MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Lightweight Path Validation Scheme in Software-Defined Networks

2024· article· en· W4401508092 on OpenAlexaff
Bing Hu, Yuanguo Bi, Kui Wu, Rao Fu, Zixuan Huang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheme (mathematics)Path (computing)SoftwareDistributed computingComputer networkProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Software-Defined Networks (SDN) revolutionize traditional networks by separating control and data planes for enhanced agility and programmability. This separation, however, also opens up vulnerabilities, allowing adversaries to manipulate data plane forwarding and breach security policies. To counter this, we propose a Lightweight Path Validation Scheme (L-PVS) specifically designed for SDN environments. Our approach uses a simple validation scheme for packet forwarding paths that verifies the paths traversed by packets. Then, we further amplify the scheme with a network flow path validation to boost the validation efficiency. To reduce storage demands on switches during flow path validation, we develop a storage optimization method that aligns switch storage overhead with network flows rather than individual packets. Furthermore, we formulate a path partition scheme and present a Greedy-based KeySwitch Node Selection Algorithm (GKSS) to pinpoint optimal switches for path partition, significantly reducing overall data plane storage usage. Lastly, we design a technique using temporary KeySwitch nodes to identify anomaly switches when the controller encounters path validation failure. Evaluation results verify that L-PVS facilitates path validation with a reduced validation header size while minimizing the impact on processing delay and switch storage overhead.

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 score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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