sensors

Review
Programmable Data Plane Applications in 5G and Beyond
Architectures: A Systematic Review
Jorge Andrés Brito 1, * , José Ignacio Moreno 1 , Luis Miguel Contreras 2 , Manuel Alvarez-Campana 1
and Marta Blanco Caamaño 2

1 Departamento de Ingeniería de Sistemas Telemáticos, ETSI de Telecomunicación, Universidad Politécnica de

Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain; [email protected] (J.I.M.);
[email protected] (M.A.-C.)
2 Telefónica I+D, 28010 Madrid, Spain; [email protected] (L.M.C.);
[email protected] (M.B.C.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: The rapid evolution of 5G and beyond technologies has sparked an unprecedented surge in
the need for networking infrastructure that can deliver high speed, minimal latency, and remarkable
flexibility. The programmable data plane, which enables the dynamic reconfiguration of network
functions and protocols, is becoming increasingly important in meeting these requirements. This
paper provides an overview of the current state of the art in programmable data planes implemented
in 5G and beyond architectures. It proposes a classification of the reviewed studies based on system
architecture and specific use cases. Furthermore, the article surveys the primary applications of
programmable devices in emerging telecommunication networks, such as tunneling and forwarding,
network slicing, cybersecurity, and in-band telemetry. Finally, this publication summarizes the
open research challenges and future directions. In addition to offering a comprehensive review of
programmable data plane applications in telecommunication networks, this article aims to guide
further research in this promising field for network operators and researchers alike.

Keywords: programmable data plane; 5G and beyond; architectures; programmable devices; P4; SDN
Citation: Brito, J.A.; Moreno, J.I.;
Contreras, L.M.; Alvarez-
Campana, M.; Blanco Caamaño, M.
Programmable Data Plane 1. Introduction
Applications in 5G and Beyond Programmable data planes have emerged as a critical component of modern network-
Architectures: A Systematic Review. ing architectures, enabling greater flexibility, faster processing, and more efficient use of
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955. https:// network resources. Following the principles of software-defined networking (SDN) [1] in
doi.org/10.3390/s23156955 programmable data planes, the control plane and data plane are separated, allowing for
Academic Editor: Huseyin Arslan more granular control over network traffic and enabling administrators to configure and
adapt networks to changing requirements and traffic patterns.
Received: 26 May 2023 To enable programming of the data plane, a variety of programming languages have
Revised: 1 August 2023
been developed throughout the years, each offering distinct attributes and functional-
Accepted: 2 August 2023
ities, e.g., Domino [2], Lucid [3], NetKAT [4], OpenState [5], and P4 [6]. However, P4
Published: 4 August 2023
(Programming Protocol-Independent Packet Processors) is the most widely used language
in the state of the art. Furthermore, this language enables the creation of custom packet
processing pipelines, allowing for the implementation of advanced features and services,
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
such as traffic monitoring, load balancing, function offloading, and security filtering.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. The evolution of communication architectures, including the emergence of 5G and
This article is an open access article beyond [7], has created opportunities for SDN and programmable data planes to show
distributed under the terms and their potential as key enabler technologies. These architectures handle vast amounts of
conditions of the Creative Commons users and their data, requiring rapid and effective processing to cater to a diverse array
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// of applications and services [8]. SDN, in this context, offers architectural flexibility and
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ scalability to address the complexities of managing a large number of connected devices. By
4.0/). utilizing centralized controllers, SDN simplifies management and automates tasks such as

Sensors 2023, 23, 6955. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23156955 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors

Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 2 of 33

provisioning, configuration, and troubleshooting within telecommunication network infras-

tructure. Its programmable and dynamic nature enables operators to swiftly reconfigure
the network and allocate resources based on specific use case requirements [9]. Comple-
mentarily, programmable data planes can be used to support low-latency applications, such
as autonomous vehicles or industrial automation, by providing fast and efficient pipelines.
They could also be employed to provide higher throughput in user plane functions and
help reach new levels of mobile broadband connectivity.
The integration of programmable data planes in 5G and beyond architectures presents
both advantages and potential impacts, but it also introduces implementation challenges.
By offloading specific network function tasks to programmable devices, the overall network
performance can be significantly optimized, thereby fulfilling the stringent requirements
and key performance indicators (KPIs) of 5G and upcoming technologies [10,11]. Moreover,
the inherent customization capability of these devices enhance support for network slicing
and multi-access edge computing, essential features in novel telecommunication systems.
However, the deployment of programmable data planes poses challenges in efficiently man-
aging a vast number of users, ensuring seamless communication between different vendor
network devices, and overcoming the limitations of data plane programming languages
for novel use cases. Despite these hurdles, programmable data planes have the potential
to enable mobile networks to operate at optimal levels, thus enhancing user experience.
Furthermore, they accelerate innovation cycles and enable experimentation, fostering the
development of more advanced and transformative telecommunication networks.
In the following subsections, the contribution of this review will be presented in detail
along with its objectives and distinctive features compared to other reviews.

1.1. Contributions
This article presents a systematic review of programmable data plane applications
in 5G and beyond networks along with relevant commercial implementations. This work
targets applications that use P4, which is the most widely used language in both academia
and industry. The contributions of this survey can be summarized as follows:
• Providing the first review that exclusively focuses on programmable data plane imple-
mentations on 5G and beyond architectures.
• Offering a comprehensive and up-to-date review of research work on these noveltech-
nologies.
• Proposing a classification of programmable data plane implementations based on
5G and beyond architectural components, as well as their use cases, categorizing
59 research papers and 2 commercial solutions.
• Identifying open challenges and future research directions in the field.
• Providing information about the implemented device and the code availability for
each of the surveyed articles.

1.2. Related Reviews

The literature covers other surveys that examine programmable data plane applica-
tions in telecommunication networks, including those for 4G and 5G. Kfoury et al. [12]
present a comprehensive review of programmable data plane switches and P4 language,
encompassing various applications, including telecommunication services. The authors
analyze each study, compare their results, and discuss limitations. However, the paper
has a limited number of articles related to 5G and its associated technologies and does not
include recent studies as it was published in 2021.
Liatifis et al. [13] offer an overview of P4 implementations in various fields, such as
next-generation mobile networks. Nevertheless, this survey compiles a limited selection
of studies and does not extensively analyze the detailed findings reported within them.
Although the authors propose future research directions, there are no specific prospects for
telecommunication networks.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 3 of 33

Hauser et al. [14] provide a tutorial on data plane programming and an extensive
survey of P4 and applied research, including cellular networks. The article includes
an analysis of the results and potential new research directions. However, it lacks an
architectural classification for 4G/5G applications and does not include recent studies in
the field.
Kianpisheh et al. [15] present a survey of programmable data planes, recognizing their
role as an enabler for diverse in-network computing (INC) applications. The article provides
a technical definition of INC and introduces a thorough classification of its uses, including
4G/5G/6G technologies. In this context, the authors analyze various implementations and
conduct comparative assessments of their results. However, this study does not include
several articles with relevant applications and does not provide information about code
availability.

2. Methodology
This section presents the methodology and criteria employed to search, select, and
filter the articles included in the review. Additionally, it provides details about the analysis
performed on the extracted information.

2.1. Article Search and Selection

To conduct the review, an extensive search was performed using reliable sources
indexed by digital object identifier (DOI). This was accomplished using the following
digital library platforms:
• IEEE Xplore Digital Library
• Google Scholar
• Scopus
• Web of Science
This search was based on programmable data plane terminology and 5G and beyond
technology. Specific keywords within articles were used, such as Programmable data plane,
PDP, P4, SDN, 5G, 6G, UPF, and network slicing. Finally, Boolean operators such as “AND”
and “OR” were utilized along with the keywords to refine the search and increase its scope.

2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

In order to refine the results of the keyword search, a set of inclusion and exclusion
criteria was applied to select studies relevant to the objectives of this review. Initially,
only articles that described programmable data plane implementations within 5G and
beyond architectures were included. Specifically, studies that utilized the P4 programming
language were considered, as it is widely recognized as the de facto standard in the current
state of the art. Subsequently, a second criterion was applied to limit the selection to studies
published between 2018 and 2022 as well early work from 2023. The reason for selecting this
time frame is that it corresponds to the period during which the vast majority of research
on programmable data planes in telecommunication networks was conducted. Prior to
2018, publications on this topic were scarce and primarily focused on pre-5G technology. It
is worth noting that certain 4G LTE applications were considered within this review given
their compatibility with 5G and beyond systems.
The primary search yielded 224 research articles, which were further reduced to a
final set of 61 articles that met the aforementioned criteria and were deemed relevant to the
objectives of this review.

2.3. Data Extraction and Analysis

A thorough inspection of the selected articles was conducted, carefully extracting
detailed information about the various applications under consideration. This included
technical evidence of the implementations as well as the reported results. These data were
then classified and synthesized to allow its proper dissemination in the review.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 4 of 33

The analysis of the extracted data aimed to identify gaps in the existing research and to
highlight potential new research opportunities for programmable data planes in emerging
telecommunication network architectures.

3. Background in Programmable Data Plane and 5G and Beyond

This section provides an overview of programmable data planes and their enabling
technologies, such as SDN, PISA architecture, and P4 programming language. It also covers
the programmable devices that support these features. Additionally, a comprehensive
review of 5G and beyond architectures is provided to contextualize the implementations
described in the survey. Finally, relevant paradigms that play a key role in the analyzed
use cases are explained, including network function virtualization (NFV), network slicing
(NS), and multi-access edge computing (MEC).

3.1. Software Defined Networking, Programmable Data Plane, and Devices

3.1.1. Software-Defined Networking
Software-defined networking (SDN) is an emerging networking paradigm that enables
network administrators to oversee and govern the network infrastructure using software
applications, instead of depending solely on conventional networking hardware [1]. SDN
works by decoupling the control plane from the data plane, allowing the network to be
centrally managed and dynamically configured. This is accomplished through the use of a
centralized controller that communicates with switches and routers in the network using a
standardized protocol, such as OpenFlow [16]. The principles of SDN can be summarized
as follows:
• Separation of control plane and data plane: The control plane, responsible for gov-
erning forwarding behavior, is separated from the data plane, which performs the
actual traffic forwarding based on instructions from the control plane. This decou-
pling enhances the network architecture’s flexibility and scalability, allowing for more
efficient management.
• Centralized Control: The so-called SDN controller is responsible for handling control
logic, being a high-level software program that can run on commodity servers.
• Programmability: The network can be programmed using software applications that
run on top of the SDN controller, enabling dynamic configuration and automation of
network functions.
• Virtualization: The network can be virtualized, enabling multiple virtual networks to
run on a single physical network infrastructure.
• Open Standards: SDN uses open standards and protocols, enabling interoperability
between different vendors’ products and facilitating new developments.
By adopting SDN, network administrators can create a more agile, flexible, and scalable
network infrastructure providing better control and visibility over network traffic.
Figure 1 illustrates a general architecture of SDN. The network is managed through
network applications, which can include load balancing, firewall management, and network
monitoring. The controller platform integrates the SDN controller, which manages network
devices and enforces network policies. Communication between the controller and network
devices is facilitated through protocols such as OpenFlow or vendor-specific alternatives.
Network devices, such as switches and routers, are responsible for forwarding data packets
between network nodes, constituting the data forwarding elements. To define the data
plane behavior of SDN devices, P4 can be employed, specifying packet parsing, processing,
and forwarding operations.
 controller and network devices is facilitated through protocols such as OpenFlow or
vendor-specific alternatives. Network devices, such as switches and routers, are
responsible for forwarding data packets between network nodes, constituting the data
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 5 of 33
forwarding elements. To define the data plane behavior of SDN devices, P4 can be
employed, specifying packet parsing, processing, and forwarding operations.

SDN general
Figure 1. SDN general architecture
architecture [1].

3.1.2. Data
3.1.2. Data Plane
Plane Programmability
Programmability
Data plane
Data plane programmability
programmability isis aa concept
concept that
that refers
refers to
to the
the ability
ability to
to customize
customize and
and
manipulate the forwarding behavior of network devices, by programming the data plane
manipulate the forwarding behavior of network devices, by programming the data plane
hardware or software directly. The data plane is responsible for the actual transfer of data
hardware or software directly. The data plane is responsible for the actual transfer of data
packets across the network and is typically implemented in high-speed packet process-
packets across the network and is typically implemented in high-speed packet processing
ing devices.
devices.
Traditionally, the data plane has been fixed and determined by the firmware of the
Traditionally, the data plane has been fixed and determined by the firmware of the
network devices, with limited ability for customization or dynamic adaptation to changing
network devices, with limited ability for customization or dynamic adaptation to
network conditions. However, with the rise of SDN, data plane programmability has
changing network conditions. However, with the rise of SDN, data plane
become increasingly important as a means of enabling flexible and dynamic network
programmability has become increasingly important as a means of enabling flexible and
architectures that can respond to changing traffic patterns, application requirements, and
dynamic network architectures that can respond to changing traffic patterns, application
security threats. A few examples of new use cases are in-band network telemetry (INT),
requirements, and security threats. A few examples of new use cases are in-band network
active queue management (AQM), time-sensitive networking (TSN), and traffic offloading.
telemetry (INT), active queue management (AQM), time-sensitive networking (TSN), and
traffic offloading.
3.1.3. PISA (Protocol Independent Switch Architecture)
The Protocol-Independent Switch Architecture (PISA) is a programmable switch
3.1.3. PISA (Protocol Independent Switch Architecture)
model
Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW that enables granular control over packet processing [17]. As shown in Figure 6 of2, 31
PISAThe Protocol-Independent
comprises a programmable Switch
parser,Architecture (PISA)match-action
a programmable is a programmable
pipeline,switch
and a
model that enables
programmable granular
deparser control
that work over packet
together to dealprocessing [17]. As
with incoming shown
packets in Figure 2,
[18].
PISA comprises a programmable parser, a programmable match-action pipeline, and a
programmable deparser that work together to deal with incoming packets [18].

Figure2.2.PISA
Figure PISAprogrammable
programmableswitch
switchmodel.
model.

The programmable parser is responsible for extracting headers from incoming

packets and parsing them based on custom or standard protocol. It can be represented as
a state machine, enabling granular control over packet processing. The programmable
match-action pipeline is the core component of PISA and executes operations over the
packet headers. It is based on the concept of a programmable table and consists of multiple
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 6 of 33

The programmable parser is responsible for extracting headers from incoming packets
and parsing them based on custom or standard protocol. It can be represented as a state
machine, enabling granular control over packet processing. The programmable match-
action pipeline is the core component of PISA and executes operations over the packet
headers. It is based on the concept of a programmable table and consists of multiple stages
that process headers using match-action tables (MATs) and forward them to the next stage.
This allows for simultaneous lookups and actions across multiple memory blocks and
arithmetic logic units (ALUs). The programmable deparser is responsible for reassembling
the packet headers and serializing them for transmission. It receives the processed headers
from the pipeline stages and combines them to reconstruct the original packet, ensuring
that the packet is correctly formatted and ready to be transmitted.

3.1.4. P4
Programming Protocol-Independent Packet Processors, P4 [6], is a high-level domain-
specific programming language designed for programming network data planes using
the PISA processing pipeline. This enables the development of adaptable, customizable
devices that can be precisely adapted to meet the demands of specific applications and
network configurations. The main principles of P4 are:
• Programmability: Network operators define how packets are parsed and processed in
a way that is both adaptable and extensible.
• Protocol Independence: Packets are processed independently of the underlying proto-
cols or technologies used in the network.
• Match-Action Pipeline: A match-action pipeline model (i.e., PISA) is used to process
packets. In this model, incoming packets are matched against a set of rules that define
how they should be processed.
• Target-Independent: Code can be compiled to run on various network devices, such
as switches, routers, and programmable network interface cards (NICs) regardless of
the specific target.
The P4 Language Consortium has undertaken the development and standardization
of P4 as a programming language [19]. It has undergone several revisions since its initial
specification in 2014, with P414 being the first standardized version [20]. Introduced in
2016, the P416 specification [21] builds upon its predecessors and offers a broader range of
capabilities. It extends the applicability of P4 to cover a diverse range of targets, including
application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs), field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs),
and network interface cards (NICs).

3.1.5. Programmable Devices

The programmable data plane functionalities can be implemented in a variety of
network devices. From which the following categories can be identified:
• Programmable switches: Similar to traditional network switches but with programma-
bility capabilities. The match-action pipeline is the fundamental abstraction for the
functionality of a programmable switch. Thus, these devices use the PISA architecture
in their design. They can also be classified into hardware and software switches.
The formers are based on ASICs (application-specific integrated circuits) such as
Intel Tofino (e.g., EdgeCore Wedge 100BF-32X from Edgecore Networks (Hsinchu,
Taiwan) [22], Inventec D10056 from Inventec Corporation (Taipei, Taiwan) [23], and
Netberg Aurora 610 from Netberg (Taoyuan, Taiwan) [24]). On the other hand, soft-
ware switches are programs for forwarding packets that operate on regular CPUs (e.g.,
bmv2, p4c-behavioral and T4P4S). The bmv2 switch can reach 1 Gbps [25], while the
latest Tofino ASIC (Intel Tofino 2) offers rates of 12.8 Tbps [26].
• FPGA boards: Development boards that have as the main component an FPGA (Field
Programmable Gate Array). FPGAs are semiconductor elements that are reconfig-
urable and can be programmed to implement custom hardware functionality. These
devices also incorporate SFP and PCIe interfaces for high-density networking. NetF-
 Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 7 of 33

PGA PLUS [27] and NetFPGA SUME [28] are examples of these boards. Based on
Xilinx FPGAs, they can achieve a throughput up to 100 Gbps.
• Smart NICs: Programmable NICs that offload network processing tasks from the host
CPU to a dedicated hardware accelerator (i.e., network processing unit). Well-known
smart NICs include Netronome Agilio CX series [29]. The latter being able to perform
100 Gbps at line rate.
Even though ASIC-based switches offer the highest throughput, they are less flexible
in terms of programmability (i.e., processing of external functions). FPGA boards and Smart
NICs offer further programmability but with more modest data rates. Finally, software
switches have the highest degree of flexibility at the cost of lower throughput.

3.2. 5G and Beyond Technology and Architecture

3.2.1. 5G Technology
5G technology has been developed by the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP),
which has set out to define and finalize its specification over Releases 15, 16, 17, and
18 [7]. 5G aims to deliver enhanced data rates exceeding the capabilities of existing
4G LTE networks. Moreover, it offers wider network coverage, more reliable connec-
tions, reduced latency times, lower power consumption, and improved scalability [30].
These capabilities allow the implementation of new applications, also known as verti-
cals, such as: eHealth, autonomous vehicles (V2X), virtual/augmented reality (VR/AR),
Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEWsmart cities, smart homes, and Industry 4.0. Accordingly, the IMT-2020 (International 8 of 31
Mobile Telecommunications—2020), issued by the ITU-T [8], has defined three categories
to classify 5G applications, as can be observed in Figure 3:

Figure
Figure3.3.Categories for5G
Categories for 5Gapplications
applications[8].[8].

•• Enhanced mobile broadband (eMBB): Designed to deliver high data rates (up
Enhanced mobile broadband (eMBB): Designed to deliver high data rates (up to >> 1
to >> 1 Gbps), allowing users to experience new levels of mobile broadband con-
Gbps), allowing users to experience new levels of mobile broadband connectivity. It
nectivity. It supports services like virtual reality, ultra-high-definition video streaming,
supports
or immersiveservices
gaming.like virtual reality, ultra-high-definition video streaming, or
• immersive
Ultra-reliablegaming.
and low-latency communications (uRLLC): Enables devices to commu-
• Ultra-reliable
nicate with eachand
otherlow-latency
in “real time”.communications (uRLLC):
This category of service Enables
is applied devices to
in scenarios
communicate with each other in “real time”. This category of service is applied in
scenarios where data loss must be avoided, low latency is crucial, and a high level of
reliability is required. Applications such as V2X, distribution automation in a smart
grid, or remote medical surgery are supported.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 8 of 33

where data loss must be avoided, low latency is crucial, and a high level of reliability
is required. Applications such as V2X, distribution automation in a smart grid, or
remote medical surgery are supported.
• Massive machine type communications (mMTC): Enables massive numbers of devices
to be connected. Usually, these devices transmit relatively low volumes of non-delay-
sensitive data. Backed services include IoT applications: Smart cities, smart homes, or
some industrial IoT scenarios.
The aforementioned usage scenarios are associated to a number of KPIs defined for
IMT-2020 in [10]. In this manner, the KPIs have minimum technical demands to fulfill in
order to be 5G complaint, e.g., user plane latency of 4 ms for eMBB and 1 ms for uRLLC.
Table 1 reports a complete list of these requirements.

Table 1. Minimum technical performance requirements of IMT-2020 [10].

KPI Key Use Case Values

Peak Data Rate eMBB DL: 20 Gbps, UL: 10 Gbps
Peak Spectral Efficiency eMBB DL: 30 bps/Hz, UL: 15 bps/Hz
User Experienced Data Rate eMBB DL: 100 Mbps, UL: 50 Mbps (Dense Urban)
DL: 0.3 bps/Hz, UL: 0.21 bps/Hz (Indoor Hotspot);
5% User Spectral Efficiency eMBB DL: 0.225 bps/Hz, UL: 0.15 bps/Hz (Dense Urban);
DL: 0.12 bps/Hz, UL: 0.045 bps/Hz (Rural)
DL: 9 bps/Hz/TRxP, UL: 6.75 bps/Hz/TRxP (Indoor Hotspot);
Average Spectral Efficiency eMBB DL: 7.8 bps/Hz/TRxP, UL: 5.4 bps/Hz/TRxP (Dense Urban);
DL: 3.3 bps/Hz/TRxP, UL: 1.6 bps/Hz/TRxP (Rural)
Area Traffic Capacity eMBB DL: 10 Mbps/m2 (Indoor Hotspot)
User Plane Latency eMBB, uRLLC 4 ms for eMBB and 1 ms for uRLLC
Control Plane Latency eMBB, uRLLC 20 ms for eMBB and uRLLC
Connection Density mMTC 1,000,000 devices/km2
Capability to support high sleep ratio and long sleep duration to allow
Energy Efficiency eMBB
low energy consumption when there are no data (e.g., above 6 GHz)
1–10−5 success probability of transmitting a layer 2 protocol data unit
Reliability uRLLC
of 32 bytes within 1 ms in channel quality of coverage edge
Mobility eMBB Up to 500 km/h
Mobility Interruption Time eMBB, uRLLC 0 ms
Bandwidth eMBB At least 100 MHz; up to 1 Gbps for operation in higher frequency bands

3.2.2. 5G System Architecture

In the first stage of Release 15, 3GPP has defined the complete architecture of a 5G
system (5GS) [31]. It describes a set of characteristics and specifications necessary for
the deployment of an operational infrastructure for mobile networks based on a 5GS.
During the second stage, the mechanisms for data and service connectivity, as well as the
general 5G architecture, were established. Figure 4 illustrates a simplified 5GS architecture
based on a service-based representation [32]. In this description, every network function
(NF) (e.g., NSSF) provides a service which can be consumed by any other NF (e.g., AMF).
NFs interact with each other using either dedicated protocol point-to-point interfaces (e.g.,
N1) or through API-based interfaces (e.g., Nnssf). As can be observed, there is a separation
of the control plane and the user plane.
 the second stage, the mechanisms for data and service connectivity, as well as the general
5G architecture, were established. Figure 4 illustrates a simplified 5GS architecture based
on a service-based representation [32]. In this description, every network function (NF)
(e.g., NSSF) provides a service which can be consumed by any other NF (e.g., AMF). NFs
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955
interact with each other using either dedicated protocol point-to-point interfaces (e.g., N1)
9 of 33
or through API-based interfaces (e.g., Nnssf). As can be observed, there is a separation of
the control plane and the user plane.

Figure4.4.Simplified
Figure Simplifiedrepresentation
representationofofthe
the5G
5Gsystem
systemarchitecture.
architecture.

3.2.3.
3.2.3.Network
NetworkFunctions,
Functions,Entities,
Entities,and
andSubsystems
Subsystems
There
Thereare
area vast number
a vast number of NFs, entities
of NFs, and subsystems
entities included
and subsystems in the 5GS
included in architec-
the 5GS
ture. However,However,
architecture. for the sake
forofthe
brevity,
sake ofthisbrevity,
subsection
this will only describe
subsection the components
will only describe the
that are the most
components thatimportant to the
are the most implementations
important included in the
to the implementations review. in the review.
included
•• 5Gresidential
5G residential gateway
gateway (5G-RG):
(5G-RG): Device
Device that
that enables
enables residential
residential or
orsmall
smallbusiness
business
fixedusers
fixed userstotoconnect
connecttoto a 5G
a 5G network
network andand
thenthen
to ato
DNa DN
suchsuch asInternet.
as the the Internet. This
This acts
as a bridge
acts between
as a bridge 5GC and
between 5GCUE.
and UE.
•• Access
Accessand
andmobility
mobilitymanagement
managementfunction
function (AMF):
(AMF): Control
Controlplane
planeNF NFwithin
withinthe
the5G
5G
Core
Core(5GC).
(5GC).TheTheUEs
UEs transmit
transmit all
all connection-
connection- andand session-related
session-related data
data to
to the
the AMF,
AMF,
which is in charge of connection and mobility management duties. Other key features
are cyphering and integrity protection, providing the user equipment (UE) with a
temporary ID, subscriber authentication, support for location services (cell sites or
tracking area), and help in lawful interception.
• Access gateway function (AGF): NF that enables fixed users to receive services from
the same 5GC that serves mobile subscribers. Its key functions include handling
signaling associated with QoS and PDU sessions as well as marking user plane packets
in uplink connections.
• Authentication server function (AUSF): Manages UE authentication of a 3GPP or
non-3GPP access.
• Data network (DN): In addition to IP-based data networks (e.g., the Internet), it refers
to any other structured data network (e.g., IoT data with low overhead).
• Network repository function (NRF): Works as a central repository for all NFs. Allows
NFs to be registered and recognized.
• Network slice selection function (NSSF): Aids in selecting the network slice instance
that will support a given device. The concept of network slicing will be further
described in the following subsection.
• Next-generation radio access network (NG-RAN): Constitutes the 5G radio access
for the UE. The main component of this subsystem is the 5G Node B (gNB), i.e., the
5G New Radio (5G-NR) base station. It can be separated into two modules: central
unit (CU) and distributed unit (DU). This architecture features connections among
CU, DU, and 5GC. The CU handles upper layers and can be deployed as a hardware
device or as cloud-based software. While DUs are placed at cell sites and manage
time-sensitive processes. There are architectural variations for NG-RAN (e.g., C-RAN),
further details can be found in [33].
• Policy control function (PCF): Establishes unified policy rules for control NFs like
mobility, roaming, and slicing.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 10 of 33

• Session management function (SMF): Another control NF, it is responsible of the

session management, i.e., creation, update, and termination of the PDU (protocol data
unit) session. Further capabilities include IP address allocation for UE, selection and
control of user plane function (UPF), and liaison with the policy control function (PCF)
for policy and QoS enforcement.
• Unified data management (UDM): Stores subscriber data and user profiles.
• User equipment (UE): Any end-user device that is able to connect to a 5G network,
e.g., a mobile phone, an IoT sensor node, or a vehicle.
• User plane function (UPF): Handles UE data traffic by routing and forwarding packets.
It also acts as an interconnection point between NG-RAN and DN, providing GPRS
tunnelling protocol (GTP) encapsulation and decapsulation. Other important func-
tionalities are acting as an anchor for RAN mobility, applying service data flow (SDF)
filtering, implementing per-flow QoS ID, and reporting of traffic usage for billing.
Given the line rate characteristic of data plane programmable devices, it makes them
ideal candidates for handling 5G user traffic. Thus, a common implementation involves
offloading UPF forwarding services to ASIC-based switches. Other uses include employing
programmable devices within 5G entities such as gNB or even at the edge of the network
(between NG-RAN and 5GC).

3.2.4. Beyond 5G Prospectives

Research beyond 5G technology has already started [34]. 6G is the next generation
of
Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW communication networks that will succeed the current 5G networks. 6G is expected 11 of 31
to provide faster speeds, lower latency, enhance mobility, and more reliable connections
than 5G [35]. It is also expected to enable new applications and use cases that are not
currently viable with existing technology. Some of the potential use cases for 6G include
advanced virtual
advanced virtualandand augmented
augmented realityimmersive
reality (truly (truly immersive
XR), holographic XR), communication
holographic
communication
(high-fidelity (high-fidelity
mobile hologram), mobile hologram),
and digital and(digital
replicas digitaltwin)
replicas
[36].(digital twin) [36].
These applications
These applications will shape new requirements
will shape new requirements and KPIs for 6G. and KPIs for 6G.
Figure
Figure 55 shows
shows the
therequirements
requirementsfor for6G.
6G.As
Ascan
canbe beobserved,
observed,three threeofofthem
themare similar
are similar
to 5G. However, there are three new categories [11]. Precision and accuracy
to 5G. However, there are three new categories [11]. Precision and accuracy are associated are associated
with sensing
with sensing andandlocalization
localizationcapabilities,
capabilities,respectively.
respectively.InInthis this context,
context, oneone
wayway of
of mea-
measuring sensing precision is using missed detection (MD) and
suring sensing precision is using missed detection (MD) and false alarm (FA) parameters. false alarm (FA)
parameters.
There is also There is alsoresponse
adaptability adaptability response
time, which time, which
is related to networkis related to network
automation and the
automation and the quantity of manual intervention that it needs. Finally,
quantity of manual intervention that it needs. Finally, end devices are expected to have end devices are
expected to have intuitive interfaces, e.g., sensible to gestures, as well as
intuitive interfaces, e.g., sensible to gestures, as well as to consume from low power to to consume from
lowpower
no powerattoall.no Furthermore,
power at all. some
Furthermore, some technologies
key enabling key enabling that technologies that to
are expected arebe
expected to be part of 6G research include artificial intelligence/machine
part of 6G research include artificial intelligence/machine learning, terahertz technologies, learning,
terahertz technologies,
spectrum sharing, and newspectrum
networksharing, and new
architecture network architecture
paradigms such as convergedparadigms such
RAN-Core
as converged RAN-Core
and subnetworks [37]. and subnetworks [37].

Figure 5.
Figure 5. 6G
6G key
key requirements
requirements [11].
[11].

The exploration of potential applications and capabilities of 6G technology is an

ongoing endeavor. It is anticipated to bring forth substantial advancements in
communication networks and facilitate novel and inventive use cases spanning various
industries.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 11 of 33

The exploration of potential applications and capabilities of 6G technology is an ongo-

ing endeavor. It is anticipated to bring forth substantial advancements in communication
networks and facilitate novel and inventive use cases spanning various industries.

3.3. Network Function Virtualization, Network Slicing, and Multi-Access Edge Computing
3.3.1. Network Function Virtualization (NFV)
Network function virtualization (NFV) [38] is an architectural approach for designing
and deploying network services by virtualizing the functionality of traditional dedicated
hardware, such as routers, switches, firewalls, and load balancers, into software running
on standard servers, storage, and networking equipment.
This architecture has been standardized by ETSI (European Telecommunications
Standards Institute) [39] defining functional building blocks and interfaces to manage
virtualized network services. 5G systems incorporate virtualization technology to enable
the implementation of various network services, including 5G core network functions,
such as the AMF as virtual network functions. This means that 5G network functions
can be executed on standard servers, which can be located in centralized data centers or
cloud-based infrastructures.
The NFV architecture presents a structural basis for constructing adaptable and versa-
tile networks through the virtualization of network functions and their separation from the
underlying hardware. This permits network operators to enhance scalability and optimize
operational expenses by leveraging a shared infrastructure to cater to multiple network
services effectively.

3.3.2. Network Slicing (NS)

Network slicing (NS) [40] is a technique employed in data networks that enables the
establishment of multiple virtual networks, known as slices, atop a single physical network
infrastructure. These slices are distinct and self-contained network instances capable of
being tailored to satisfy the specific demands of an application or service.
NS finds significant utility in 5G networks [41], in which slices are utilized to deliver
differentiated services for diverse applications, such as IoT (mMTC), autonomous vehicles
(uRLLC), and audio/video streaming (eMBB). Each of these applications possesses unique
network requirements pertaining to bandwidth, latency, and reliability. This facilitates the
provision of individual virtual networks for each application, accompanied by their own
QoS assurances.

3.3.3. Multi-Access Edge Computing (MEC)

Multi-access edge computing (MEC) [42] is a distributed computing paradigm aimed
at extending the capabilities of cloud computing in proximity to end-user devices. By
leveraging an infrastructure that enables the execution of applications and services at the
network’s edge, MEC reduces reliance on centralized cloud computing resources. These
resources can be strategically located in diverse areas such as base stations, access points,
and edge routers. This approach holds the potential to decrease network latency, optimize
network bandwidth utilization, and facilitate the development of innovative applications
and services that demand real-time data processing and low-latency response times. Within
the realm of 5G, there exist several deployment scenarios wherein MEC can seamlessly
integrate with 5GS [43]. Figure 6 showcases four plausible physical implementations of a
5G + MEC network.
 and edge routers. This approach holds the potential to decrease network latency, optimize
network bandwidth utilization, and facilitate the development of innovative applications
and services that demand real-time data processing and low-latency response times.
Within the realm of 5G, there exist several deployment scenarios wherein MEC can
seamlessly
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 integrate with 5GS [43]. Figure 6 showcases four plausible physical 12 of 33
implementations of a 5G + MEC network.

Figure 6. (a) NG-RAN and6. local

Figure UPF with
(a) NG-RAN MEC.
and local (b)with
UPF Transmission node andnode
MEC. (b) Transmission MEC andwith
MECan optional
with an optional
local UPF. (c) Locallocal
UPFUPF.
and(c)MEC withand
Local UPF network
MEC withaggregation point. point.
network aggregation (d) 5GC functions
(d) 5GC functionswith
with MEC
MEC [43].
[43]. 4. Findings and Discussion
This section presents an analysis of the contributions made by the surveyed papers
4. Findings and Discussion
and a discussion of their results. Firstly, the criteria used to classify the proposed articles are
provided, based
This section presents on the role
an analysis ofofthe
programmable data made
contributions plane devices
by thewithin the 5G and
surveyed beyond
papers
architecture. Subsequently, the implementation of each selected work is explained and
and a discussion of their results. Firstly, the criteria used to classify the proposed articles
compared, including their reported results. Finally, a summary of the findings is presented
are provided, based
alongonwith
thetherole of programmable
insights data plane devices within the 5G and
gained from the research.
beyond architecture. Subsequently, the implementation of each selected work is explained
4.1. Classification
and compared, including their ofreported
the Reviewed Papers Finally, a summary of the findings is
results.
presented along with Programmable data planes
the insights gained fromhave demonstrated
the research. significant utility in novel telecommu-
nication systems, as highlighted in previous sections. Numerous studies have explored the
potential of these applications, making it essential for network operators and researchers
to have a systematic review of these studies, placed within a system architecture setting.
This approach aids in the identification of critical subsystems and network functions that
incorporate programmable devices. To address this need, a classification of articles is
proposed centered on 5G and beyond architecture and its use cases. Table 2 presents the
position of each reviewed work within the system architecture, its associated use case
category, and the deployed programmable data plane device.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 13 of 33

Table 2. Article classification based on system architecture and use case.

Architectural Placement Device Supported

Use Case Work Technology
UE NG-RAN Edge-to-Core UPF SW Switch HW Switch FPGA Board Smart NIC N/A
Aghdai et al. [44,45] • • 4G and 5G
Shen et al. [46] • • 5G
Lee et al. [47] • • 5G
Singh et al. [48] • • 4G and 5G
Singh et al. [49] • • • • 5G
Vörös [50] • • 5G
Ricart-Sanchez et al. [51] • • 5G
Lin et al. [52] • • 5G
NIKSS [53] • • 5G
MacDavid et al. [54] • • • 5G
Alfredsson et al. [55] • • 5G
Bose et al. [56] • • 5G
Tunneling and AccelUPF [57] • • • 5G
forwarding
CeUPF [58] • • 5G
Rischke et al. [59] • • 5G
Fernando et al. [60] • • • 5G
Jain et al. [61] • • 5G and beyond
Gramaglia et al. [62] • • 5G and beyond
BRAINE [63] • • 5G
Kong et al. [64] • • 5G
Synergy [65] • • 5G
Velox [66,67] • • 5G
Paolucci et al. [68] • • 5G
Kundel et al. [69] • • 5G
Kaloom 5G UPF [70] • • 4G and 5G
Metaswitch Fusion Core [71] • • 4G and 5G
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 14 of 33

Table 2. Cont.

Architectural Placement Device Supported

Use Case Work Technology
UE NG-RAN Edge-to-Core UPF SW Switch HW Switch FPGA Board Smart NIC N/A
Ricart-Sanchez et al. [72–74] • • 5G
Lin et al. [52] • • 5G
Cunha et al. [75] • • 5G
Chang et al. [76,77] • • 5G
Chiu et al. [78] • • 5G
Wang et al. [79] • • 5G
Network slicing
FestNet [80] • • 5G and beyond
FSA [81,82] • • 5G
Yan et al. [83] • • 5G and beyond
P4-TINS [84] • • 5G
AHAB [85] • • 5G
Turkovic et al. [86] • • • 5G and beyond
Lin et al. [87] • • 5G
Ricart-Sanchez et al. [88,89] • • 5G
Paolucci et al. [90] • • 5G

Cybersecurity BRAINE [63] • • 5G

Velox [66] • • 5G
Wen et al. [91] • • 5G
FrameRTP4 [92] • • 5G
Paolucci et al. [90] • • 5G
Dreibholz et al. [93] • • 4G and 5G
In-band Telemetry Scano et al. [94] • • 5G and beyond
SDNPS [95] • • 5G
BRAINE [63] • • • 5G
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 15 of 33

Table 2. Cont.

Architectural Placement Device Supported

Use Case Work Technology
UE NG-RAN Edge-to-Core UPF SW Switch HW Switch FPGA Board Smart NIC N/A
TurboEPC [96] • • • • 4G and 5G
Bose et al. [56] • • 5G
Control plane offloading
AccelUPF [57] • • • 5G
Velox [67] • • 5G
SMARTHO [97] • • 5G
Handover Aghdai et al. [45] • • 4G and 5G
Synergy [65] • • 5G
INCA [98,99] • • • • • 5G
Service function chaining
FrameRTP4 [92] • • 5G
Data placement GRED [100] • • 5G
Data retrieval HDS [101] • • 5G
Data aggregation Wu et al. [102] • • 5G
Beamforming calculations Mallouhi et al. [103] • • • 5G
Publish subscribe scheme Lotfimahyari et al. [104] • • 5G
Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 31
Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 31
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 16 of 33

4.2. Reviewed Literature Statistics

4.2. Reviewed
4.2. Reviewed Literature
Literature Statistics
Statistics
Upon examining the 61 articles included in this review, relevant statistics were
Upon examining
Upon examining thethe6161articles
articlesincluded
includedin in this review,
this relevant statistics
werewere
obtained. Figure 7 presents the distribution of papers perreview, relevant
year from statistics
2018 through 2022 asob-
obtained.
tained. Figure
Figure 7 presents
7 presents the distribution of papers per year from 2018 through 2022 2022
the distribution of papers per year from 2018 through as
as well
well as early work from 2023.
well as early work from
as early work from 2023. 2023.

Figure 7. Distribution of reviewed articles per year.

Figure 7.
Figure 7. Distribution
Distribution of
of reviewed
reviewed articles
articles per
per year.
year.
The distribution of programmable devices used in the reviewed articles is presented
The
The distribution
distribution ofof programmable
programmable devices
devices used
used in
in the
the reviewed
reviewed articles
articles is
is presented
presented
in Figure 8. The results show that a significant portion of the implementations were done
in
in Figure
Figure 8.
8. The
The results
results show
show that
that aa significant
significant portion
portion of
of the
the implementations
implementations were were done
done
using software switches (40%). These switches are typically used for prototyping and
using
using software
softwareswitches
switches(40%). These
(40%). Theseswitches are are
switches typically usedused
typically for prototyping and proof
for prototyping and
proof of concept purposes. Hardware devices, including switches, FPGA boards, and
of concept purposes. Hardware devices, including switches, FPGA boards,
proof of concept purposes. Hardware devices, including switches, FPGA boards, and and smart NICs,
smart NICs, accounted for a combined usage of 55%. This indicates that the majority of
accounted
smart NICs, foraccounted
a combined forusage of 55%. usage
a combined This indicates that the
of 55%. This majority
indicates thatofthe
research work
majority of
research work is geared towards deployment in real-world networks. It should be noted
is geared work
research towards deployment
is geared in real-world
towards deployment networks. It should
in real-world be noted
networks. that 4.9%
It should be of the
noted
that 4.9% of the papers did not provide any information regarding the device used.
papers
that 4.9%didofnot
theprovide
papers any information
did not provide anyregarding the device
information used. the device used.
regarding

Figure 8. Distribution
Figure of implemented
8. Distribution programmable
of implemented devices
programmable from
devices reviewed
from articles.
reviewed articles.
Figure 8. Distribution of implemented programmable devices from reviewed articles.
Figure
Figure 9 shows
9 shows thethe distribution
distribution of of papers
papers based
based ononthethe architecture
architecture section
section where
where thethe
Figure 9have
applications shows beenthedeployed.
distribution It ofevident
is papers based
that onmajority
the the architecture
of section
solutions, where the
representing
applications have been deployed. It is evident that the majority of solutions, representing
applications
51%, have beenhave been deployed.
implemented Itedge-to-core
is evident that the majority of solutions,This
representing
51%, have been implemented in in
thethe
edge-to-core section
section of of
thethe architecture.
architecture. indicates
This indicates
51%,most
that have been implemented in the edge-to-core section of the architecture. This indicates
that most of of
thethe research
research found
found inin
thisthis review
review is isfocused
focused ononthethe transportnetwork.
transport network. In In
that most
addition, of the research
Figure1010illustrates found
illustratesthe in this
thedistribution review
distributionof is focused
of articles
articles based on on the transport network. In
addition, Figure on their
their specific
specificuse
usecase
caseim-
addition, Figure 10
plementations, revealing illustrates the distribution of articles based on their specific use case
implementations, revealingthatthattunneling
tunneling andand
forwarding,
forwarding, alongside network
alongside slicing,
network emerge
slicing,
implementations,
as the most frequently revealing
adopted thatusetunneling and forwarding,
cases. Moreover, the surveyalongside
found thatnetwork slicing,
16 articles have
Sensors2023,
Sensors 2023,23,
23,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 16 of
16 of 31
31

Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 17 of 33

emerge as
emerge as the
the most
most frequently
frequently adopted
adopted use
use cases.
cases. Moreover,
Moreover, the
the survey
survey found
found that
that 16
16
articles have
articles have made
made their
their used
used code
code available
available onon the
the GitHub
GitHub platform.
platform. Further
Further details
details can
can
made their used code available on the GitHub platform. Further details can be found in
be found
be found in
in Table
Table A1
A1 from
from Appendix
Appendix AA of
of this
this paper.
paper.
Table A1 from Appendix A of this paper.

Figure
Figure 9.9.Architecture
Figure9. Architecture placement
Architectureplacement distribution
placementdistribution of
distributionof implementations
ofimplementations from
implementationsfrom reviewed
fromreviewed articles.
reviewedarticles.
articles.

Figure10.
Figure
Figure 10. Usecase
10.Use
Use casedistribution
case distributionof
distribution ofofimplementations
implementationsfrom
implementations fromreviewed
from reviewedarticles.
reviewed articles.
articles.
4.3. Characteristics of the Reviewed work
4.3. Characteristics
4.3. Characteristics of of the
the Reviewed
Reviewed work work
Aghdai et al. [44] propose a transparent edge gateway (EGW) for MEC in LTE or 5G
Aghdai et
Aghdai et al. [44]
[44] propose
propose aa transparent
transparent edge edge gateway
gateway (EGW)(EGW) for for MEC
MEC in in LTE
LTE oror 5G
5G
networks. Thisal. solution is implemented on P4 smart NICs, enabling content delivery at the
networks. This
networks. This solution
solution is is implemented
implemented on on P4 smart
smart NICs,
NICs, enabling
enabling content
content delivery
delivery at at
edge of the transport network by parsing theP4inner IP headers of GTP-U messages. In their
the edge
the edge of
of the
the transport
transport networknetwork by by parsing
parsing the the inner
inner IPIP headers
headers of of GTP-U
GTP-U messages.
messages. In In
subsequent work [45], the authors incorporated mobility support for the handover process,
their
their subsequent
subsequent
aiming to minimize work
work [45],
the[45], the authors
the
number authors incorporated
incorporated
of application mobility support
mobility
state migrations. support for for the
the handover
handover
process,
process, aiming
aiming to
to minimize
minimize the
the number
number of
of application
application state
state
Shen et al. [46] introduce a GTP engine for MEC in 5G networks, which offloads the migrations.
migrations.
Shen et
Shen et al.
encapsulation al. [46]
[46] introduce
and introduce aa GTP
decapsulation GTP engine
of engine
the for MEC
for
tunneling MEC in 5G
in
protocol5G networks,
networks,
to a P4 FPGA which
which offloads the
offloads
board. the
encapsulation
encapsulation
Lee et al.and and
[47] decapsulation
decapsulation
present a P4of of the tunneling
the
switch tunneling protocol to
protocol
that implements to aa P4
P4 FPGA
stateless FPGA board. functions
board.
translation
Lee
Lee et
et al.
al. [47]
[47] present
present a
a P4
P4 switch
switch that
that implements
implements
for both GTP and SRv6 (Segment Routing IPv6) protocols. This approach stateless
stateless translation
translation functions
functions
enablesforfor
the
both
both GTP
GTP and
and SRv6
SRv6 (Segment
(Segment Routing
Routing IPv6)
IPv6) protocols.
protocols. This
This
coexistence of both protocols within a 5G network, facilitating a gradual transition towards approach
approach enables
enables the
the
coexistence
coexistence
full adoption ofofboth
of both
SRv6. protocols within
protocols within aa 5G 5G network,
network, facilitating
facilitating aa gradual
gradual transition
transition
towards
towards full
full et
Singh adoption
adoption of SRv6.
of SRv6. evolved packet gateway (EPG) offloading by employing
al. [48] implement
Singh et
Singh
P4 switches et al.
al.perform
to [48] implement
[48] implement
functions evolved
evolved
such as packet
packet gateway
GTP gateway
and VXLAN (EPG)
(EPG) offloading
offloading
(virtual by employing
by
extensible employing
local area
P4
P4 switches
switches
network) to perform
to perform functions
functions such
encapsulation/decapsulation, such as as GTP
IPGTP andand
and
routing, VXLAN
VXLAN (virtual
(virtual
stateless extensible
extensible
firewall. local
In theirlocal area
area
follow-up
network)
network) encapsulation/decapsulation,
encapsulation/decapsulation, IP
IP routing,
routing, and
and stateless
stateless
work [49], the authors present a hybrid pipeline design for 5G gNB and UPF. P4 smart firewall.
firewall. In
In their
their follow-
follow-
up
up work
work
NICs [49],
[49],
and the authors
the
switches authors
were used present
present aa hybrid
hybrid
to handle pipeline
pipeline
most design
of thedesign
packetforfor 5G gNB
5G
processing,gNB and
and
whileUPF.
UPF. P4 smart
P4 smart
unsupported
NICs
NICs and switches
and switches
functions such as ARQ were used
were(automatic to handle
used to handle repeat most
most of the packet
of theand
request) packet processing,
processing,were
cryptography while
while unsupported
unsupported
performed using
functions
functions
DPDK (data such
such as ARQ
as
plane ARQ (automatic
(automatic
development kit). repeat request)
repeat request) andand cryptography
cryptography were were performed
performed
usingVörös
using DPDKet(data
DPDK (data plane
plane
al. [50] development
development
introduce kit).
a hybridkit). approach to packet processing in gNB that employs
a P4 switch for most of the workload and outsources additional tasks, such as ARQ and
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 18 of 33

ciphering, to DPDK external services. This approach allows for a more efficient utilization
of hardware resources and better scalability of the system.
Ricart-Sanchez et al. [51] present a P4-based solution to improve the performance of the
edge-to-core network data path in 5G multi-tenant environments. The proposed solution
leverages P4 FPGA boards to handle encapsulation protocols such as VXLAN, GTP, and
GTP over VXLAN, enabling efficient traffic routing and forwarding. In their subsequent
works [88,89], the authors introduce a firewall system for 5G multi-tenant scenarios that
supports traffic detection, differentiation, and selective blocking in the backhaul network.
The firewall rules are stored in the TCAM (ternary-content-addressable memory) table of
the P4 FPGA boards. Moreover, in [72,73], the authors design and implement a network
slicing framework for the edge-to-core network segment that allows for the creation of
different slices based on a 6-tuple consisting of user source and destination IPs, user source
and destination ports, differentiated services code point (DSCP), and GTP tunnel ID. The
framework is deployed in a smart grid self-healing automatic reconfiguration use case
in [74], i.e., uRLLC traffic.
Lin et al. [52] leverage P4 switches to implement a network slicer and a UPF for
handling different types of traffic in a 5G testbed. Specifically, they use P4 switches to
implement the transport network slicing functionality as well as the data plane functions
required for supporting mMTC, eMBB, and CIoT traffic.
NIKSS [53] is a software switch implemented in P4. It features a PSA (portable switch
architecture) eBPF compiler that translates P4 programs into executable code. This device
has been programmed to function as a 5G UPF for evaluation purposes, demonstrating its
capability to handle a range of protocols, including IP, UDP, and GTP-U.
MacDavid et al. [54] implemented two 5G UPFs. The first is a model UPF implemented
as a P4 software switch, with the PFCP interface defined as a series of match-action tables
based on packet metadata. This approach provides developers with a useful starting point
for creating full-fledged UPF implementations for specific hardware targets. The second
UPF is designed to run on hardware switches, maximizing bandwidth and minimizing
latency. It leverages microservices to provide additional functionality, such as buffering
traffic for idle mobile devices.
Alfredsson et al. [55] propose the design of a 5G multi-access proxy’s user plane
based on the MP-DCCP (multi-path datagram congestion control protocol) protocol, which
extends DCCP to support multipath communication. To implement this design, the authors
use a P4 smart NIC.
Bose et al. [56] implement 5G UPF prototypes, one of which utilizes a P4 smart NIC to
offload both data plane processing (e.g., GTP encapsulation/decapsulation and oversub-
scribed session queuing) and control plane signaling (e.g., control plane packet processing
and data plane rule installation). In a follow-up work [57], the authors propose AccelUPF,
a high-performance 5G UPF that offloads user plane functionality to a programmable
switch, achieving significant acceleration in data plane processing. It also offloads PFCP
(packet forwarding control protocol) message processing from the control plane, dividing it
between the hardware and software components to optimize performance. The fast path on
hardware is assigned to the more common and simpler patterns of PFCP messages, while
the software handles the more complex and infrequent messages.
CeUPF [58] adopts a hybrid architecture that combines software and hardware ele-
ments to optimize the performance of user plane functions. Specifically, some actions, such
as traffic steering and datagram forwarding, are offloaded to programmable hardware.
While other messages that the hardware cannot process are directed back to the software
user plane. This offloading is achieved using a P4-based hardware switch and a smart NIC.
Rischke et al. [59] conducted a comparative analysis of XDP, DPDK, and P4 as process-
ing acceleration technologies in uRLLC scenarios. In their study, they implemented UPF
surrogates to handle GTP processes for each technology. Specifically, they used a P4 FPGA
board as the device under test to evaluate the performance of the P4-based UPF.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 19 of 33

Fernando et al. [60] develop a 5G-MEC testbed for the purpose of gathering data
related to cybersecurity. To achieve high throughput in this architecture, P4 switches are
utilized specifically for the handling of UDP traffic.
Jain et al. [61] utilize a P4 Smart NIC to implement the UPF function for 5G and beyond
networks. The device performs forwarding and tunneling, while more complex functions
such as buffering and flow processing are assigned to a host-based UPF.
Gramaglia et al. [62] present an implementation of SRv6 as a transport protocol for
5G network slicing utilizing P4 switches. The proposed solution is evaluated in terms of
performance against the widely used GTP protocol.
BRAINE [63] proposes a MEC solution for 5G. This framework deploys multiple P4
switches to perform INT, user plane offloading, and DoS attack detection.
Kong et al. [64] implement a MEC router based on a P4 switch to provide ultra-low
latency services in a distributed computing environment. The router performs GTP match
and encapsulation/decapsulation actions, which minimize the load on host CPU cores.
Synergy [65] is a high-performance UPF on P4 smart NICs with monitoring capabilities
for user session data prediction and handover optimization. Efficient buffering of data
packets during handover and paging events is accomplished by employing a two-level
flow-state access mechanism, which results in low latency for both control and data planes
while maintaining high packet forwarding throughput. The prediction of handover events
is achieved through the utilization of a recurrent neural network model.
Velox [66,67] is a network of P4 switches designed to interconnect 5G RAN and core
networks for industrial scenarios. It enables switches to process cellular control (NGAP) and
cellular data packets (GTP) while introducing the concept of intra-cellular optimization to
reduce latency between two devices on the same network. Additionally, active monitoring
and security capabilities are included in the data plane pipeline.
Paolucci et al. [68] present an implementation of a UPF offloaded to a P4 switch.
The demonstration includes GTP-U encapsulation/decapsulation functions, automatic
forwarding and steering functions, and configurable monitoring of selected GTP flows’
performance, such as the online latency experienced at a node. Additionally, in [89], the
same authors introduce use cases that showcase the potential of programmable data planes
in 5G SDN networks. P4 switches are utilized to provide advanced functionalities such as
traffic engineering, cybersecurity, multi-tenancy, 5G offloading, and telemetry.
Kundel et al. [69] evaluate various UPF implementations in an end-to-end 5G stan-
dalone test network, including a P4 switch based UPF.
The Kaloom 5G UPF [70] employs an Intel Tofino ASIC and offloads QoS process-
ing (i.e., bit rate policing) and GTP processing to the programmable hardware. Additionally,
it supports network slicing and SRv6.
Metaswitch Fusion Core [71] is a private 5G Core designed for MEC. It features a UPF
that carries out packet classification, routing, and forwarding tasks. The platform includes
a cross-compiler that facilitates the use of the P4 programming language for defining
UPF pipelines.
Cunha et al. [75] and Chang et al. [76,77] present a solution that aims to ensure
performance isolation for network slicing, specifically with regards to bandwidth and
delay guarantees, in order to support three Industry 4.0 case scenarios, such as digital
twin, telemetry, and remote support. The proposed implementation integrates P4- and
OpenFlow-based switches at the transport network data plane. The former deploy packet
marking and meter coloring actions to provide the necessary network slicing functionality.
Chiu et al. [78] propose a comprehensive framework for achieving end-to-end network
slicing in 5G networks. In their approach, P4 switches are utilized to enable transport
network slicing, allowing for the enforcement of slice identification and bandwidth control
in accordance with the QoS requirements of each slice.
Wang et al. [79] propose a network slicing framework for an eHealth use case in
the 5G context. The framework employs P4 FPGA boards to perform traffic parsing and
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 20 of 33

classification, as well as QoS control, for video transmission. To enable QoS control, an API
is utilized to specify the priority of the network traffic processed by the board.
FestNet [80] is a sliced transport network, which utilizes P4 switches to implement
a virtualized programmable data plane (vPDP) and a two-layer design. This enables the
provision of network slicing and live slice mobility functionalities.
FSA [81,82] provides dynamic network slicing by utilizing the wireless schedule to
identify the slice for each fronthaul packet. This architecture uses P4 switches and enables
packet prioritization.
Yan et al. [83] propose an optical 5G inter-data center architecture that utilizes a P4
FPGA board as server-edge processor. The architecture facilitates network slicing and
inter-data center communication.
P4-TINS [84] is a solution that provides bandwidth guarantee and management for
network slices. The solution adopts a two-level priority queue framework in which a meter
serving each slice receives all traffic belonging to that slice and dispatches packets to high-
and low-priority queues. This ensures that there is no interference between slices.
AHAB [85] is a hierarchical per-user bandwidth allocator designed for network slicing.
This solution operates directly in the data plane using a P4 switch which dynamically
adjusts the user bandwidth limit for each slice in real-time. It adopts a maximum–minimum
fairness approach that considers the bandwidth demand of all users across all slices, thereby
avoiding the need to store per-user state in switch memory.
Turkovic et al. [86] propose a P4 switch-based network slicing framework that can
handle time-sensitive tasks such as overload and underload detection, rerouting, and state
transfer. A custom slice management protocol is implemented using a SM header to enable
efficient slice management.
Lin et al. [87] propose a content permutation algorithm for handling IoT traffic in 5G
networks. Their approach involves implementing the algorithm in P4 switches, where
packet payloads are split into code words and shuffled according to a secret cipher gener-
ated at an SDN controller.
Wen et al. [91] propose a virtual testbed for 5G security experimentation, including a
P4 switch for prototyping defense mechanisms and developing traffic rules. The defense
mechanism uses a modified countmin sketch data structure to detect UEs exceeding a
threshold, limiting the maximum bit rate with a TrTCM meter.
FrameRTP4 [92] is a framework that aims to deliver real-time attack detection and
mitigation mechanisms in network slicing. For this, it provides a customizable P4 program
that includes a service function chain to enable the lifecycle management of slices. Addi-
tionally, the P4 program deploys a monitoring system, namely SFCMon, that uses bloom
filters and sketches to support a mechanism to track network flows.
Dreibholz et al. [93] describe a 4G/5G testbed where P4 switches are used to perform
in-band network telemetry. The telemetry data is sent to a collector that gathers information
about traffic flows and switch queue status. This approach enables end-to-end performance
testing to enhance quality of experience (QoE) for end-users.
Scano et al. [94] propose a P4-based INT mechanism for 5G and beyond networks.
The proposed mechanism allows for end-to-end monitoring using headers that incorporate
information on latency and geolocation, thereby enabling steering policies without the
need for SDN controller intervention.
SDNPS [95] is an SDN framework that utilizes P4 switches and implements an INT
data packet format to support mMTC and URLLC slices. The INT data, which include
queue occupancy, link throughput, and processing delay, are recorded in data packets
forwarded by P4 switches and collected by an INT data collector module in the applica-
tion plane.
TurboEPC [96] presents control plane offloading of a small amount of user state to
MATs in P4 switches. These devices process a subset of signaling messages e.g., S1 release
and service request.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 21 of 33

SMARTHO [97] implements a smart handover procedure using programmable switches

between 5G CU and DU. For this purpose, switches spoof the behavior of UEs and perform
resource allocation in advance.
INCA [98,99] utilizes the SRv6 protocol for traffic identification and chaining. This
solution is deployed using P4 software switches and Smart NICs, and it is capable of
parsing SRH, TEID, and QoS ID.
GRED [100] presents a data placement and retrieval service for MEC to enhance
routing path lengths and forwarding table sizes. This mechanism is implemented on a P4
device, which is not specified by the authors.
HDS [101] is a hybrid data sharing framework for hierarchical MEC. The data location
service is divided into two parts: intra-region—based on a cuckoo summary—and inter-
region, using a geographic MDT-based routing scheme. The authors did not provide any
information on the specific programmable device utilized in their implementation.
Wu et al. [102] propose a coding scheme implemented in P4 switches for SDN-based
5G networks. This coding scheme performs arithmetic aggregation based on the residue
number system (RNS) for multiple data packets generated by mMTC-IIoT devices.
Mallouhi et al. [103] present an in-network approach for adaptative beamforming
towards the UE. In this approach, the UE periodically reports its location to a P4 hardware
switch, which uses this information along with the base station information to compute
the angle required to reconfigure the beam between the base station and the UE. The angle
computations are approximated with MATs to improve computational efficiency.
Lotfimahyari et al. [104] propose an architecture that enables state replication between
NFV instances by utilizing a custom publish-subscribe protocol that runs directly in P4
switches. This architecture is designed to reduce communication delays and processing
overhead for NFVs.

4.4. Obtained Results Discussion

4.4.1. Tunneling and Forwarding
The works in [46,49,55,59,64,68,69] report processing latencies of 1.23 µs, 200 µs, 25 µs,
0.458 µs, 6 µs, 5 µs, and 0.739 µs, respectively. The study in [56] reports a latency reduction
of 77% compared to common software implementations, while [61] shows a drop of 3.75x
compared to a host based UPF deployment using DPDK. Furthermore, [44] specifies an end-
to-end latency of 50 µs, which is useful for checking compliance with the KPIs from [10].
Regarding throughput, experiments in [60,69,75] display 98.7 Gbps, 40 Gbps, and
2 Gbps, respectively, while [47] achieves approximately 100 Gbps. In [80], the obtained
data rate is 402× higher than that of a pure UPF software design.

4.4.2. Network Slicing

In [72,73], full isolation between slices is reported, with 512 users divided into 16 slices.
The lowest priority slices experience a maximum delay of 2.5 ms, whereas the rest of the
traffic shows less than 1 ms of delay. When applied to an industrial smart grid use case (i.e.,
uRLLC) [74], a round trip time (RTT) of 10.02 ms is obtained, with the authors reporting
high reliability and only 0.3% packet loss when the system is under the highest level of
stress. In [76,77], where another industrial application is presented, experiments show
delays of 15 ms for digital twin app data, 30 ms for telemetry packets, and 50 ms for remote
support, all of which use virtual queues with priority queuing. The study in [79] presents
an e-health video transmission use case in which slices with a high QoS level have an
average delay of less than 0.05 ms. Moreover, in [52], the authors include the committed
information rate (CIR) ratio as an adjustment parameter in the hardware switches for
the throughput of each supported vertical for three IoT scenarios. For instance, mMTC
applications require a CIR of 100% to achieve a 100% throughput percentage without any
packet loss. The study in [85] demonstrates that the proposed prototype can support up
to 16,000 slices, while [80] reports that creating slices takes 400 ms, which is faster than
slicing implementations that do not use programmable data planes. The network slicing
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 22 of 33

framework in [86] shows an average delay seen at the end-host of 69.8 ms. The solution
presented in [84] demonstrates that slices experiencing high traffic loads, defined as four or
more flows within a slice, share the remaining bandwidth with a maximum difference of
4%.Furthermore, the bandwidth allocated to each flow within a slice varies only slightly,
ranging from 0.54% to 8.23% of the total slice bandwidth.
Finally, in [81,82], network slicing in the fronthaul section of NG-RAN results in
update routing entry latencies of less than 6 µs, with support for multipoint routing of
80 Gbps.

4.4.3. Cybersecurity
In [88,89], the authors describe a firewall implementation that effectively blocks mali-
cious traffic and can manage up to 1,024 flows with minimal added delay. Another study
on firewalls, presented in [66], reports that security rules are updated within 10 ms with
a confidence interval of 95%. Meanwhile, the DoS detection scheme described in [63] is
evaluated based on the time that programmable switches take to extract features from
packets, which is 110 µs. This is significantly faster than CPU-based solutions. In contrast,
the DDoS mitigator outlined in [90] incurs a latency below 150 µs while managing 1 Gbps
of traffic. In [91], a defense mechanism against cellular botnets restricts traffic to 40 requests
per second. Additionally, the secret permutation implemented in [87] encodes and decodes
IoT packet payloads at a line rate of 6.4 Tbps, which the authors claim to be the fastest rate
reported in the literature.

4.4.4. In-Band Telemetry

The study described in [93] demonstrates that the end-to-end round trip time (RTT)
and dequeue time can be accurately measured using their implementation of INT. Another
work in [94] reported that the INT load did not have a significant impact on end-to-end
latency, as it was found to be below 1 ms. Moreover, INT-based traffic steering can reduce
latency to less than 50 ms. The results of applying INT for network slicing in [95] show
that uRLLC packet loss is reduced to almost zero compared to conventional software
approaches. Meanwhile, for mMTC, it was observed that the average throughput per node
is approximately equal to the packet generation rate, regardless of the number of nodes
requesting connections. Finally, the implemented INT in [63] achieved an average latency
reduction of around 6 ms, while the programmable switch was able to extract features in
around 110 µs.

4.4.5. Control Plane Offloading

According to the research in [96], throughput can improve by up to 102 times and
latency can decrease by 98% when switch hardware stores state data. In [57] authors
show that offloading 35.79% of PFCP messages to programmable devices results in a 57%
increase in throughput compared to solutions without this feature. Additionally, the study
conducted in [67] reports that network latency can be reduced by up to 40% compared to
traditional multi-switch topology implementations that do not process NGAP packages.

4.4.6. Other Uses

In [100], the proposed data placement approach is shown to achieve improved load
balancing and below 30% path lengths when compared to alternative methods. While the
data retrieval scheme introduced in [101] achieves a reduction of 50.21% in lookup paths
and 92.75% in false positives compared to other state-of-the-art implementations. On the
other hand, the publish-subscribe scheme proposed in [104] is found to result in more
homogeneous traffic and lower state replication latency, although no latency measurements
are included. The service function chaining (SFC) scheme introduced in [98,99] can classify
and create a service sequence for traffic flows, which results in an increase of only 1% in
flow completion time (FTC), a reasonable impact for 5G architectures. In [97], experimental
results show that their proposed framework can reduce handover time by up to 18% and
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 23 of 33

25% for two and three sequences, respectively. According to the findings reported in [65],
the average reduction in handover delay achieved by the proposed solution was 2.11
times compared to a host-based approach. Finally, the beamforming method presented
in [103], which employs programmable devices, can calculate angle approximations within
acceptable empirical error distributions for moderate user movement speeds of less than
90 km/h and control cycle times less than 100 ms. It is worth noting that the resource
consumption of the method depends solely on the size of the TCAM table used in the
programmable device.

4.5. Summary and Insights

The majority of studies investigating tunneling and forwarding functions are imple-
mented within the UPF and edge-to-core section and have focused on lowering latency
as well as enhancing throughput. The performance achieved in these studies is heavily
influenced by the type of device used. Programmable hardware switches have been found
to achieve higher throughput compared to FPGA boards and smart NIC implementations,
whereas software switches demonstrate the lowest line rates. Nonetheless, hybrid designs
aim to leverage the programmability features of smart NICs or software switches to offload
more complex user-defined rules and achieve lower latencies.
Network slicing implementations are mostly deployed in the edge-to-core segment of
systems, with use cases such as e-health, industrial IoT, and smart grids being evaluated to
demonstrate the efficacy of programmable devices in achieving slice isolation and fairness.
While a study has explored the deployment of network slicing in the NG-RAN section
of the architecture, to date, no work has integrated this approach with transport network
slicing to achieve an end-to-end programmable data plane solution.
Articles pertaining to cybersecurity focus on strategies for blocking malicious traffic
and content permutation. However, this type of implementation is restricted due to the
computational constraints of programmable devices.
INT applications reviewed in this study utilize programmable devices to append
additional headers containing specific data from 5G and beyond networks. These data are
subsequently collected by a control entity to optimize key parameters and processes, such
as QoS, traffic steering, and network slicing. Notably, the reviewed deployments in this
domain are currently limited to software switch implementations only.
Control plane offloading using programmable data planes is effective for handling
simple signaling components that can take advantage of the high-speed properties of
these devices.
On the other hand, the reviewed literature reveals other additional uses of pro-
grammable data planes in 5G and beyond architectures. These applications include data
placement, data retrieval, data aggregation, publish–subscribe schemes, service function
chaining (SFC), handover processes, and beamforming calculations.
While programmable data planes have demonstrated a broad range of applications
for 5G and beyond architectures, there are general limitations that need to be addressed.
For instance, programmable devices do not currently support complex functionalities such
as automatic repeat request (ARQ) and ciphering. Furthermore, handling state transfer for
numerous UEs can be challenging due to memory constraints. Finally, a lack of realistic
experimental settings can make it difficult to obtain reliable results.

5. Open Points and Future Research Directions

As programmable data plane implementations become increasingly relevant in 5G
and beyond architectures, there are some open points and potential research directions
that remain to be explored. Although there have been major advancements in research, a
number of obstacles still need to be overcome. Within this section of the review, attention
will be drawn to several critical domains that need further exploration, including issues
corresponding to scalability, performance, computational constraints, interoperability, and
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 24 of 33

energy efficiency. By identifying those gaps and future research tracks, the aim is to
encourage further research in this emerging field.
• Scalability: One of the main challenges associated with using programmable data
planes in the 5G and beyond context is ensuring scalability to accommodate the large
number of users and sessions these networks must manage. However, limited storage
capacity on programmable devices poses constraints on state transfer, prompting fur-
ther exploration of potential solutions. A promising approach is to use simultaneous
software and hardware programmable devices, with the former managing low-traffic
levels and the latter handling high-traffic levels. The study in [49] is a noteworthy
approach that involves transitioning user connections to the hardware device if they
exhibit high rates of data transmission. Additional studies that explore diverse hybrid
software/hardware models can be found in [50,58]. Another option for improving
scalability is to incorporate a QoS scheduler within a programmable device to establish
distinct queues, as proposed in [77]. Finally, a variation of multipath transport pro-
tocols such as QUIC could be employed to exploit available paths while minimizing
data storage in intermediate nodes. A preliminary work on the compatibility of the
aforementioned protocol with programmable devices is available in [105].
• Performance: Although programmable data planes have been effective in improving
network throughput and reducing latency by offloading tunneling and forwarding of
user plane data, challenges remain in optimizing the performance of 5G and beyond
networks. Minimizing control plane intervention is desirable whenever possible. To
this end, smart NICs offer the flexibility to manage complex user plane rules reducing
control plane-user plane bottlenecks. The studies in [56,65] can be seen as notable
examples of leveraging the capabilities of smart NICs for optimization. Additionally,
developing simpler control protocols can aid in offloading tasks to the data plane. The
initial concepts of this approach are showcased in [57]. Another path for improving
system performance is to explore end-to-end network slicing solutions that incorporate
programmable devices in the NG-RAN and edge-to-core sections of the network. A
starting point is the work in [82], which showcases network slicing in the fronthaul
section of the system architecture. More research is required to thoroughly explore the
potential advantages offered by such solutions.
• Computational limitations: Programmable data plane devices have inherent con-
straints in performing complex computations, as they do not support floating-point
arithmetic operations and can handle integer values only. As a result, network func-
tionalities that rely on complex operations will not be supported. To tackle this issue,
approximation algorithms can be utilized to trade off precision for improved network
performance. An application-oriented implementation of an approximation scheme
utilizing the longest prefix match for programmable devices calculations is demon-
strated in [106]. Another possible solution is to assign non-supported computations
to the control plane (e.g., general-purpose CPUs), which is capable of handling more
complex operations, as in the scheme presented in [107]. Nevertheless, this methodol-
ogy could potentially result in a rise in latency, which represents a prospective aspect
to take into account in forthcoming research work.
• Interoperability: Ensuring compatibility between programmable data plane devices
and existing network infrastructures, protocols, and services is crucial for successful
deployment. To achieve this, interoperability mechanisms must be developed that fa-
cilitate the integration of programmable devices with legacy equipment. One potential
approach is to create hybrid testbed environments that combine both programmable
and non-programmable devices to assess the feasibility of interoperability mecha-
nisms. Some examples of programmable data-plane-oriented testbeds are featured
in [52,108,109]. Another promising option is to explore emerging technologies such as
digital twins [110] for evaluating compatibility and identifying potential issues before
deployment in real-world network architectures.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 25 of 33

• Energy efficiency: With the growing concern for environmental sustainability, energy
efficiency is becoming an essential aspect of network design for 5G and beyond
technologies. Programmable data plane devices are typically implemented using
power-hungry hardware such as FPGAs or ASICs. This can lead to high energy
consumption and costs. However, none of the surveyed articles specifically address
this vital aspect. To fill this gap in the literature, research is needed to evaluate
the energetic impact of programmable devices operation and ultimately develop
energy-efficient schemes that can reduce power consumption while maintaining high
network performance. Although the study in [111] presents an implementation within
a data center framework, its central focus lies in utilizing programmable devices
to consolidate traffic and mitigate the energy consumption of servers and network
components. This serves as a promising initial step that can be further extended to a
telecommunication network setting.

6. Conclusions
This systematic review has conducted a comprehensive analysis of the latest advance-
ments in programmable data plane applications for 5G and beyond architectures. The
investigation has revealed that the majority of implementations are currently deployed
in the edge-to-core segment of networks, utilizing hardware programmable devices like
switches and smart NICs. Key applications observed include tunneling and forwarding, as
well as network slicing. The results highlight the promising potential of programmable
data planes in enhancing the performance, flexibility, and reliability of upcoming telecom-
munications networks. Finally, this study has also acknowledged the main challenges and
potential directions for future research, highlighting the need for additional exploration
in areas such as scalability, interoperability, performance enhancement, computational
constraints, and energy conservation.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization: J.A.B., J.I.M. and L.M.C.; investigation: J.A.B. and M.A.-C.;
methodology: J.A.B., J.I.M. and L.M.C.; data gathering: J.A.B. and M.B.C.; survey: J.A.B., J.I.M.,
L.M.C., M.B.C. and M.A.-C.; validation: J.I.M., L.M.C. and M.A.-C.; writing—original draft prepara-
tion: J.A.B. and M.B.C.; writing—review and editing: J.I.M., L.M.C. and M.A.-C.; visualization, J.A.B.,
J.I.M., L.M.C., M.B.C. and M.A.-C.; supervision: J.I.M. and L.M.C. All authors have read and agreed
to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Project “SDGine for
Healthy People and Cities”. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon
2020 Research and Innovation Programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Grant Agreement No.
945139 and from Telefónica I+D. This work was also funded by the Spanish Ministerio de Asuntos
Económicos y Transformación Digital through UNICO-5G I+D program (NextGenerationEU), within
the B5GEMINI-INFRA project (Beyond 5G Enhanced Management through dIgital twiNsbased on
artificial Intelligence) under Grant TSI-063000-2021-81.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 26 of 33

Appendix A

Table A1. Code availability of the reviewed articles.

Device
Use Case Work Year Code
SW Switch HW Switch FPGA Board Smart NIC N/A
Aghdai et al. [44,45] • 2018, 2019
Shen et al. [46] • 2019
Lee et al. [47] • 2019
https://github.com/intrig-unicamp/macsad-usecases/tree/
Singh et al. [48] • 2019
master/p4-16 (accessed on 14 May 2023)
https://github.com/intrig-unicamp/P4-HH
Singh et al. [49] • • 2022
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
Vörös [50] • 2020
Ricart-Sanchez et al. [51] • 2018
Lin et al. [52] • 2021
https://github.com/P4-Research/nikss-artifacts
NIKSS [53] • 2022
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
https://github.com/robertmacdavid/up4-abstract
MacDavid et al. [54] • • 2021
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
Alfredsson et al. [55] • 2022
Tunneling and
forwarding Bose et al. [56] • 2021
AccelUPF [57] • • 2022
CeUPF [58] • 2021
https://github.com/justus-comnets/upf-acceleration
Rischke et al. [59] • 2022
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
Fernando et al. [60] • 2022
https://github.com/open-nfpsw/p4_basic_lb_metering_nic
Jain et al. [61] • 2022
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
https://github.com/wnlUc3m/slicing-srv6
Gramaglia et al. [62] • 2020
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
BRAINE [63] • 2021
Kong et al. [64] • 2020
https://github.com/spand009/Synergy
Synergy [65] • 2022
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 27 of 33

Table A1. Cont.

Device
Use Case Work Year Code
SW Switch HW Switch FPGA Board Smart NIC N/A
Velox [66,67] • 2021, 2022
Paolucci et al. [68] • 2021
Kundel et al. [69] • 2022
Kaloom 5G UPF [70] • 2019
Metaswitch Fusion Core [71] • 2021
Ricart-Sanchez et al. [72–74] • 2019, 2020
Lin et al. [52] • 2021
Cunha et al. [75] • 2021 https://github.com/5growth/5gr-rl (accessed on 14 May 2023)
https://github.com/5growth/5gr-rl/tree/master/i8-code/
Chang et al. [76,77] • 2021
QoS-Slicing (accessed on 14 May 2023)
Chiu et al. [78] • 2022
Wang et al. [79] • 2019
Network slicing FestNet [80] • 2021
FSA [81,82] • 2020, 2021
Yan et al. [83] • 2020
P4-TINS [84] • 2022
https://github.com/Princeton-Cabernet/AHAB (accessed on
AHAB [85] • 2023
14 May 2023)
Turkovic et al. [86] • • 2021
Lin et al. [87] • 2019
Ricart-Sanchez et al. [88,89] • 2018, 2019
Paolucci et al. [90] • 2021
BRAINE [63] • 2021
Cybersecurity
Velox [66] • 2021
Wen et al. [91] • 2022
https://github.com/michelsb/FrameRTP4
FrameRTP4 [92] • 2020
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
Paolucci et al. [90] • 2021
Dreibholz et al. [93] • 2022
In-band Telemetry Scano et al. [94] • 2021
SDNPS [95] • 2022
BRAINE [63] • 2021
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 28 of 33

Table A1. Cont.

Device
Use Case Work Year Code
SW Switch HW Switch FPGA Board Smart NIC N/A
https://github.com/rinku-shah/turboepc
TurboEPC [96] • • 2020
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
Control plane Bose et al. [56] • 2022
offloading
AccelUPF [57] • • 2022
Velox [67] • 2022
SMARTHO [97] • 2018
Aghdai et al. [45] • 2019
Handover
https://github.com/spand009/Synergy
Synergy [65] • 2022
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
INCA [98,99] • • 2021
Service function
chaining https://github.com/michelsb/FrameRTP4
FrameRTP4 [92] • 2020
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
Data placement GRED [100] • 2019
Data retrieval HDS [101] • 2020
Data aggregation Wu et al. [102] • 2020
Beamforming
Mallouhi et al. [103] • 2022
calculations
https://github.com/imanlotfimahyari/State-Sharing-p4
Publish subscribe
Lotfimahyari et al. [104] • 2022 -python/blob/master/pubsub/pubsub_register/pub_sub.p4
scheme
(accessed on 14 May 2023)
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 29 of 33

References
1. Kreutz, D.; Ramos, F.M.V.; Veríssimo, P.E.; Rothenberg, C.E.; Azodolmolky, S.; Uhlig, S. Software-Defined Networking: A
Comprehensive Survey. Proc. IEEE 2015, 103, 14–76. [CrossRef]
2. Sivaraman, A.; Cheung, A.; Budiu, M.; Kim, C.; Alizadeh, M.; Balakrishnan, H.; Varghese, G.; McKeown, N.; Licking, S. Packet
trans: High-level programming for linerate switches. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGCOMM Conference, Florianopolis,
Brazil, 22–26 August 2016; pp. 15–28.
3. Sonchack, J.; Loehr, D.; Rexford, J.; Walker, D. Lucid: A language for control in the data plane. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM
SIGCOMM 2021 Conference (SIGCOMM ‘21), Virtual, 23–27 August 2021.
4. Anderson, C.J.; Foster, N.; Guha, A.; Jeannin, J.B.; Kozen, D.; Schlesinger, C.; Walker, D. NetKAT: Semantic foundations for
networks. ACM Sigplan Not. 2014, 49, 113–126. [CrossRef]
5. Bianchi, G.; Bonola, M.; Capone, A.; Cascone, C. Openstate: Programming platform-independent stateful openflow applications
inside the switch. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 2014, 44, 44–51. [CrossRef]
6. Bosshart, P.; Daly, D.; Gibb, G.; Izzard, M.; McKeown, N.; Rexford, J.; Schlesinger, C.; Talayco, D.; Vahdat, A.; Varghese, G. P4:
Programming protocol-independent packet processors. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 2014, 44, 87–95. [CrossRef]
7. 3GPP. 3GPP Specification Set: 5G. Available online: https://www.3gpp.org/specifications-technologies/releases (accessed on
14 May 2023).
8. IMT Vision–Framework and Overall Objectives of the Future Development of IMT for 2020 and beyond, Document ITU-R M.2083-
0. September 2015. Available online: https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/m/R-REC-M.2083-0-201509-I!!PDF-E.pdf
(accessed on 14 May 2023).
9. Tadros, C.N.; Rizk, M.R.M.; Mokhtar, B.M. Software Defined Network-Based Management for Enhanced 5G Network Services.
IEEE Access 2020, 8, 53997–54008. [CrossRef]
10. Minimum Requirements Related to Technical Performance for IMT-2020 Radio Interface(s), Document ITU-R M.2410-0.
November 2017. Available online: https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-r/opb/rep/R-REP-M.2410-2017-PDF-E.pdf (accessed on
14 May 2023).
11. Viswanathan, H.; Mogensen, P.E. Communications in the 6G Era. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 57063–57074. [CrossRef]
12. Kfoury, E.F.; Crichigno, J.; Bou-Harb, E. An Exhaustive Survey on P4 Programmable Data Plane Switches: Taxonomy, Applications,
Challenges, and Future Trends. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 87094–87155. [CrossRef]
13. Liatifis, A.; Sarigiannidis, P.; Argyriou, V.; Lagkas, T. Advancing SDN from OpenFlow to P4: A Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 2023,
55, 186. [CrossRef]
14. Hauser, F.; Häberle, M.; Merling, D.; Lindner, S.; Gurevich, V.; Zeiger, F.; Frank, R.; Menth, M. A survey on data plane programming
with P4: Fundamentals, advances, and applied research. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2023, 212, 103561. [CrossRef]
15. Kianpisheh, S.; Taleb, T. A Survey on In-Network Computing: Programmable Data Plane and Technology Specific Applications.
IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2023, 25, 701–761. [CrossRef]
16. McKeown, N.; Anderson, T.; Balakrishnan, H.; Parulkar, G.; Peterson, L.; Rexford, J.; Shenker, S.; Turner, J. OpenFlow: Enabling
innovation in campus networks. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 2008, 38, 69–74. [CrossRef]
17. Bosshart, P.; Gibb, G.; Kim, H.; Varghese, G.; McKeown, N.; Izzard, M.; Mujica, F.; Horowitz, M. Forwarding metamorphosis:
Fast programmable match-action processing in hardware for SDN. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2013 Conference on
SIGCOMM (SIGCOMM ‘13), Hong Kong, 12–16 August 2013; pp. 99–110.
18. Chole, S.; Fingerhut, A.; Ma, S.; Sivaraman, A.; Vargaftik, S.; Berger, A.; Mendelson, G.; Alizadeh, M.; Chuang, S.T.; Keslassy, I.;
et al. DRMT: Disaggregated Programmable Switching. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on
Data Communication (SIGCOMM ‘17), Los Angeles, CA, USA, 21–25 August 2017; pp. 1–14.
19. The P4 Language Consortium. Available online: https://p4.org/ (accessed on 14 May 2023).
20. P4 Language Specification 14. Available online: https://p4.org/p4-spec/p4-14/v1.0.5/tex/p4.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
21. P4 Language Specification 16. Available online: https://p4.org/p4-spec/docs/P4-16-v1.2.1.html (accessed on 14 May 2023).
22. Edgecore Networks. EdgeCore Wedge 100BF-32X. Available online: https://www.edge-core.com/productsInfo.php?cls=1&cls2
=180&cls3=181&id=335 (accessed on 14 May 2023).
23. Inventec. Invectec D10056. Available online: https://productline.inventec.com/Switch/D10056.aspx (accessed on 14 May 2023).
24. Netberg. Netberg Aurora 610. Available online: https://netbergtw.com/products/aurora-610/ (accessed on 14 May 2023).
25. Bmv2 Software Switch. Available online: https://github.com/p4lang/behavioral-model/blob/main/docs/performance.md
(accessed on 14 May 2023).
26. Intel. Intel Tofino 2. Available online: https://www.intel.es/content/www/es/es/products/network-io/programmable-
ethernet-switch/tofino-2-series.html (accessed on 14 May 2023).
27. NetFPGA. NetFPGA PLUS. Available online: https://netfpga.org/NetFPGA-PLUS.html (accessed on 14 May 2023).
28. NetFPGA. NetFPGA SUME. Available online: https://netfpga.org/NetFPGA-SUME.html (accessed on 14 May 2023).
29. Netronome, Agilio CX Smart NICs. Available online: https://www.netronome.com/products/agilio-cx/ (accessed on
14 May 2023).
30. Agiwal, M.; Roy, A.; Saxena, N. Next Generation 5G Wireless Networks: A Comprehensive Survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor.
2016, 18, 1617–1655. [CrossRef]
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 30 of 33

31. GPP: Release 15. 2023. Available online: https://www.3gpp.org/specifications-technologies/releases/release-15 (accessed on

14 May 2023).
32. System Architecture for the 5G System, Document TS 23.501, V17.5.0, 3GPP. Available online: https://www.etsi.org/deliver/
etsi_ts/123500_123599/123501/17.05.00_60/ts_123501v170500p.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
33. Habibi, M.A.; Nasimi, M.; Han, B.; Schotten, H.D. A Comprehensive Survey of RAN Architectures Toward 5G Mobile Communi-
cation System. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 70371–70421. [CrossRef]
34. David, K.; Berndt, H. 6G Vision and Requirements: Is There Any Need for Beyond 5G? IEEE Veh. Technol. Mag. 2018, 13, 72–80.
[CrossRef]
35. Zhang, Z.; Xiao, Y.; Ma, Z.; Xiao, M.; Ding, Z.; Lei, X.; Karagiannidis, G.; Fan, P. 6G Wireless Networks: Vision, Requirements,
Architecture, and Key Technologies. IEEE Veh. Technol. Mag. 2019, 14, 28–41. [CrossRef]
36. Samsung Research. The Next Hyper Connected Experience for All. 2020. Available online: https://cdn.codeground.org/nsr/
downloads/researchareas/20201201_6G_Vision_web.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
37. Ziegler, V.; Viswanathan, H.; Flinck, H.; Hoffmann, M.; Räisänen, V.; Hätönen, K. 6G Architecture to Connect the Worlds. IEEE
Access 2020, 8, 173508–173520. [CrossRef]
38. Bouras, C.; Kollia, A.; Papazois, A. SDN & NFV in 5G: Advancements and challenges. In Proceedings of the 2017 20th Conference
on Innovations in Clouds, Internet and Networks (ICIN), Paris, France, 7–9 March 2017; pp. 107–111.
39. Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV). Architectural Framework, Document ETSI GS NFV 002 V1.2.1. Available online:
https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/nfv/001_099/002/01.02.01_60/gs_nfv002v010201p.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
40. What is Network Slicing? Available online: https://5g.co.uk/guides/what-is-network-slicing/ (accessed on 14 May 2023).
41. Foukas, X.; Patounas, G.; Elmokashfi, A.; Marina, M.K. Network Slicing in 5G: Survey and Challenges. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2017,
55, 94–100. [CrossRef]
42. ETSI. Multi-Access Edge Computing (MEC). Available online: https://www.etsi.org/technologies/multi-access-edge-computing
(accessed on 14 May 2023).
43. MEC in 5G Networks. ETSI White Paper No. 28. June 2018. Available online: https://www.etsi.org/images/files/
ETSIWhitePapers/etsi_wp28_mec_in_5G_FINAL.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
44. Aghdai, A.; Huang, M.; Dai, D.; Xu, Y.; Chao, J. Transparent Edge Gateway for Mobile Networks. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE
26th International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), Cambridge, UK, 25–27 September 2018; pp. 412–417.
45. Aghdai, A.; Xu, Y.; Huang, M.; Dai, D.H.; Chao, H.J. Enabling Mobility in LTE-Compatible Mobile-edge Computing with
Programmable Switches. arXiv 2019, arXiv:1905.05258.
46. Shen, C.-A.; Lee, D.-Y.; Ku, C.-A.; Lin, M.-W.; Lu, K.-C.; Tan, S.-Y. A Programmable and FPGA-accelerated GTP Offloading Engine
for Mobile Edge Computing in 5G Networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM 2019—IEEE Conference on Computer
Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), Paris, France, 29 April–2 May 2019; pp. 1021–1022.
47. Lee, C.; Ebisawa, K.; Kuwata, H.; Kohno, M.; Matsushima, S. Performance Evaluation of GTP-U and SRv6 Stateless Translation.
In Proceedings of the 2019 15th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM), Halifax, NS, Canada,
21–25 October 2019; pp. 1–6.
48. Singh, S.K.; Rothenberg, C.E.; Patra, G.; Pongracz, G. Offloading virtual evolved packet gateway user plane functions to a
programmable ASIC. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM CoNEXT Workshop Emerging in-Network Computing Paradigms (ENCP),
Orlando, FL, USA, 9 December 2019; pp. 9–14.
49. Singh, S.K.; Rothenberg, C.E.; Langlet, J.; Kassler, A.; Vörös, P.; Laki, S.; Pongrácz, G. Hybrid P4 Programmable Pipelines for 5G
gNodeB and User Plane Functions. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2022, 1–18. [CrossRef]
50. Vörös, P.; Pongrácz, G.; Laki, S. Towards a Hybrid Next Generation NodeB. In Proceedings of the 3rd P4 Workshop in Europe
(EuroP40 20), Barcelona, Spain, 1 December 2020; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 56–58.
51. Ricart-Sanchez, R.; Malagon, P.; Salva-Garcia, P.; Perez, E.C.; Wang, Q.; Calero, J.M.A. Towards an FPGA-Accelerated pro-
grammable data path for edge to-core communications in 5G networks. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2018, 124, 80–93. [CrossRef]
52. Lin, Y.B.; Tseng, C.C.; Wang, M.H. Effects of transport network slicing on 5G applications. Futur. Internet 2021, 13, 69. [CrossRef]
53. Osiński, T.; Palimaka,
˛ J.; Kossakowski, M.; Tran, F.D.; Bonfoh, E.F.; Tarasiuk, H. A novel programmable software datapath for
software-defined networking. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on emerging Networking EXperiments and
Technologies (CoNEXT ‘22), Rome, Italy, 6–9 December 2022; pp. 245–260.
54. MacDavid, R.; Cascone, C.; Lin, P.; Padmanabhan, B.; ThakuR, A.; Peterson, L.; Rexford, J.; Sunay, O. A P4-based 5G User Plane
Function. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Symposium on SDN Research (SOSR) (SOSR ‘21), Virtual, 11–12 October 2021;
pp. 162–168.
55. Alfredsson, R.; Kassler, A.; Vestin, J.; Pieskä, M.; Amend, M. Accelerating a Transport Layer based 5G Multi-Access Proxy on
SmartNIC. In Proceedings of the Würzburg Workshop on Next-Generation Communication Networks, Wurzburg, Germany,
11–13 October 2022.
56. Bose, A.; Maji, D.; Agarwal, P.; Unhale, N.; Shah, R.; Vutukuru, M. Leveraging Programmable Dataplanes for a High Performance
5G User Plane Function. In Proceedings of the 5th Asia-Pacific Workshop on Networking (APNet 2021), Shenzhen, China,
24–25 June 2021; pp. 57–64.
57. Bose, A.; Kirtikar, S.; Chirumamilla, S.; Shah, R.; Vutukuru, M. AccelUPF: Accelerating the 5G user plane using programmable
hardware. In Proceedings of the Symposium on SDN Research (SOSR ‘22), Virtual, 18–20 October 2022; pp. 1–15.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 31 of 33

58. Cong, Z.; Baokang, Z.; Baosheng, W.; Yulei, Y. CeUPF: Offloading 5G User Plane Function to Programmable Hardware Base on
Co-existence Architecture. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Its Emerging
Applications (ACM ICEA ‘21), Jinan, China, 28–29 December 2022; pp. 34–39.
59. Rischke, J.; Vielhaus, C.; Sossalla, P.; Wang, J.; Fitzek, F.H.P. Comparison of UPF acceleration technologies and their tail-latency
for URLLC. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE Conference on Network Function Virtualization and Software Defined Networks
(NFV-SDN), Phoenix, AZ, USA, 14–16 November 2022; pp. 19–25.
60. Fernando, O.A.; Xiao, H.; Spring, J. Developing a Testbed with P4 to Generate Datasets for the Analysis of 5G-MEC Security. In
Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), Austin, TX, USA, 10–13 April
2022; pp. 2256–2261.
61. Jain, V.; Panda, S.; Qi, S.; Ramakrishnan, K.K. Evolving to 6G: Improving the Cellular Core to lower control and data plane latency.
In Proceedings of the 2022 1st International Conference on 6G Networking (6GNet), Paris, France, 6–8 July 2022; pp. 1–8.
62. Gramaglia, M.; Sciancalepore, V.; Fernandez-Maestro, F.J.; Perez, R.; Serrano, P.; Banchs, A. Experimenting with SRv6: A Tunneling
Protocol supporting Network Slicing in 5G and beyond. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 25th International Workshop on Com-
puter Aided Modeling and Design of Communication Links and Networks (CAMAD), Pisa, Italy, 14–16 September 2020; pp. 1–6.
63. Cugini, F.; Scano, D.; Giorgetti, A.; Sgambelluri, A.; Castoldi, P.; Paolucci, F. P4 Programmability at the Network Edge: The
BRAINE Approach. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks (ICCCN),
Athens, Greece, 19–22 July 2021; pp. 1–9.
64. Kong, S.; Dipjyoti, S.; Lee, J. Programmable Chip Based High Performance MEC Router for Ultra-Low Latency and High
Bandwidth Services in Distributed Computing Environment. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. 2020, 103, 2525–2527. [CrossRef]
65. Panda, S.; Ramakrishnan, K.K.; Bhuyan, L.N. Synergy: A SmartNIC Accelerated 5G Dataplane and Monitor for Mobility
Prediction. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 30th International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), Lexington, KY, USA,
30 November–2 December 2022; pp. 1–12.
66. Gökarslan, K.; Sandal, Y.S.; Tugcu, T. Towards a URLLC-Aware Programmable Data Path with P4 for Industrial 5G Networks. In
Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC Workshops), Montreal, QC, Canada,
14–23 June 2021; pp. 1–6.
67. Gökarslan, K.; Tugcu, T. Velox: Next-Generation Industrial Cellular Networks with Programmable Data Planes. In Proceedings of
the 2022 IEEE International Black Sea Conference on Communications and Networking (BlackSeaCom), Sofia, Bulgaria, 6–9 June
2022; pp. 220–225.
68. Paolucci, F.; Scano, D.; Cugini, F.; Sgambelluri, A.; Valcarenghi, L.; Cavazzoni, C.; Ferraris, G.; Castoldi, P. User Plane Function
Offloading in P4 switches for enhanced 5G Mobile Edge Computing. In Proceedings of the 2021 17th International Conference on
the Design of Reliable Communication Networks (DRCN), Milano, Italy, 19–22 April 2021; pp. 1–3.
69. Kundel, R.; Meuser, T.; Koppe, T.; Hark, R.; Steinmetz, R. User Plane Hardware Acceleration in Access Networks: Experiences in
Offloading Network Functions in Real 5G Deployments. In Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences, Virtual, 4–7 January 2022; pp. 1–10.
70. White Paper. Intel, Kaloom Create P4-Programmable Network Solutions. 2020. Available online: https://builders.intel.com/
docs/networkbuilders/intel-kaloom-create-p4-programmable-network-solutions.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
71. Metaswitch. Metaswitch Fusion Core. Available online: https://info.metaswitch.com/hubfs/pdfs/metaswitch-fusion-core-
private-5g-datasheet-2021.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
72. Ricart-Sanchez, R.; Malagon, P.; Alcaraz-Calero, J.M.; Wang, Q. P4-NetFPGA-based network slicing solution for 5G MEC
architectures. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM/IEEE Symposium on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems
(ANCS), Cambridge, UK, 24–25 September 2019; pp. 1–2.
73. Ricart-Sanchez, R.; Malagon, P.; Matencio-Escolar, A.; Calero, J.M.A.; Wang, Q. Toward hardware—Accelerated QoS-aware—5G
network slicing based on data plane programmability. Trans. Emerg. Telecommun. Technol. 2020, 31, e3726. [CrossRef]
74. Ricart-Sanchez, R.; Aleixo, A.C.; Wang, Q.; Calero, J.M.A. Hardware-Based Network Slicing for Supporting Smart Grids Self-
Healing over 5G Networks. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC
Workshops), Dublin, Ireland, 7–11 June 2020; pp. 1–6.
75. Cunha, V.A.; Maroulis, N.; Papagianni, C.; Sacido, J.; Jiménez, M.; Ubaldi, F.; Garcia-Saavedra, A. 5 Growth: Secure and Reliable
Network Slicing for Verticals. In Proceedings of the 2021 Joint European Conference on Networks and Communications & 6G
Summit (EuCNC/6G Summit), Porto, Portugal, 8–11 June 2021; pp. 347–352.
76. Chang, C.Y.; Jiménez, M.A.; Gharbaoui, M.; Sacido, J.; Ubaldi, F.; Papagianni, C.; De Schepper, K. Slice Isolation for 5G Transport
Networks. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 7th International Conference on Network Softwarization (NetSoft), Tokyo, Japan,
28 June–2 July 2021; pp. 366–368.
77. Chang, C.Y.; Ruiz, T.G.; Paolucci, F.; Jiménez, M.A.; Sacido, J.; Papagianni, C.; Martini, B. Performance Isolation for Network
Slices in Industry 4.0: The 5Growth Approach. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 166990–167003. [CrossRef]
78. Chiu, Y.-S.; Yen, L.-H.; Wang, T.-H.; Tseng, C.-C. A Cloud Native Management and Orchestration Framework for 5G End-to-End
Network Slicing. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE International Conference on Service-Oriented System Engineering (SOSE),
Newark, CA, USA, 15–18 August 2022; pp. 69–76.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 32 of 33

79. Wang, Q.; Alcaraz-Calero, J.; Ricart-Sanchez, R.; Weiss, M.B.; Gavras, A.; Nikaein, N.; Vasilakos, X.; Giacomo, B.; Pietro, G.;
Roddy, M.; et al. Enable Advanced QoS-Aware Network Slicing in 5G Networks for Slice-Based Media Use Cases. IEEE Trans.
Broadcast. 2019, 65, 444–453. [CrossRef]
80. Jiang, H.; Choi, N.; Thottan, M.; Van der Merwe, J. FestNet: A Flexible and Efficient Sliced Transport Network. In Proceedings of
the 2021 IEEE 7th International Conference on Network Softwarization (NetSoft), Tokyo, Japan, 28 June–2 July 2021; pp. 97–105.
81. Budhdev, N.; Joshi, R.; Kannan, P.G.; Chan, M.C.; Mitra, T. Slicing 5G fronthaul networks using programmable switches. In
Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on emerging Networking EXperiments and Technologies (CoNEXT ‘20),
Barcelona, Spain, 1–4 December 2020; pp. 534–535.
82. Budhdev, N.; Joshi, R.; Kannan, P.G.; Chan, M.C.; Mitra, T. FSA: Fronthaul slicing architecture for 5G using dataplane pro-
grammable switches. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, New
Orleans, LO, USA, 25–29 October 2021; pp. 723–735.
83. Yan, Y.; Beldachi, A.F.; Nejabati, R.; Simeonidou, D. P4-enabled Smart NIC: Enabling Sliceable and Service-Driven Optical Data
Centres. J. Light. Technol. 2020, 38, 2688–2694. [CrossRef]
84. Chen, Y.-W.; Li, C.-Y.; Tseng, C.-C.; Hu, M.-Z. P4-TINS: P4-Driven Traffic Isolation for Network Slicing with Bandwidth Guarantee
and Management. IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manag. 2022, 19, 3290–3303. [CrossRef]
85. MacDavid, R.; Chen, X.; Rexford, J. Scalable Real-Time Bandwidth Fairness in Switches. IEEE INFOCOM. 2023. Available online:
https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~jrex/papers/infocom23.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
86. Turkovic, B.; Nijhuis, S.; Kuipers, F. Elastic Slicing in Programmable Networks. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 7th International
Conference on Network Softwarization (NetSoft), Tokyo, Japan, 28 June–2 July 2021; pp. 115–123.
87. Lin, Y.-B.; Huang, T.-J.; Tsai, S.-C. Enhancing 5G/IoT Transport Security Through Content Permutation. IEEE Access 2019,
7, 94293–94299. [CrossRef]
88. Ricart-Sanchez, R.; Malagon, P.; Alcaraz-Calero, J.M.; Wang, Q. Hardware-Accelerated Firewall for 5G Mobile Networks. In
Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 26th International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), Cambridge, UK, 25–27 September
2018; pp. 446–447.
89. Ricart-Sanchez, R.; Malagon, P.; Alcaraz-Calero, J.M.; Wang, Q. NetFPGA-Based Firewall Solution for 5G Multi-Tenant
Architectures. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Edge Computing (EDGE), Milan, Italy,
8–13 July 2019; pp. 132–136.
90. Paolucci, F.; Cugini, F.; Castoldi, P.; Osiński, T. Enhancing 5G SDN/NFV Edge with P4 Data Plane Programmability. IEEE Netw.
2021, 35, 154–160. [CrossRef]
91. Wen, Z.; Pacherkar, H.S.; Yan, G. VET5G: A Virtual End-to-End Testbed for 5G Network Security Experimentation. In Proceedings
of the 15th Workshop on Cyber Security Experimentation and Test, Virtual, 8–10 August 2022; pp. 19–29.
92. Bonfim, M.; Santos, M.; Dias, K.; Fernandes, S. A real-time attack defense framework for 5G network slicing. Softw. Pract. Exp.
2020, 50, 1228–1257. [CrossRef]
93. Dreibholz, T.; Fida, M.-R.; Ahmed, A.H.; Ocampo, A.F.; Michelinakis, F.I. A Live Demonstration of In-Band Telemetry in OSM-
Orchestrated Core Networks. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 47th Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN), Edmonton,
AB, Canada, 26–29 September 2022; pp. 245–247.
94. Scano, D.; Paolucci, F.; Kondepu, K.; Sgambelluri, A.; Valcarenghi, L.; Cugini, F. Extending P4 in-band telemetry to user equipment
for latency- and localization-aware autonomous networking with AI forecasting. J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 2021, 13, D103–D114.
[CrossRef]
95. Wu, Y.-J.; Hwang, W.-S.; Shen, C.-Y.; Chen, Y.-Y. Network Slicing for mMTC and URLLC Using Software-Defined Networking
with P4 Switches. Electronics 2022, 11, 2111. [CrossRef]
96. Shah, R.; Kumar, V.; Vutukuru, M.; Kulkarni, P. TurboEPC: Leveraging Dataplane Programmability to Accelerate the Mobile
Packet Core. In Proceedings of the Symposium on SDN Research (SOSR ‘20), San Jose, CA, USA, 3 March 2020; pp. 83–95.
97. Palagummi, P.; Sivalingam, K.M. SMARTHO: A Network Initiated Handover in NG-RAN using P4-based Switches. In Proceed-
ings of the 2018 14th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM), Rome, Italy, 5–9 November 2018;
pp. 338–342.
98. Matos, G.; Verdi, F.L.; Contreras, L.M.; de Almeida, L.C. When SRv6 meets 5G Core: Implementation and Deployment of a
Network Service Chaining Function in SmartNICs. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2107.11966.
99. Matos, G.; de Almeida, L.C.; Contreras, L.M.; Verdi, F.L. INCA: A mechanism for traffic identification and chaining in the
data plane. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Latin-American Conference on Communications (LATINCOM), Santo Domingo,
Dominican Republic, 17–19 November 2021; pp. 1–6.
100. Xie, J.; Qian, C.; Guo, D.; Li, X.; Shi, S.; Chen, H. Efficient Data Placement and Retrieval Services in Edge Computing. In
Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 39th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), Dallas, TX, USA,
7–9 July 2019; pp. 1029–1039.
101. Xie, J.; Guo, D.; Shi, X.; Cai, H.; Qian, C.; Chen, H. A Fast Hybrid Data Sharing Framework for Hierarchical Mobile Edge
Computing. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM 2020—IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, Toronto, ON, Canada,
6–9 July 2020; pp. 2609–2618.
Sensors 2023, 23, 6955 33 of 33

102. Wu, X.; Jin, Z.; Jia, W.-K.; Shi, X. Aggregating Multiple Small-Data Frames using Arithmetic Encoding in P4 Switches. In
Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 18th Annual Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC), Las Vegas, NV, USA,
9–12 January 2021; pp. 1–6.
103. Mallouhi, H.; Kaur, J.; Abbas, H.T.; Laki, S. In-network angle approximation for supporting adaptive beamforming. In Proceedings
of the 5th International Workshop on P4 in Europe (EuroP4 ‘22), Rome, Italy, 9 December 2022; pp. 61–66.
104. Lotfimahyari, I.; Sviridov, G.; Giaccone, P.; Bianco, A. Data-Plane-Assisted State Replication with Network Function Virtualization.
IEEE Syst. J. 2022, 16, 2934–2945. [CrossRef]
105. Kunze, I.; Sander, C.; Wehrle, K.; Rüth, J. Tracking the QUIC spin bit on Tofino. In Proceedings of the 2021 Workshop on
Evolution, Performance and Interoperability of QUIC (EPIQ ‘21), Munich, Germany, 7 December 2021; Association for Computing
Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2021; pp. 15–21.
106. Kundel, R.; Blendin, J.; Viernickel, T.; Koldehofe, B.; Steinmetz, R. P4-CoDel: Active Queue Management in Programmable
Data Planes. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Conference on Network Function Virtualization and Software Defined Networks
(NFV-SDN), Verona, Italy, 27–29 November 2018; pp. 1–4.
107. Mai, T.; Yao, H.; Guo, S.; Liu, Y. In-Network Computing Powered Mobile Edge: Toward High Performance Industrial IoT. IEEE
Netw. 2021, 35, 289–295. [CrossRef]
108. 2STiC. A National Programmable Infrastructure to Experiment with Next-Generation Networks. Available online: https:
//www.2stic.nl/national-programmable-infrastructure.html (accessed on 14 May 2023).
109. Mambretti, J.; Chen, J.; Yeh, F. International P4 Networking Testbed. SC19 Network Research Exhibition. 2019. Available online:
https://sc19.supercomputing.org/app/uploads/2019/11/SC19-NRE-002.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
110. Rodrigo, M.S.; Rivera, D.; Moreno, J.I.; Àlvarez-Campana, M.; López, D.R. Digital Twins for 5G Networks: A Modeling and
Deployment Methodology. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 38112–38126. [CrossRef]
111. Grigoryan, G.; Kwon, M. Towards Greener Data Centers via Programmable Data Plane. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE 24th
International Conference on High Performance Switching and Routing (HPSR), Albuquerque, NM, USA, 5–7 June 2023; pp. 62–67.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.