# SDN-Based Routing Framework for Elephant and Mice Flows Using Unsupervised Machine Learning
## 4 Results and Analysis of Experiment
### Results and Evaluation
The comparison of throughput was performed for the two types of flows. Figure 10 presents the throughput for elephant flows for the proposed approach and the Ryu controller. The findings show that the throughput provided by the proposed application outperforms that of the Ryu controller. For instance, for flow number 16, the result changes because the routing process is based on the type of flow and the ID of the cluster. Therefore, the type of representative flow for each cluster is determined precisely, which is not applied in the Ryu controller. Consequently, the route for the representative flow is selected in a particular cluster and then applied to all the elephant flows in that cluster. For flow number 22, the throughput of our application is about 88.2% superior to that of the Ryu controller for elephant flows, when the throughput measurement is executed for intervals of 0-40 s and has a bandwidth of 100 MB. Figure 9: Comparison Between the Proposed Method and the Ryu Controller With Respect to Throughput for the Two Types of Flows. On the other side, the throughput of mice flows is presented in Figure 11. It shows that both the proposed application and the Ryu controller provide the same throughput. It is interpreted by the fact that both of these methods use the shortest path for routing the mice flows. The measurement of mice throughput is run for interval 0-60 s with a bandwidth 100 KB. For the second parameter, which is bandwidth usage, Figure 12 shows that the performance of the proposed application is higher in most of the flows compared to the Ryu controller. The reasons behind that are (i) the use of a clustering process and (ii) the use of a developed Dijkstra algorithm. The low performance of the proposed method in flows 14 and 22 is because of the need to serve higher-priority flows. Figure 11: Comparison Between the Proposed Method and the Ryu Controller With Respect to Throughput for Mice Flows. Figure 10: Comparison Between the Proposed Method and the Ryu Controller With Respect to Throughput for Elephant Flows. The evaluation of the proposed mechanism for the second topology was accomplished by running two experiments to compare the performance of the Ryu controller and our proposed method. The comparison was based on the same parameters for the first topology. Figures 13 and 14 depict the throughput and bandwidth usage measurement provided by the proposed mechanism and the Ryu controller in the two experiments. It is clear from the charts of experiment 1 that the performance of the proposed method is better than that of the Ryu controller for the majority of flows for both parameters. However, as the number of flows increases, the performance of the proposed method is equal to or slightly less than that of the controller. In experiment 2, as shown in the charts of the aforementioned figures, the throughput and bandwidth provided by the proposed mechanism are improved compared to those by the Ryu controller. Consequently, the performance of the proposed mechanism is enhanced for 70% of the flows. Nevertheless, compared to the performance of the Ryu controller, the performance of the proposed application declines for the remaining 30% of the flows. The reason behind this reduction in performance is the need to serve higher-priority flows. Figure 12: Comparison Between the Bandwidth Used in the Proposed Method and the Ryu Controller for the Two Types of Flows. Figure 13: Comparison of Throughput Between the Proposed Method and the Ryu Controller for the Two Types of Flows in Two Experiments. In general, it is observed that the performance of the two methods improves as the number of flows increases in both experiments. The third parameter that was used to compare the performance of the proposed approach and the RYU controller is the data transfer rate. This parameter was added to support the evaluation of the proposed method. Figure 15 shows that the proposed method is more effective in transferring data than the Ryu controller for most of the flows in both experiments.