Systems and methods for analyzing the selection of measurements of a communication network

• US 20050138493A1
• Filed: 12/17/2003
• Published: 06/23/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 12/17/2003
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Keysight Technologies, Inc.
• Original Assignee: Agilent Technologies, Inc.
• Inventors: Barford, Lee A.
• Granted Patent: US 7,356,443 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 714/712
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/06 Management of faults, events, alarms or notifications
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/0631 using root cause analysis; using analysis of correlation between notifications, alarms or events based on decision criteria, e.g. hierarchy, tree or time analysis
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/142 using statistical or mathematical methods
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/147 for predicting network behaviour
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/045 for graphical visualisation of monitoring data
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/0817 by checking functioning

Abstract

Representative embodiments are directed to systems and methods for analyzing the selection of measurements of events associated with a communications network. In one embodiment, the selection of measurements includes creating a representation of a network. After the creation of the network representation, multiple sets of contemplated measurements associated with the network representation are created. A metric is calculated that is related to the respective diagnostic effectiveness for each set of contemplated measurements when the respective set of contemplated measurements is provided to a network diagnostic algorithm.

Claims

1. A method, comprising:

creating a representation of a network;

creating multiple sets of contemplated measurements associated with said representation of said network; and

calculating a metric that is related to a respective diagnostic effectiveness for each set of contemplated measurements when said respective set of contemplated measurements is provided to a network diagnostic algorithm.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein said calculating a metric comprises:

determining whether packet corruption caused by a first communication link in said network could be misdiagnosed by said network diagnostic algorithm as being caused by a second communication link.

3. The method of claim 2 wherein said calculating a metric comprises:

building a matrix whether identifying packet corruption caused by each respective communication link in said network is distinguishable from packet corruption caused by every other communication link in said network.

4. The method of claim 1 wherein said calculating a metric uses probabilities of failure of devices in said network.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein said calculating a metric uses costs of repair of devices in said network.

6. A method, comprising:

selecting a first edge in a network representation;

defining packet flow constraints corresponding to said network representation and counter constraints corresponding to network measurements;

defining packet corruption constraints that include a constraint identifying said first edge as causing at least one instance of packet corruption;

attempting to solve an integer program, that uses said packet flow constraints, counter constraints, and packet corruption constraints, for packet corruption on a second edge in said network representation; and

in response to said attempting, determining whether packet corruption caused by said first edge is distinguishable from packet corruption caused by said second edge.

7. The method of claim 6 wherein said packet flow constraints include a first set of packet flow constraints corresponding to network routing limitations and a second set of said packet flow constraints that are duplicates of said first set.

8. The method of claim 7 wherein said duplicates of said first set are unconstrained by packet counter constraints.

9. The method of claim 6 wherein said packet corruption constraints include constraints identifying edges other than said first edge as causing zero instances of packet corruption.

10. The method of claim 6 further comprising:

determining whether a solution for said integer program exists for packet corruption on said second edge that is greater than zero.

11. The method of claim 6 further comprising:

generating a matrix defining whether packet corruption for each edge in said network representation is distinguishable from packet corruption on every other edge in said network representation.

12. The method of claim 11 further comprising:

determining a set of measurements that minimizes a cost of erroneous repairs using said matrix, probabilities of failures of devices associated with edges in said network representation, and costs of repair for said devices.

13. The method of claim 12 further comprising:

defining said probabilities of failures to equal one.

14. The method of claim 12 further comprising:

defining said costs of repairs to equal one.

15. A computer readable medium, comprising:

a first data structure for representing a network;

a second data structure for representing packet flow constraints associated with said network;

a third data structure for representing sets of contemplated measurements;

code for defining a network diagnostic algorithm that identifies potential fault candidates using said first, second, and third data structures; and

code for calculating a metric, for each set of contemplated measurements, that is related to a respective diagnostic effectiveness of a set of contemplated measurements when processed by said network diagnostic algorithm.

16. The computer readable medium of claim 15, wherein said network diagnostic algorithm applies an integer programming solution algorithm to constraints defined by said second data structure and said third data structure.

17. The computer readable medium of claim 15 wherein said code for calculating a metric determines whether each edge is distinguishable from every other edge in said first data structure when a respective set of contemplated measurements is processed by said network diagnostic algorithm.

18. The computer readable medium of claim 15 wherein said metric is further related to probabilities of failure associated with devices within said network.

19. The computer readable medium of claim 15 wherein said metric is further related to costs of repair of devices within said network.

20. A system comprising:

means for representing a network;

means for representing at least one set of measurements associated with said network;

means for determining whether a diagnostic algorithm uniquely identifies a first edge in said means for representing as a source of packet corruption when said first edge has caused packet corruption when said diagnostic algorithm processes said set of measurements.

21. The system of claim 20 wherein said means for determining generates a matrix that defines whether each edge in said means for representing is distinguishable as a source of packet corruption from every other edge in said means for representing.

22. The system of claim 21 further comprising:

means for calculating a metric for said set of measurements that is related to diagnostic effectiveness of said set of measurements when processed by said diagnostic algorithm.

23. The system of claim 22 wherein said metric is further related to probabilities of failure of devices within said network.

24. The system of claim 22 wherein said metric is further related to costs of repair of devices within said network.