MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052519231 · doi:10.1109/gmpls.2007.4362595

Distributed Failure Recovery of the LDP Signalling Protocol

2007· article· en· W2052519231 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Wu, Michel Savoie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBackupComputer networkState (computer science)Distributed computingProtocol (science)Node (physics)InitializationSession (web analytics)State informationEngineeringDatabaseAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After a control plane failure, a signalling protocol needs to recover state information about the established connections in the data plane, so that new connection setups do not disrupt existing connections, and existing connections are not degraded (e.g., loss of connection information). First, we provide a comparison of existing techniques to achieve label distribution protocol (LDP) recovery. Then, we propose a backup mechanism to store state information in an upstream neighbour node. The backup LDP state information is synchronized with the original LDP state information in a downstream node when the LDP sets up or tears down connections. After that, we present a two-step LDP state information recovery, which uses a fast LDP state information recovery to recover what labels are idle before a control plane failure, and a detailed LDP state information recovery to fully recover all LDP state information. The fast LDP state information recovery is realized as part of the LDP initialization, allowing a restarting LDP session to process new connection setup requests as soon as possible, without interfering existing connections. The detailed LDP state information recovery performs in the background is parallel to the normal LDP operations. At the end, the security aspect of the proposed LDP recovery is analyzed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207