Pros of Ryu

• More active development and maintenance
• Larger community and contributor base
• Better documentation and examples

Cons of Ryu

• Potentially more complex due to additional features
• May have a steeper learning curve for beginners
• Larger codebase to navigate

Code Comparison

Ryu:

from ryu.base import app_manager
from ryu.controller import ofp_event
from ryu.controller.handler import CONFIG_DISPATCHER, MAIN_DISPATCHER
from ryu.controller.handler import set_ev_cls
from ryu.ofproto import ofproto_v1_3

class SimpleSwitch13(app_manager.RyuApp):
    OFP_VERSIONS = [ofproto_v1_3.OFP_VERSION]

Both repositories appear to be the same project, as Ryu is the main repository for the Ryu SDN Framework. The comparison provided above is based on the assumption that there might be differences between the two repositories, but in reality, they are likely identical or very similar. The code snippet shown is a typical example of how to create a simple OpenFlow 1.3 switch using the Ryu framework, which would be the same for both repositories.

Pros of OVS

• More mature and widely adopted in production environments
• Offers high-performance virtual switching capabilities
• Supports a broader range of networking protocols and features

Cons of OVS

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity
• Requires more system resources compared to Ryu
• Less suitable for rapid prototyping or educational purposes

Code Comparison

Ryu (Python-based SDN controller):

from ryu.base import app_manager
from ryu.controller import ofp_event
from ryu.controller.handler import CONFIG_DISPATCHER, MAIN_DISPATCHER
from ryu.controller.handler import set_ev_cls
from ryu.ofproto import ofproto_v1_3

class SimpleSwitch13(app_manager.RyuApp):
    OFP_VERSIONS = [ofproto_v1_3.OFP_VERSION]

OVS (C-based virtual switch):

#include <config.h>
#include <openvswitch/vlog.h>
#include "bridge.h"
#include "openvswitch/ofp-actions.h"
#include "openvswitch/ofp-msgs.h"

VLOG_DEFINE_THIS_MODULE(bridge);

The code snippets highlight the different approaches: Ryu focuses on SDN controller implementation in Python, while OVS is a C-based virtual switch with lower-level networking capabilities.

Pros of Mininet

• Simulates entire networks on a single machine, allowing for easy testing and development
• Supports custom topologies and can emulate various network conditions
• Widely used in academic and research environments for SDN experimentation

Cons of Mininet

• Primarily focused on network emulation, not a full SDN controller like Ryu
• May require additional tools or controllers for complete SDN functionality
• Limited scalability for very large network simulations

Code Comparison

Mininet (Python):

from mininet.net import Mininet
from mininet.topo import SingleSwitchTopo

net = Mininet(topo=SingleSwitchTopo(k=4))
net.start()
net.pingAll()
net.stop()

Ryu (Python):

from ryu.base import app_manager
from ryu.controller import ofp_event
from ryu.controller.handler import set_ev_cls, CONFIG_DISPATCHER

class SimpleSwitch(app_manager.RyuApp):
    @set_ev_cls(ofp_event.EventOFPSwitchFeatures, CONFIG_DISPATCHER)
    def switch_features_handler(self, ev):
        # Handle switch features

Mininet focuses on network emulation and topology creation, while Ryu is designed for implementing SDN controllers and applications. Mininet is ideal for testing network configurations, while Ryu excels in developing custom SDN control logic.