Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES) Protocol Specification

By Avri Doria, Jamal Hadi Salim, Robert Haas, H. Khosravi, Weiming Wang, Ligang Dong, R. Gopal, Joel M. Halpern. Request for Comments, 2010

302 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Aerospace Engineering, Hardware and Architecture

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/95aaf5286d62a7f305decd8e8165c90c00b3ab25

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Aerospace Engineering

1. F. Yu

In Hardware and Architecture

1. Abdelbaki El Belrhiti El Alaoui
2. Abdelhamid Mellouk
3. Katia Obraczka
4. Sami Souihi
5. A. E. Fergougui
6. Kamal Benzekki
7. Fetia Bannour

Citations in the corpus

• Software-defined networking (SDN): a survey (2016, methodology): “There are other similar existing southbound interfaces such as the Forwarding and Control Element Separation [9,10] standardized by the Internet Engineering Task Force, Path Computation Element [11], the Locator/ID Separation Protocol [12], and SoftRouter [13].”
• A Survey of Software-Defined Networking: Past, Present, and Future of Programmable Networks (2014, methodology): “In SDN, the network intelligence is logically centralized in software-based controllers (the control plane), and network devices become simple packet forwarding devices (the data plane) that can be programmed via an open interface (e.g., ForCES [1], OpenFlow [2], etc).”
• A Survey on Software-Defined Network and OpenFlow: From Concept to Implementation (2014, background): “…each with an action field associated with each flow entry, b) a communication channel, which provides link for the transmission of commands and packets between a controller and the switch, c) the OpenFlow protocol, which enables an OpenFlow controller able to communicate with any router/switch.”
• Software-Defined Network Function Virtualization: A Survey (2015, background): “2 depicts the SDN architecture [21], [40], [41].”
• Distributed SDN Control: Survey, Taxonomy, and Challenges (2018, methodology): “However, despite being a mature standard solution, the ForCES alternative did not gain widespread adoption by major router vendors.”
• A Survey of Machine Learning Techniques Applied to Software Defined Networking (SDN): Research Issues and Challenges (2019, methodology): “There exist other less popular proposals such as OVSDB [32], ForCES [33], Protocol-Oblivious Forwarding (POF) [34], NETCONF [35], LISP [36], OpFlex [37] and OpenState [38].”
• A Survey and a Layered Taxonomy of Software-Defined Networking (2014, methodology): “Other alternatives to OpenFlow exist, for instance, the Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES) framework [20].”
• Survey on Network Virtualization Hypervisors for Software Defined Networking (2015, methodology): “The OF protocol [13] (which employs some aspects from Orphal [86]) is a widely employed SDN instruction set, an alternative developed by the IETF is the forwarding and control element separation (ForCES) protocol [87], [88].”