2022
DOI: 10.1109/access.2022.3215434
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Microgrid Power Sharing Framework for Software Defined Networking and Cybersecurity Analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 74 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Overall, OSPF and SDN microservices have different strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of which one to use depends on the specific network requirements and goals. All of these values are within the ranges defined by the IEEE 61850 standard [ 37 ] for safe microgrid operation. Nevertheless, this microservice implementation has the best portability (by using a Docker container), resiliency (provided by Rancher orchestrator), and scalability results (demonstrated by the recovery time presented in Table 5 ).…”
Section: Experimental Scenarios and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 71%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Overall, OSPF and SDN microservices have different strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of which one to use depends on the specific network requirements and goals. All of these values are within the ranges defined by the IEEE 61850 standard [ 37 ] for safe microgrid operation. Nevertheless, this microservice implementation has the best portability (by using a Docker container), resiliency (provided by Rancher orchestrator), and scalability results (demonstrated by the recovery time presented in Table 5 ).…”
Section: Experimental Scenarios and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…The most widely used architecture for microgrid control uses a centralized SDN controller as an intelligent element within the topology. However, critical aspects such as latency, network convergence (less than 100 ms), reliability (close to ), and packet losses must be managed carefully [ 37 , 38 ]. Achieving these properties is difficult in a centralized control scheme, especially for a large topology, due to communication devices’ propagation latency and processing time.…”
Section: Main Disadvantage Of An Sdn Controllermentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Additional work by other authors can be reviewed in [32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48]. As can be seen from the review, the use of Kali Linux [49] in the process of studying the network security level of PEDs has not been proposed.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%