Analysis of Comparisons between OpenFlow and ForCES
draft-wang-forces-compare-openflow-forces-01
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Zhiliang Wang , Tina Tsou (Ting ZOU) , Jing Huang , Xingang Shi , Xia Yin | ||
| Last updated | 2012-09-13 (Latest revision 2012-03-12) | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
While both ForCES and OpenFlow follow the basic idea of separations of forwarding plane and control plane in network elements, they have some technical differences. This document analyzes the differences between OpenFlow and ForCES technically from the aspects of goals, architecture, forwarding model and protocol interface. The two techniques can learn much from each other in their standardization process.
Authors
Zhiliang Wang
Tina Tsou (Ting ZOU)
Jing Huang
Xingang Shi
Xia Yin
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)