NetPilot

Defense Network Research Lab

Describe a multi-vendor mesh in plain English, deploy it in the cloud or on-prem in ~2 minutes, and iterate on protocol behavior under degraded conditions.

Try It Free

← Network Research Lab

app.netpilot.io

See It in Action

Watch NetPilot build a 5-node FRR mesh, deploy it to the cloud, inject random link loss, and run an end-to-end test — all from one plain-English prompt. The same flow applies to MANET, mesh, and tactical protocol experiments under adversarial conditions.

~2 min
prompt to running multi-vendor lab
9+
network OSes and growing
Cloud or on-prem
self-hosted / air-gapped via enterprise plan
Prompt = artifact
reproducible for publication or disclosure

What makes NetPilot different for defense research

Cloud-native + AI-designed in one product — describe a multi-vendor mesh in plain English and iterate on protocol behavior in ~2 minutes instead of standing up host infrastructure by hand. Four capabilities defense and government research teams compound when shipped together.

Cloud-native

Browser only. Nothing to install.

The alternative

CORE/EMANE and self-hosted ContainerLab mean a provisioned host, sourced images, and a maintained install before the first experiment runs.

AI-designed

Describe any topology in plain English — AI designs, configures, and deploys it; SSH in to verify.

The alternative

Hand-authored scenario files and per-vendor configs typed device by device before a mesh experiment can deploy.

Multi-turn iteration

“Add an Arista spine, move OSPF to area 0.0.0.1” → AI updates across all devices.

The alternative

Re-edit scenario files and rebuild the topology by hand for every protocol swap or impairment-level change.

2 minutes vs days/weeks

~2 minutes from prompt to working multi-vendor lab.

The alternative

Days to install the environment, source images, and wire up scenario + impairment scripts before any data comes out.

From prompt to a running multi-vendor mesh

Describe or import the experiment, let the AI design and deploy it in the cloud, then SSH into real vendor CLIs to verify protocol state. The prompt and generated configs become the reproducible artifact.

app.netpilot.io

Describe or import

State the topology, protocols, and impairments in plain English — or import existing configs to rebuild a digital twin of an operational network.

app.netpilot.io

AI designs & deploys

The agent designs the topology, generates per-vendor configs, and deploys a cloud lab in ~2 minutes. Iterate by chat — "add an IS-IS level, raise loss to 20%" — across every node.

app.netpilot.io

SSH to real CLIs

Dual-path: drive it with the AI agent, or SSH straight into FRR and commercial NOS CLIs to verify adjacency state, capture traces, and script impairments yourself.

What you can build and model

Wireless-mesh and multi-vendor protocol experiments at the IP and routing-protocol layer — the control-plane research surface NetPilot iterates on in the cloud. For RF-channel and waveform fidelity, pair with CORE/EMANE.

Wireless-mesh routing under loss

Multi-hop mesh on FRR with tc netem injecting packet loss, latency, jitter, and link flap — measure convergence and route stability at each impairment level.

Babel / OSPF / IS-IS comparison

Run the same mesh topology under each routing protocol and compare convergence, churn, and route-table stability head-to-head.

Tactical / MANET protocol testbed

Stand up a disconnected, partitioned, or degraded multi-hop network and iterate on control-plane behavior — the protocol layer, not RF channel fidelity.

Multi-vendor mesh interop

FRR and Nokia SR Linux (built in) interoperating with Cisco, Juniper, or Arista (BYOI) — real CLIs and real adjacency state to surface cross-implementation behavior.

Protocol-bug reproduction

Reproduce a multi-vendor routing bug for unclassified defense-research publication or coordinated disclosure — prompt + configs + topology become the artifact.

BGP / IS-IS / segment routing

Multi-area OSPF, multi-level IS-IS with wide metrics, BGP policy, SRv6 uSID, and SR-MPLS across the topology for backbone research.

Impairment & fault-injection scripts

Scriptable, reproducible IP-layer impairment via tc netem plus Scapy malformed-packet injection at the routing-protocol layer.

Production-mirror digital twin

Import existing configs to rebuild a digital twin of an operational network, then validate a change before it touches the real environment.

Mesh and MANET research tools compared

Honest positioning. NetPilot is not a replacement for CORE/EMANE on RF-channel fidelity (that is the established open-source reference environment). NetPilot is the cloud iteration layer for protocol-level research, multi-vendor comparison, and artifact-ready reproducibility.

AI-built from plain-English prompt
NetPilot
Yes
CORE/EMANE
No
ns-3
No
ContainerLab
No
EVE-NG
No
GNS3
No
Cloud self-serve
NetPilot
Yes
CORE/EMANE
on-prem
ns-3
self-hosted
ContainerLab
self-hosted
EVE-NG
self-hosted VM
GNS3
self-hosted
Real NOS CLIs
NetPilot
FRR + commercial
CORE/EMANE
via VMs
ns-3
simulator
ContainerLab
BYOI
EVE-NG
BYOI
GNS3
BYOI
RF-channel fidelity (PHY modeling)
NetPilot
out of scope
CORE/EMANE
reference-grade
ns-3
modules
ContainerLab
out of scope
EVE-NG
out of scope
GNS3
out of scope
Artifact-ready reproducibility
NetPilot
prompt = artifact
CORE/EMANE
scenario files
ns-3
scripts
ContainerLab
YAML topo
EVE-NG
lab files
GNS3
project files
Multi-vendor NOS interop
NetPilot
Yes
CORE/EMANE
via VMs
ns-3
No
ContainerLab
BYOI
EVE-NG
BYOI
GNS3
BYOI
Setup time
NetPilot
~2 minutes
CORE/EMANE
Days (install + scenario)
ns-3
Days (scripts)
ContainerLab
Hours (install + images)
EVE-NG
Hours–days (VM + images)
GNS3
Hours (install + images)
Anchor experiment

Babel vs OSPF vs IS-IS under progressive packet loss

A canonical mesh-routing experiment: compare three routing protocols on identical topologies under increasing packet-loss conditions. Which converges fastest? Which is most stable? Which misbehaves at what loss threshold?

The NetPilot workflow: describe the experiment in plain English — "8-node mesh with FRR running Babel, 8-node mesh with FRR running OSPF, and 8-node mesh with FRR running IS-IS — same topology, same node positions. tc netem injects correlated packet loss progressively from 0% to 20%. Capture per-protocol convergence time, route table stability, and adjacency flaps."

NetPilot generates FRR configurations for all three protocols, deploys all three labs in ~2 minutes each, runs the impairment script, and produces per-protocol data that's reproducible by any researcher with the same prompt. The prompt + generated configs become the artifact.

→ AI-powered MANET research labs→ OSPF vs Babel under link failure

Complement to CORE/EMANE — not replacement

CORE/EMANE wins

  • • RF-channel fidelity and waveform modeling
  • • PHY-layer channel effects and interference
  • • Established open-source reference lineage
  • • On-premises deployment for regulated environments

NetPilot wins

  • • AI-built topologies from plain-English prompts
  • • Cloud self-serve — minutes to running lab
  • • Multi-vendor NOS (FRR + commercial) for interop research
  • • Artifact-ready reproducibility for publication

Use both. CORE/EMANE for RF-fidelity validation; NetPilot for protocol-layer iteration and multi-vendor comparison. The two target different layers of the stack.

Use cases for defense and government research teams

Four research workflows where cloud-native protocol iteration adds speed to an existing RF-fidelity toolchain.

Cross-protocol mesh behavior

Compare Babel vs OSPF vs IS-IS convergence and route stability under packet loss on identical mesh topologies. Reproducible per-protocol behavioral data in the cloud. The comparison cited in the NetPilot OSPF-vs-Babel analysis is the canonical starting point.

OSPF vs Babel under link failure →

Packet loss, latency, and jitter impairment research

tc netem on Linux endpoints provides scriptable, reproducible IP-layer impairment — uniform and correlated packet loss, latency, jitter, duplication, reordering, rate limiting, and link-flap patterns. Scripted, repeatable, capturable per experiment.

Multi-vendor mesh research

FRR mesh interoperating with commercial NOSes — real CLIs, real protocol behavior, real adjacency state. Useful for researching cross-implementation behavior that single-vendor simulators cannot surface.

AI-powered MANET research labs →

Reproducible artifacts for FFRDC / academic publication

The prompt + generated configs + deployable topology form an artifact another researcher can run in minutes. Matches SIGCOMM / CoNEXT / IMC artifact-evaluation expectations — addresses the environment-setup bottleneck that drives reproducibility rates below one-third in networking research.

Protocols and impairments supported

IP and routing-protocol layer coverage. For RF-channel fidelity, pair with CORE/EMANE.

  • Routing: BGP, OSPF (multi-area), IS-IS (multi-level, wide metrics), Babel, RIP, EIGRP (on vendor NOS)
  • EVPN (Type-2/3/5, symmetric/asymmetric IRB) and VXLAN
  • SRv6 (uSID endpoint behaviors, L3VPN over SRv6) and SR-MPLS
  • PIM (ASM, SSM) for multicast mesh research
  • BFD (multi-hop, authenticated)
  • Impairments (tc netem): packet loss (uniform, correlated), latency, jitter, duplication, reordering, rate limit, link flap
  • Malformed packet injection via Scapy (protocol-layer only)
  • Multi-vendor NOS: FRR and Nokia SR Linux built in; Cisco IOL / Juniper cRPD / Arista cEOS via BYOI

Scope note

NetPilot operates at the IP and routing-protocol layer. Research workflows requiring RF-channel fidelity (PHY modeling, waveform simulation) are best served by CORE/EMANE. NetPilot does not hold FedRAMP, IL4, or IL5 authorization; research labs with those compliance requirements should use on-premises tooling.

Bottom line for defense and government research

Pick a dedicated RF / cyber-physical tool when you need:

  • •CORE/EMANE for wireless/RF MANET fidelity — waveform, PHY-layer interference, and RF-channel modeling NetPilot does not replicate
  • •Keysight for high-fidelity cyber-physical and RF emulation (smart-grid, 5G, hardware-in-the-loop)
  • •FedRAMP / IL4 / IL5 workloads on the commercial cloud — NetPilot holds none of those authorizations (use its on-prem option or self-hosted CORE/EMANE on authorized infrastructure)

Pick NetPilot when you need:

  • •AI-built multi-vendor mesh topologies from a plain-English prompt — 9+ network OSes and growing
  • •Cloud lab running in ~2 minutes, or self-hosted / air-gapped on-prem via the enterprise plan
  • •Dual-path control-plane iteration: drive the AI agent or SSH into real FRR + commercial CLIs
  • •Artifact-ready reproducibility — the prompt + configs + topology re-run in minutes for publication or disclosure

Verdict:For RF-channel fidelity and waveform research, CORE/EMANE and Keysight remain the right tools, and compliance-bound workloads belong on authorized infrastructure. For fast, reproducible, multi-vendor protocol-layer research — comparing Babel, OSPF, and IS-IS behavior under impairment — NetPilot is the AI-native network emulator that gets a lab running in minutes, in the cloud or on-prem.

Defense & Government Research FAQ

Scenario-phrased questions from research practitioners.

Describe the experiment in plain English — for example, '8-node mesh with FRR running Babel on one topology, FRR running OSPF on a second identical topology, and FRR running IS-IS on a third. tc netem injects 0% to 20% correlated packet loss progressively. Capture convergence times and route stability per protocol.' NetPilot deploys all three in ~2 minutes, runs the impairment script, and produces reproducible per-protocol data.
No. CORE/EMANE is the open-source reference environment for RF-channel fidelity modeling and waveform research. NetPilot is complementary — it targets protocol-layer iteration, multi-vendor NOS behavior, and reproducible artifacts. Use CORE/EMANE for RF-layer fidelity; use NetPilot for control-plane iteration, multi-vendor protocol comparison, and publication-ready reproducibility.
Yes. NetPilot's prompt + generated configs + deployable topology form a reusable artifact that another researcher can run in minutes. This matches SIGCOMM / CoNEXT / IMC artifact-evaluation program expectations. Reproducibility in networking research has historically been low — around 32% by one ACM survey — and the prompt-as-artifact pattern directly addresses the environment-setup bottleneck that drives that number.
NetPilot's Linux endpoints use tc netem for scriptable, reproducible impairment: packet loss (uniform and correlated), latency, jitter, duplication, reordering, rate limiting, and link-flap patterns. Scapy is available for malformed or custom packet injection at the routing-protocol layer. The impairments are IP-layer — CORE/EMANE remains the correct tool for RF-channel fidelity modeling.
No — those are out of scope. NetPilot operates at the IP and routing-protocol layer. For waveform simulation, PHY-layer interference modeling, or RF-channel fidelity, CORE/EMANE remains the correct tool. NetPilot's wedge is protocol-layer iteration speed, multi-vendor comparison, and artifact-ready reproducibility.
Yes. NetPilot's default FRR image runs Babel alongside BGP, OSPF, IS-IS, EVPN, and SRv6. Describe the mesh topology, prompt the experiment, and SSH into any node to verify Babel state. The FRR cloud lab guide walks through the six-protocol FRR stack with copy-pasteable prompts.
ContainerLab, EVE-NG, and GNS3 are the canonical self-hosted multi-vendor lab platforms — powerful but self-operated. You provision the host, source the vendor images, and maintain the install. NetPilot is the AI-built equivalent: describe the topology in plain English and get a running lab in ~2 minutes, with the same real multi-vendor CLIs — in the cloud, or self-hosted on-prem (including fully air-gapped on a local LLM, no cloud and no phone-home) when on-premises deployment is required. Use the DIY self-hosted tools when you want to own and hand-build every layer yourself; use NetPilot when you want the agent to design, deploy, and reproduce the labs for you.
NetPilot's commercial cloud platform does not hold FedRAMP, IL4, or IL5 authorization. For teams that need those authorizations, NetPilot's enterprise plan includes a self-hosted / on-prem deployment option — run the software on your own authorized infrastructure (authorization scope remains with the deploying organization). Research labs whose workflow does not require those authorizations can use the cloud product directly, or pair with CORE/EMANE or self-hosted ContainerLab / EVE-NG / GNS3.
Yes. NetPilot's enterprise plan includes a self-hosted / on-prem deployment for air-gapped or disconnected research environments — it runs entirely on your own LAN with the AI agent driven by a local LLM (Ollama, vLLM, or Microsoft Foundry Local), no cloud and no phone-home at runtime. Run it on your own authorized infrastructure — authorization scope remains with the deploying organization. Commercial cloud is the default self-serve; on-prem is available via Contact Sales.

Related reading

Comparison

Best Network Research Lab Platforms in 2026

Tier-ranked comparison of 10 platforms with a 6-row segment routing guide.

Guide

AI-Powered MANET Research Labs

Reproducible mesh network experiments in the cloud — for defense, academic, and community mesh research.

On-Prem

On-Prem AI Network Lab

Run the agent fully air-gapped on your own local LLM — no cloud, no phone-home — for disconnected research environments.

Segment

Academic Research

Reproducibility methodology, artifact-ready workflows, and cross-protocol research rigor.

Segment

Open Networking & FRR

FRR Babel, OSPF, and IS-IS for mesh research — the open-source routing stack running inside many defense labs.

Tutorial

OSPF vs Babel Under Link Failure

Head-to-head routing protocol convergence comparison under impairment.

Tutorial

FRRouting Cloud Labs

Six FRR protocols in one prompt — BGP, OSPF, IS-IS, Babel, EVPN, SRv6.

Guide

BGP Convergence Research

Methodology and artifact patterns for BGP convergence research.

Comparison

Keysight vs VIAVI vs NetPilot: Research Lab Comparison

Honest comparison across research tooling categories.

Hub

Network Research Lab

The parent hub — all six research segments.

Ready to iterate on mesh protocols in minutes?

Dedicated environments, custom vendor image support, workflow integration — talk to us about a research plan. Or spin up a free lab and try a Babel vs OSPF comparison yourself.