MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1829787244

HyperFlow: a distributed control plane for OpenFlow

2010· article· en· W1829787244 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Tootoonchian, Yashar Ganjali

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpenFlowScalabilityComputer scienceSynchronizingForwarding planeController (irrigation)Distributed computingComputer networkBandwidth (computing)Software-defined networkingTransmission (telecommunications)Telecommunications
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenFlow assumes a logically centralized controller, which ideally can be physically distributed. However, current deployments rely on a single controller which has major drawbacks including lack of scalability. We present HyperFlow, a distributed event-based control plane for OpenFlow. HyperFlow is logically centralized but physically distributed: it provides scalability while keeping the benefits of network control centralization. By passively synchronizing network-wide views of OpenFlow controllers, HyperFlow localizes decision making to individual controllers, thus minimizing the control plane response time to data plane requests. HyperFlow is resilient to network partitioning and component failures. It also enables interconnecting independently managed OpenFlow networks, an essential feature missing in current OpenFlow deployments. We have implemented HyperFlow as an application for NOX. Our implementation requires minimal changes to NOX, and allows reuse of existing NOX applications with minor modifications. Our preliminary evaluation shows that, assuming sufficient control bandwidth, to bound the window of inconsistency among controllers by a factor of the delay between the farthest controllers, the network changes must occur at a rate lower than 1000 events per second across the network. 1.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations902
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207