MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987946049 · doi:10.1109/honet.2010.5715783

Investigation of fast reroute mechanisms in an optical testbed environment

2010· article· en· W1987946049 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Hassan, Muneer I. Bazama, T. Saad, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiprotocol Label SwitchingComputer networkComputer scienceLoose Source RoutingLabel switchingVirtual routing and forwardingTestbedBackupNetwork packetOptical IP SwitchingRouting protocolInternet ProtocolQuality of serviceThe InternetRouting tableOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate and evaluate the performance of two fast reroute mechanisms in packet switched core networks. Such mechanisms enable, in the case of a network fault, the fast switchover of protected traffic onto pre-established backup paths within minimal time (typically below 50 ms) to minimize traffic loss. Our research testbed consists of both real and emulated IP/MPLS Label Switching Routers (LSRs). Using empirical tests, we compare the two fast protection mechanisms MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE) Fast Reroute (FRR), and IP FRR to protect MPLS LDP traffic. In our tests, we consider single link failures protected with pre-provisioned backup paths using TE-FRR tunnels, or IP Fast Reroute (IP-FRR) alternate paths. We compare the two techniques in terms of traffic loss and network time convergence obtained by repeating the tests multiple times.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207