|
Software-defined networking (SDN) and intent-based networking (IBN) offer an ability to revolutionize the modern network architecture. Both of these concepts are relatively new, and your chief technology officer (CTO) has only heard them in passing. In fact, she pawned them off as the new “marketing fad” dressed up as a new concept. Since you have researched both technologies, you understand this is not a fad. When used in combination with virtualization and cloud computing, you know SDN and IBN could revolutionize how the organization operates, providing for reduced costs, efficiency, better management of the network assets, and security. However, you need to develop a white paper for the Caduceus CTO to highlight these benefits. Given the CTO has only heard the term in passing, you must describe in this white paper, the SDN and IBN concepts, their benefits, and what it would take for the organization to implement. Forming Your TeamsIn addition to submitting your individual white paper here in Assignment 3, you will also begin to work with your team for the upcoming collaborative projects (Assignments 4 and 5). You should meet your team, brainstorm ideas for your white paper together, and begin planning your upcoming work. Writing Your PaperAfter you introduce yourself to your team and brainstorm ideas for this assignment, refer to the SDN and IBN Assignment Resources for more details about Caduceus and download the assignment template. In your white paper, use additional sources of information but also describe the concept in layman’s terms. Use visuals where appropriate. Describe how an SDN/IBN architecture would look different than network architectures we have traditionally deployed. Compare and contrast the network architectures and discuss the pros and cons of each. The paper should include the following sections:
Submitting Your WorkDownload the assignment template cover page and complete your white paper.
When complete, export your file as a PDF and upload it to the LEO Assignments Folder (e.g., Project 3 – SDN & IBN Assignment). |
||
Rubric Name: Project 3: SDN and IBN Assignment
| Evaluation Criteria |
Exceeds
10 points
|
Meets
8.5 points
|
Approaches
7.5 points
|
Does not Meet
0 points
|
Criterion Score
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1.1.1: Articulate the main idea and purpose of a communication.
|
Articulates fully and clearly the main idea and purpose of the communication. |
Articulates the main idea and purpose of a communication. |
Attempts to articulate the main idea and or purpose of the communication, but one or both is not clear. |
Does not attempt to articulate the main idea and purpose of communication. |
Score of 1.1.1: Articulate the main idea and purpose of a communication.,
/ 10 |
|
1.1.2: Support the main idea and purpose of a communication.
|
Supports fully and appropriately the main idea and purpose of communication. |
Supports the main idea and purpose of communication. |
Attempts to support the main idea and/or purpose of the communication, but the support is lacking in some areas. |
Does not support the main idea or purpose of communication. |
Score of 1.1.2: Support the main idea and purpose of a communication.,
/ 10 |
|
1.1.3: Present ideas in a clear, logical order appropriate to the task.
|
Presents a logical flow of ideas that is easily identifiable and completely appropriate to the task. |
Presents ideas in a clear, logical order appropriate to the task. |
Attempts to present ideas, but the logic is not clear and/or not appropriate to the task. |
Does not present ideas in a clear, logical order appropriate to the task. |
Score of 1.1.3: Present ideas in a clear, logical order appropriate to the task.,
/ 10 |
|
1.1.4: Explain the relationship between the ideas presented to enhance clarity and comprehension.
|
Explains the relationship between the ideas presented in a thorough manner to enhance clarity and comprehension. |
Explains the relationship between the ideas presented to enhance clarity and comprehension. |
Attempts to explain the relationship between the ideas presented, but there may be gaps in clarity and comprehension. |
Does not explains the relationship between the ideas presented to enhance clarity and comprehension. |
Score of 1.1.4: Explain the relationship between the ideas presented to enhance clarity and comprehension.,
/ 10 |
|
1.3.3: Integrate appropriate credible sources to illustrate and validate ideas.
|
Integrates completely appropriate and highly credible sources to illustrate and validate ideas. |
Integrates appropriate credible sources to illustrate and validate ideas. |
Attempts to integrate sources to illustrate and validate ideas, but there are problems with source credibility or appropriateness, or the integration is choppy. |
Does not integrate sources to illustrate and validate ideas. |
Score of 1.3.3: Integrate appropriate credible sources to illustrate and validate ideas.,
/ 10 |
|
1.4.1: Produce grammatically correct material in standard academic English that supports the communication.
|
Produces grammatically correct material in flawless standard academic English that fully supports the communication. |
Produces grammatically correct material in standard academic English that supports the communication. |
Attempts to produce grammatically correct material in standard academic English, but mistakes in some areas affect the credibility of the communication. |
Does not produce grammatically correct material, and the mistakes hamper the communication. |
Score of 1.4.1: Produce grammatically correct material in standard academic English that supports the communication.,
/ 10 |
|
1.4.3: Write concise and logical sentences in standard academic English that clarify relationships among concepts and ideas.
|
Writes concise and logical sentences in flawless standard academic English that leave no doubt as to the relationships among concepts and ideas. |
Writes concise and logical sentences in standard academic English that clarify relationships among concepts and ideas. |
Attempts to write concise and logical sentences in standard academic English, but issues with concision and/or clarity inhibit understanding of the relationships among concepts and ideas. |
Does not write concise and logical sentences in standard academic English, and lapses in logic and sentence structure make it impossible to see relationships between concepts and ideas. |
Score of 1.4.3: Write concise and logical sentences in standard academic English that clarify relationships among concepts and ideas.,
/ 10 |
|
2.3.1: State conclusions or solutions clearly and precisely.
|
States well-conceived conclusions or solutions clearly and precisely. |
States conclusions or solutions clearly and precisely. |
Attempts to state conclusions or solutions, but they are not clear or precise. |
Does not state conclusions or solutions. |
Score of 2.3.1: State conclusions or solutions clearly and precisely.,
/ 10 |
|
10.1.3: Define the specifications of required technologies.
|
Defines thoroughly and clearly the specifications of required technologies. |
Defines the specifications of required technologies. |
Attempts to define the specifications of required technologies, but there are gaps and/or lack of clarity. |
Does not define the specifications of required technologies. |
Score of 10.1.3: Define the specifications of required technologies.,
/ 10 |
|
13.2.1: Evaluate vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements.
|
Evaluate and provides detailed justification for vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements. |
Evaluates vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements. |
Attempts to evaluate vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements, but some recommendations lack detail or do not consider context. |
Does not evaluate vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements. |
Score of 13.2.1: Evaluate vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements.,
/ 10 |
/ 100
Answer Preview: SDN and IBN Assignment
