In the current innovative network, to cope with the increased require- ments of customers, there is a rapid increase in the development of dierent protocols and applications. With such increase in networking technology, the security constraints are becoming more and more severe, reducing the accessibility to the actual network for implementing new protocols. This scenario forced for an urgent need of a technology, which can help the re- searchers to implement their developed protocols in the network without inuencing the production trac. This need resulted in a concept called network isolation. This is achieved by VLAN or SDN technologies. In this study, we investigate the performance of VLAN and an API of SDN in the context of establishing dynamic link, in switching setup. For such a link creation, dynamic VLAN (dVLAN) is used in the former case and OpenFLow protocol is used in the later scenario. The main focus in this study is to compare the dynamic behavior of both the protocols in layer-2 context by measuring network level performance metrics of each protocol. Some of the features like, vendor independency and software independency is taken into account while measuring the performance metrics. In order to evaluate the performance, an experimental testbed is implemented. The network level performance metric called protocol setup time is measured. It is the time taken by each protocol to setup an active link between two end-hosts. A two-tire network architecture is implemented with the mentioned features. From the analytical and statistical results obtained, OpenFlow re- sulted in performing relatively better when compared to dynamic VLANs. By carefully examining the protocol setup time of OpenFlow against dVLAN, OpenFlow took less time when compared to dVLAN resulting in faster exe- cution in enabling connectivity. On the other hand, the analytical study on the two protocols reects the simplicity exhibited by dVLAN over Open- Flow.

Le cloud computing est un modèle informatique donnant accès à un grand nombre de ressources de calcul et de stockage. Trois types de cloud existent, le cloud public, le cloud privé et le cloud hybride. Afin de proposer une solution cloud hybride, nous utilisons le protocole TRILL qui permet d'optimiser l'utilisation des ressources réseau d'une infrastructure. Cependant, TRILL ne permet pas d'interconnecter des data centers sans perdre l'indépendance de leur plan de contrôle. Pour modifier ce comportement, lequel implique la création d'un unique domaine de broadcast s'étendant sur tout le réseau, nous proposons, comme première contribution, une solution (MLTP) qui permet d'interconnecter des réseaux TRILL tout en les maintenant indépendants. Un autre élément manquant de TRILL est l'isolation des flux réseau. Notre seconde contribution consiste donc à trouver et implémenter une solution d'isolation des flux au sein de MLTP. Ce nouveau protocole (MLTP+VNT), permet d'avoir une solution de cloud hybride, mais elle possède deux désavantages. Le premier est la gestion des pannes. Certains éléments de MLTP+VNT, les Border RBridges (BRB), contiennent des informations nécessaires au routage inter-data center et lorsqu'ils tombent en panne, ces informations sont perdues. Pour éviter cela, nous avons, dans notre troisième contribution, modifié MLTP+VNT pour synchroniser les BRBs. Le second est l'obligation de n'utiliser que des réseaux MLTP+VNT pour réaliser un cloud hybride. Pour lever cette restriction, nous avons, dans notre quatrième contribution, conçu une passerelle entre un réseau TRILL, pour le cloud public, et un réseau OpenFlow, pour le cloud privé. / Cloud computing uses infrastructure with a lot of computing and storage resources. There are three types of cloud: Public cloud, Private cloud, and Hybrid cloud. In order to provide a hybrid cloud solution, we used as a base the TRILL protocol which optimizes the use of the data center infrastructure. However, TRILL cannot interconnect data centers as doing so will merge the data centers networks and each data center will lose its independence. Our first contribution is to change this behavior and we develop MLTP which allows to interconnect TRILL or MLTP network without merging them. Another functionality missing from TRILL is network isolation. To fill this lack, in our second proposal we add to MLTP a solution called VNT and we then have a new protocol called MLTP+VNT. In this protocol, each user traffic is isolated from one another. Therefore, MLTP+VNT allows to have a hybrid cloud environment. Nevertheless, it has two shortcomings. The first one is its “single” point of failure. As a matter of fact, MLTP+VNT uses a new type of nodes called Border RBridges which contains inter-data centers routing information. If a Border RBridge fails, then the information it contained is lost. In order to prevent this loss, we implement a method to synchronize the Border RBridges in our third contribution. The second shortcoming is the obligation to use MLTP+VNT in each network to form the hybrid cloud. To lift this limitation, we design and develop, in our fourth contribution, a bridge between a MLTP+VNT network and an OpenFlow network. This way, our solution allows to create a hybrid cloud environment with the MLTP+VNT solution in the public cloud and OpenFlow in the public cloud.