@techreport{hares-forces-vs-openflow-00,
    number =    {draft-hares-forces-vs-openflow-00},
    type =      {Internet-Draft},
    institution =   {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    note =      {Work in Progress},
    url =       {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hares-forces-vs-openflow/00/},
    author =    {Susan Hares},
    title =     {{Analysis of Comparisons between OpenFlow and ForCES}},
    pagetotal = 46,
    year =      2012,
    month =     jul,
    day =       8,
    abstract =  {While both ForCES and OpenFlow follow the basic idea of separations of forwarding plane and control plane in network elements, they are technically different. ForCES specification contains both a modeling language {[}RFC5812{]} which allows flexible definition of the Flow tables and flow logic. ForCES flow logic include Logical Functional Blocks (LFBs) connected in flow logic that is described in logic of direct graphs augmented by passage of Metadata and grouping concepts. OpenFlow's specifications contain a specific instantiation of Flow tables and flow logic which has emerged from the research community theories. OpenFlow's logic varies based on the revision of the specification (OpenFlow-Paper {[}McKeown2008{]}, OpenFlow Switch Specification 1.0 {[}OpenFlow1-0{]}, OpenFlow 1.1 {[}OpenFlow-1.1{]} Open Configuration 1.0 {[}OpenFlowConfig-1.0{]}).},
}