MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058226996 · doi:10.1109/mcom.2014.6852092

Design considerations for managing wide area software defined networks

2014· article· en· W2058226996 on OpenAlexaff
Reaz Ahmed, Raouf Boutaba

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Magazine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkRouterSoftware-defined networkingBottleneckNetwork packetNetwork architectureNetwork managementDistributed computingController (irrigation)Networking hardwareEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SDN has the potential to simplify network configuration and reduce management complexity. In today¿s networks control and forwarding functions are tightly coupled and embedded within each switch/router. SDN, in contrast, accumulates the control functionality in one or more dedicated network entities called controllers, which provide a unified interface to configure and control the network. Packet forwarding, on the other hand, remains the responsibility of the switches/routers. Many datacenter networks have benefited from the abstraction provided by SDN. However, in a Wide Area Network (WAN) a single controller becomes a performance bottleneck. Multiple controller solutions are proposed as a natural consequence. In this article we present the requirements, design alternatives, and a possible management architecture for a single administrative domain WA-SDN. We also discuss the functional components that should be present in a multi-controller architecture for managing WA-SDN deployments.

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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations84
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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