Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Thomas Wirtgen

dblp:252/1020 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
0009-0003-9746-3991ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Computer networks · 3 · 3 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer networks
2 papers
Routing and switching · 74% Software-defined and programmable networks · 26%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Routing and switching
routing protocol
1.022023
xBGP: Faster Innovation in Routing Protocols · NSDI 2023
The Case for Pluginized Routing Protocols · ICNP 2019
Routing and switching › inter-domain routing
BGP
0.822023
xBGP: Faster Innovation in Routing Protocols · NSDI 2023
The Case for Pluginized Routing Protocols · ICNP 2019
Software-defined and programmable networks
programmable routing
0.712023
xBGP: Faster Innovation in Routing Protocols · NSDI 2023
Routing and switching › routing protocol
OSPF
0.112019
The Case for Pluginized Routing Protocols · ICNP 2019

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

virtual machine · 0.4plugin API · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 xBGP: Faster Innovation in Routing Protocols
Thomas Wirtgen, Tom Rousseaux, Quentin De Coninck, Nicolas Rybowski, Randy Bush, Laurent Vanbever, Axel Legay, Olivier Bonaventure
NSDI1
2020 xBGP: When You Can't Wait for the IETF and Vendors
abstract
Thanks to the standardization of routing protocols such as BGP, OSPF or IS-IS, Internet Service Providers (ISP) and enterprise networks can deploy routers from various vendors. This prevents them from vendor-lockin problems. Unfortunately, this also slows innovation since any new feature must be standardized and implemented by all vendors before being deployed.
Thomas Wirtgen, Quentin De Coninck, Randy Bush, Laurent Vanbever, Olivier Bonaventure
HotNets1
2019 The Case for Pluginized Routing Protocols
abstract
Routing protocols such as BGP and OSPF are key components of Internet Service Provider (ISP) networks. These protocols and the operator's requirements evolve over time, but it often takes many years for network operators to convince their different router vendors and the IETF to extend routing protocols. Some network operators, notably in enterprise and datacenters have adopted Software Defined Networking (SDN) with its centralised control to be more agile. We propose a new approach to implement routing protocols that enables network operators to innovate while still using distributed routing protocols and thus keeping all their benefits compared to centralised routing approaches. We extend a routing protocol with a virtual machine that is capable of executing plugins. These plugins extend the protocol or modify its underlying algorithms through a simple API to meet the specific requirements of operators. We modify the OSPF and BGP implementations provided by FRRouting and demonstrate the applicability of our approach with several use cases.
Thomas Wirtgen, Cyril Dénos, Quentin De Coninck, Mathieu Jadin, Olivier Bonaventure
ICNP1