MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230368799 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14651493

Policy Disputes In BGP: Analysis, Detection And Proposed Solution

2021· preprint· en· W4230368799 on OpenAlexaff
Baha U. Kazi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBorder Gateway ProtocolDefault-free zoneComputer scienceRouting protocolRouting (electronic design automation)Computer networkNetwork mappingDistance-vector routing protocolThe InternetDistributed computingAutonomous system (mathematics)Path vector protocolProtocol (science)Static routingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is the de-facto inter-domain routing protocol in the Internet, which involves exchange of routing information among the ASes that is used by the routers in an AS to compute paths to destination address blocks or prefixes in the Internet. The BGP is a path-vector and policy-based routing that allows each AS to independently define a set of local policies for route selection. However, since routes are selected based on local policies of the ASes, it might cause global conflicts or network topology disputes among the ASes. In this thesis, first we present a survey and in-depth analysis of the existing available solutions and their implementations for the BGP policy induced faults. Then, we discuss the tool we have developed for identifying the BGP faults or route instability within an autonomous system due to local policy. Finally, we propose a new solution to detect and eliminate the route oscillation in the BGP best path selection process due to local policy conflicts among ASes. We also present the test cases that we developed using BGP simulator for simulating oscillation faults in the test-bed and then discuss their results.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlFrench-language works237,207