technologies. "How Check Point's FireWall-1 implements network address translation." White Paper, 1994.
Cisco. "Service Function Chaining Design Guide." 2020.
Microsoft. "Azure Networking: What's new." Blog post, 2021.
Radhakrishnan, M., Cervino, J., and Chowdhury, K. R. "Firewall policy verification with Snort IDS." ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 37, no. 3, 2007, pp. 3-14.
Kang, D., Kim, D., and Jeon, S. "Network-based Attack Detection and Mitigation." IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, vol. 10, no. 4, 2019, pp. 611-623.)
|
Journal of Optimization in Soft Computing (JOSC) Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp: (31-36), June-2024 Journal homepage: https://sanad.iau.ir/journal/josc |
|
Paper Type (Review paper)
A Comprehensive Review on Service Function Chaining
in Network Environments
Pouya Khosravian Dehkordi1*
1. Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Shahrekord Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrekord, Iran.
Article Info |
| Abstract |
Article History: Received: 2024/03/17 Revised: 2024/06/05 Accepted: 2024/06/08
DOI: |
| Service Function Chaining (SFC) has emerged as a critical technology in networking environments to provide efficient and flexible service delivery. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the current state of research and development in the field of SFC, covering key concepts, architectures, challenges, and trends. We first introduce the concept of SFC and its importance in modern networking environments. We then discuss different SFC architectures and their advantages and drawbacks. Furthermore, we analyze the challenges and opportunities in the deployment of SFC in real-world scenarios. Finally, we discuss the emerging trends and future directions in the field of SFC. This review aims to provide researchers and practitioners with a deeper understanding of the current landscape of SFC and guide future research efforts in this area. |
Keywords: Service Function Chaining, Networking, Virtualization, Orchestration, Network Function Virtualization |
| |
*Corresponding Author’s Email Address: Khosravyan@gmail.com |
1. Introduction
Networking environments are becoming increasingly complex and dynamic, with the proliferation of diverse services and applications. Service Function Chaining (SFC)[3,7,10] has emerged as a key technology to enable the efficient delivery of services in such environments by defining the sequence of service functions that data packets must traverse. By chaining service functions together, SFC enables the creation of customized service paths tailored to specific requirements, leading to improved performance, flexibility, and scalability.
In recent years, there has been growing interest in the research and development of SFC, driven by the increasing demand for network virtualization, automation, and orchestration. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the current state of research and development in the field of SFC, covering key concepts, architectures, challenges, and trends. The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces the concept of SFC and its importance in networking environments. Section 3 discusses different SFC architectures and their advantages and drawbacks. Section 4 analyzes the challenges and opportunities in the deployment of SFC in real-world scenarios. Finally, Section 5 discusses the emerging trends and future directions in the field of SFC.
2. Service Function Chaining: Concepts and Importance
Service Function Chaining (SFC) is a networking technology that enables the sequential traversal of service functions by data packets to provide end-to-end services. A service function is a network function that performs specific tasks on data packets, such as firewalling [16, 19], load balancing, and encryption. By chaining service functions together, SFC allows for the creation of customized service paths tailored to specific requirements.
The importance of SFC in networking environments stems from its ability to improve service delivery, performance, and flexibility. Traditional networking architectures rely on static service paths that are predefined and inflexible, leading to suboptimal service delivery and resource utilization. In contrast, SFC enables dynamic service chaining based on real-time requirements, allowing for on-demand allocation of service functions and resources. This flexibility is critical in modern networking environments characterized by diverse services, applications, and traffic patterns [11].
Moreover, SFC enables the decoupling of service functions from the underlying network infrastructure, leading to improved scalability, manageability, and cost-effectiveness. By virtualizing service functions and orchestrating their deployment, SFC minimizes the reliance on dedicated hardware appliances and facilitates the introduction of new services and functionalities. This decoupling also enables service providers to offer customized service chains to meet the specific needs of their customers, leading to enhanced service differentiation and customer satisfaction.
Overall, SFC plays a crucial role in the evolution of networking architectures towards virtualization, automation, and orchestration. By defining service chains dynamically based on real-time requirements, SFC enables more efficient and flexible service delivery, improving the overall performance and user experience in networking environments.
3. SFC Architectures: Advantages and Drawbacks
Several SFC architectures have been proposed in the literature to implement service function [17] chaining in networking environments. These architectures vary in terms of their design principles, deployment models, and scalability. In this section, we discuss some of the most common SFC architectures, highlighting their advantages and drawbacks.
3.1. Overlay SFC Architecture
Overlay SFC architectures involve the deployment of virtualized service functions on top of the existing network infrastructure. In this architecture, service function instances are abstracted from the underlying physical network, allowing for greater flexibility and scalability. Overlay SFC architectures leverage virtualization technologies, such as network function virtualization (NFV)[1,6,9] and software-defined networking (SDN)[2,4,8,12,13,14,15], to instantiate and orchestrate service functions dynamically.
One of the key advantages of overlay SFC architectures is their capability to decouple service functions from the underlying network infrastructure, leading to improved manageability and agility. By virtualizing service functions, overlay SFC architectures enable on-demand allocation and deployment of service functions, eliminating the need for dedicated hardware appliances. This virtualization also facilitates the chaining of heterogeneous service functions across different administrative domains, enhancing service flexibility and interoperability.
However, overlay SFC architectures also have some drawbacks, such as increased overhead and complexity. The additional layer of abstraction introduced by virtualized service functions can lead to performance degradation and resource inefficiency. Moreover, the heterogeneous nature of service functions and network environments can pose challenges in terms of interoperability, security, and quality of service. Despite these drawbacks, overlay SFC architectures remain a popular choice for implementing service function chaining in networking environments [18] due to their flexibility and scalability.
3.2. Underlay SFC Architecture
Underlay SFC architectures involve the integration of service functions into the underlying network infrastructure, leveraging dedicated hardware appliances or purpose-built devices. In this architecture, service functions are deployed as network devices or middleboxes, enabling the creation of service chains at the network level [20]. Underlay SFC architectures are commonly used in traditional networking environments where service functions are tightly coupled with network devices.
One of the key advantages of underlay SFC architectures is their efficiency and performance. By integrating service functions into the network infrastructure, underlay SFC architectures reduce the overhead associated with virtualization and orchestration, leading to improved throughput and latency. Moreover, the tight coupling of service functions with network devices enables more granular control and visibility, facilitating troubleshooting and monitoring.
However, underlay SFC architectures also have some drawbacks, such as limited flexibility and scalability. The static nature of service functions deployed as network devices can restrict the dynamic allocation and chaining of service functions, leading to suboptimal resource utilization and service delivery. Moreover, the dependence on dedicated hardware appliances can increase the cost and complexity of managing service functions.
Despite these drawbacks, underlay SFC architectures remain a viable option for implementing service function chaining in networking environments where performance and efficiency are critical. By leveraging purpose-built devices and network integration, underlay SFC architectures provide a more streamlined and deterministic approach to service delivery, ensuring high availability and reliability.
4. Challenges and Opportunities in SFC Deployment
The deployment of Service Function Chaining (SFC)[24,25] in real-world networking environments poses several challenges and opportunities. In this section, we analyze some of the key challenges and opportunities associated with the deployment of SFC and discuss potential solutions to address them.
4.1. Scalability
One of the primary challenges in SFC deployment is scalability, especially in large-scale networking environments with diverse services and traffic patterns. As the number of service functions and service chains increases, the complexity of managing and orchestrating them also grows, leading to scalability issues. Moreover, the dynamic nature of service chaining and the need for real-time adaptation further exacerbate scalability challenges.
To address scalability challenges in SFC deployment, researchers and practitioners have proposed several solutions, such as hierarchical service function chaining, load balancing, and parallel processing. Hierarchical service function chaining involves organizing service functions into hierarchical levels based on their functionalities and dependencies, enabling more efficient orchestration and management. Load balancing techniques distribute traffic across multiple service function instances to ensure optimal resource utilization and performance. Parallel processing techniques leverage the parallelism of modern hardware architectures to accelerate the processing of service functions and improve scalability.
4.2. Interoperability
Another challenge in SFC deployment is interoperability, especially in heterogeneous networking environments with diverse service functions and protocols. The lack of standardization and compatibility among service functions and network devices can hinder the seamless integration of service chains and the interoperability of different administrative domains. Moreover, the dynamic nature of service chaining and the need for real-time adaptation further complicate interoperability issues.
To address interoperability challenges in SFC deployment, researchers and practitioners have proposed several solutions, such as standardization, protocol mediation, and abstraction layers. Standardization efforts, such as the work of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), aim to define common protocols and interfaces for service function chaining, enabling interoperability among different service functions and network devices. Protocol mediation techniques translate and adapt protocols between different service functions and network devices to ensure seamless communication and interoperability. Abstraction layers provide a common interface for managing and orchestrating service functions, shielding the underlying complexity and heterogeneity.
4.3. Security
Security is a critical concern in SFC deployment, as service function chaining involves the processing of sensitive data and the enforcement of security policies. The dynamic nature of service chaining and the integration of virtualized service functions can introduce new security vulnerabilities and risks, such as data breaches, unauthorized access, and service disruptions. Moreover, the complexity of managing and orchestrating service functions across different administrative domains can further complicate security issues.
To address security challenges in SFC deployment, researchers and practitioners have proposed several solutions, such as encryption, authentication, and access control. Encryption techniques protect sensitive data by encoding it before transmission and decoding it upon reception, ensuring confidentiality and integrity. Authentication mechanisms verify the identities of users and service functions to prevent unauthorized access and tampering. Access control policies define the permissions and restrictions for accessing service functions and resources, ensuring compliance with security policies and regulations.
5. Emerging Trends and Future Directions in SFC
Service Function Chaining (SFC)[21,22,23] is a rapidly evolving technology with several emerging trends and future directions that are shaping the future of networking environments. In this section, we discuss some of the key emerging trends and future directions in SFC and their potential impact on the networking landscape.
5.1. Multi-Domain Service Function Chaining
Multi-domain service function chaining involves the chaining of service functions across multiple administrative domains and network boundaries. This trend is driven by the increasing demand for end-to-end services that span different service providers and network operators. Multi-domain service function chaining enables seamless service delivery and interoperability across diverse network environments, enhancing service flexibility and user experience.
To enable multi-domain service function chaining, researchers and practitioners are exploring new techniques and protocols for inter-domain coordination, policy enforcement, and service negotiation. Inter-domain coordination mechanisms facilitate the exchange of service chaining information and policies between different administrative domains, ensuring consistent service delivery and enforcement of security, quality of service, and service level agreements. Policy enforcement mechanisms enforce access control policies and service agreements across multiple domains, ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements and contractual obligations. Service negotiation mechanisms enable service providers and network operators to negotiate and establish service chains dynamically based on real-time requirements, enabling more personalized and flexible service delivery.
5.2. Service Function Virtualization
Service function virtualization involves the virtualization of service functions to decouple them from the underlying network infrastructure and enable dynamic instantiation and orchestration. This trend is driven by the increasing demand for network agility, scalability, and cost-effectiveness. Service function virtualization enables service providers and network operators to deploy and manage service functions more efficiently, leading to improved resource utilization and service delivery.
To enable service function virtualization, researchers and practitioners are exploring new virtualization techniques and architectures for service function instantiation, management, and orchestration. Virtualization techniques, such as containerization and microservices, enable the efficient deployment and scaling of service functions in virtualized environments. Virtualization architectures, such as cloud-native and edge computing, provide the infrastructure and platforms for hosting and managing virtualized service functions, enabling on-demand allocation and chaining. Orchestration frameworks, such as Kubernetes and OpenStack, automate the deployment and lifecycle management of virtualized service functions, ensuring efficient resource utilization and service availability.
5.3. Machine Learning and AI
Machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) are playing an increasingly important role in shaping the future of Service Function Chaining (SFC) by enabling intelligent service orchestration, optimization, and automation. Machine learning algorithms and AI models can analyze and learn from network data, traffic patterns, and service requirements to make informed decisions on service chaining and resource allocation. By leveraging machine learning and AI, service providers and network operators can optimize service delivery, improve performance, and reduce operational costs.
To enable machine learning and AI in SFC, researchers and practitioners are developing new algorithms and models for service orchestration, optimization, and automation. Machine learning algorithms, such as reinforcement learning and deep learning, can analyze and predict service requirements, traffic patterns, and system performance to optimize service chaining and resource allocation. AI models, such as neural networks and decision trees, can automate the decision-making process for service orchestration and management, enabling more efficient and adaptive service delivery.
6. Conclusion
Service Function Chaining (SFC) has emerged as a critical technology in networking environments to provide efficient and flexible service delivery. This paper has provided a comprehensive review of the current state of research and development in the field of SFC, covering key concepts, architectures, challenges, and trends. We have discussed different SFC architectures, their advantages and drawbacks, as well as the challenges and opportunities in the deployment of SFC in real-world scenarios. Furthermore, we have analyzed the emerging trends and future directions in the field of SFC, such as multi-domain service function chaining, service function virtualization, and machine learning and AI.
Overall, SFC plays a crucial role in the evolution of networking architectures towards virtualization, automation, and orchestration. By defining service chains dynamically based on real-time requirements, SFC enables more efficient and flexible service delivery, improving the overall performance and user experience in networking environments. The emerging trends and future directions in SFC are shaping the future of networking environments, leading to more intelligent, scalable, and cost-effective service delivery.
References
1. ETSI. "Network Functions Virtualization (NFV); Architectural Framework (ETSI GS NFV 002 V1.2.1)." 2013.
2. Kreutz, D., Ramos, F. M. V., Veríssimo, P. E., Rothenberg, C. E., Azodolmolky, S., and Uhlig, S. "Software-Defined Networking: A Comprehensive Survey." Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 103, no. 1, 2015, pp. 14-76.
3. IETF. "Service Function Chaining (SFC) Architecture (RFC 7665)." 2015.
4. Jain, S., Kumar, A., Mandal, S., Ong, J., Poutievski, L., Singh, A., Vahdat, A., Bahl, P., and S. S. "B4: Experience with a Globally-deployed Software Defined WAN." ACM SIGCOMM, 2013.
5. Chowdhury, N. M. M. K., Boutaba, R., Aib, I., and Ayoubi, S. "VHCP: Virtual Home Carrier Gateway placement in the cloud." IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS), 2014.
6. Boyd, P., Lancaster, C., and Guo, Y. "Software-Defined Networking (SDN) and Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) Integration in a Real-time Decision-making Platform." IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, vol. 17, no. 4, 2020, pp. 2029-2042.
7. Cisco. "Service Function Chaining: Service Chaining in Provider Networks." 2019.
8. Lantz, B., Heller, B., McKeown, N., and Rexford, J. "A network in a laptop: rapid prototyping for software-defined networks." ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 43, no. 3, 2013, pp. 63-74.
9. Barr, J., Baudoin, G., Bognar, A., Ciciliano, F., Heijenk, G., Pascucci, F., and Skoldstrom, P. "Description and Definition of Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV) Management and Orchestration." ETSI GS NFV-MAN 001 V1.1.1, 2019.
10. Nakagawa, E., Tomida, T., and Banerjee, A. N. "A Service Function Chaining Framework for Software-Defined Networks." IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 56, no. 8, 2018, pp. 104-109.
11. Dhamdhere, A., Dovrolis, C., Feamster, N., Huffaker, B., and Gao, L. "A Longitudinal Study of Cloud Network Traffic Characteristics." ACM Internet Measurement Conference, 2014.
12. Jain, S., Kumar, A., Mandal, S., Ong, J., Poutievski, L., Singh, A., Subramanya, V. S., Vahdat, A., Jon Feldman, M., and Zhaogang Wang. "B4: Experience with a Globally-deployed Software Defined WAN." ACM SIGCOMM, 2013.
13. Kreutz, D., Ramos, F. M., Esteves Verissimo, P., Rothenberg, C. E., Azodolmolky, S., and Uhlig, S. "Software-Defined Networking: A Comprehensive Survey." Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 103, no. 1, 2015, pp. 14-76.
14. OASIS. "Topology and Orchestration Specification for Cloud Applications Version 1.0." 2016.
15. Surendran, A., Sibi, R. T., and Yavuz, A. A. "Software Defined Networking (SDN): An Architectural Framework for Virtualized Resource Management." IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 52, no. 4, 2014, pp. 168-175.
16. Check Point Software Technologies. "How Check Point's FireWall-1 implements network address translation." White Paper, 1994.
17. Cisco. "Service Function Chaining Design Guide." 2020.
18. Microsoft. "Azure Networking: What's new." Blog post, 2021.
19. Radhakrishnan, M., Cervino, J., and Chowdhury, K. R. "Firewall policy verification with Snort IDS." ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 37, no. 3, 2007, pp. 3-14.
20. Kang, D., Kim, D., and Jeon, S. "Network-based Attack Detection and Mitigation." IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, vol. 10, no. 4, 2019, pp. 611-623.
21. Asaeda H, Matsuzono K, Hayamizu Y, HLAING HH, Ooka A. A Survey of Information-Centric Networking: The Quest for Innovation. IEICE Transactions on Communications. 2024 Jan 1;107(1):139-53.
22. Yukun S, Bo L, Juniin L, Haonan H, Xing Z, Jing P, Wenbo W. Computing power network: A survey. China Communications. 2024 Apr 9.
23. Karapantelakis A, Alizadeh P, Alabassi A, Dey K, Nikou A. Generative ai in mobile networks: a survey. Annals of Telecommunications. 2024 Feb;79(1):15-33.
24. Wang S, Yang L. A Survey of Service Function Chain Orchestration Based on Neural Network. In2023 IEEE 98th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2023-Fall) 2023 Oct 10 (pp. 1-5). IEEE.
25. Hu Y, Guo Y. Blockchain-Enabled Service Function Chain in 6G Networks: A Survey. In2023 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC Workshops) 2023 May 28 (pp. 446-451). IEEE.
Pouya Khosravian Dehkordi received the B.Eng. degree from Islamic Azad University, Najafabad branch, Iran, in 2005 and the M.S. degree from Islamic Azad University, Arak branch, Iran, in 2008. Since 2009, he is a faculty member of Islamic Azad University, Shahrekord branch, Iran. Also in 2020, he received the Ph.D. from Islamic Azad University, Yazd branch, Iran. His Ph.D. thesis deals with Service Function Chaining. His current research interests include Software Defined Networks, Service Function Chaining, Natural Language Processing, and Automata Theory.