issue fixed

implementation/mininet_controller.py

@@ -718,4 +718,5 @@ if __name__ == '__main__':
             sleep(1)
             use_shortcut = True
             run(test_topo, args.test, bw_limit, delay, use_shortcut)
-
+    else:
+        run(args.topo, args.test, bw_limit, delay, use_shortcut)

thesis/content/evaluation/minimal_network.tex

@@ -251,7 +251,13 @@ To show the amount of TCP packets being forwarded on each router, we measured th
   	\label{fig:evaluation_minimal_packet_flow_concurrent_wo_sc}
 \end{figure}
 
-The results in the network before a failure are as to be expected and can be seen in \cref{minimal_packet_flow_wo_sc_a}. Each router on the route from H1 to H4, which includes R1, R2 and R4, report the same amount of packets at each point of measurement.  
+The results in the network before a failure are as to be expected and can be seen in \cref{minimal_packet_flow_wo_sc_a}. Each router on the route from H1 to H4, which includes R1, R2 and R4, report the same amount of packets at each point of measurement. While the packet count fluctuates during the measurement no packet loss was reported and the bandwidth was at an average of \SI{95}{Mbps} during the whole run of the test. This is why we assume that the fluctuations can be attributed to the mechanisms used in \textit{iperf}.
+
+After a failure all four routers receive packets as can be seen in \cref{minimal_packet_flow_wo_sc_b}, but router R1 now receives most packets with an average of around 1500 packets while router R3 and R4 receive roughly the same amount of packets as before the failure at an average of around 1000 packets. Router R2 receives the least packets with an average of around 500 packets. 
+
+This is most likely caused by the looped path and the implications for packet travel this has. Router R1 receives all packets that are sent to H4 from H1 twice, once sending them to R2 and the second time when receiving the packets back from R2 to send them to R3. But while all packets \textbf{sent} from H1 pass R1 twice, acknowledgements sent back by the \textit{iperf} server on H4 will only pass R1 once, as R1 would not send packets with H1 as destination to R2. Router R2 on the other hand only receives packets sent to H4 but none of the ACKs sent back. This is why, when compared to the average packet count of all routers in \cref{minimal_packet_flow_wo_sc_a}, R2 receives roughly half of all packets a router would normally receive as TCP specifies that for each received packet TCP will send an ACK as answer. This also explains why router R1 forwards an average of around 1500 packets per second, forwarding data packets with around 500 packets per second twice and forwarding acknowledgement packets once with also 500 packets per second, producing an additional 50\% load on the router.
+
+Aside from the changed path and therefore the inclusion of router R3 in this path, routers R3 and R4 are unaffected by the failure, forwarding each packet once.
 
 \subsubsection{With FRR and ShortCut}
 \label{minimal_packet_flow_with_frr_and_shortcut}