Why not having the same controller, controlling all the switches? What is the problem? Remember that central control is a concept. Its implementation can follow diverse paths, going from 1 server only to an app running in a cloud. I don't really understand why would anyone want multiple controllers, when there could be only one controller and over it, multiple apps implementing different services. Its a much more simple layered approach.
On 18 October 2013 21:16, Wes Felter <w...@felter.org> wrote: > On 10/18/13 7:30 AM, Rui Figueira wrote: > >> Hi Brian. The controller is really a good option to manage the switches, >> but I'm intending to have something that is more independent of it, >> because a switch can have multiple controllers, right? In addition, we >> can have a controller responsible for some of the network switches and a >> other controller responsible for the remaining. >> > > In theory OF switches should be managed using the OF-Config protocol and > someone should write an OF Manager, but I don't think anybody is actually > working on it. You could write one and become a hero... :-) > > -- > Wes Felter > IBM Research - Austin > > > ______________________________**_________________ > openflow-discuss mailing list > openflow-discuss@lists.**stanford.edu<openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/openflow-**discuss<https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss> > -- Carlos Miguel Ferreira Researcher at Telecommunications Institute Aveiro - Portugal Work E-mail - c...@av.it.pt MSN Contact -> carlosmf...@gmail.com Skype & GTalk -> carlosmf...@gmail.com LinkedIn -> http://www.linkedin.com/in/carlosmferreira
_______________________________________________ openflow-discuss mailing list openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss
