Advanced tools for unified communication data management and analysis

• US 9,860,368 B2
• Filed: 02/12/2014
• Issued: 01/02/2018
• Est. Priority Date: 02/12/2013
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Unify Square, Inc. (Unisys Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Unify Square, Inc. (Unisys Corporation)
• Inventors: Aggarwal, Sudhanshu, Raghavan, Arun, Osborne, Robert
• Primary Examiner(s): Taylor, Nicholas
• Assistant Examiner(s): Kim, Chong G
• Application Number:
  US14/179,476
• Publication Number:
  US 20140229614A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,420 Days
• Field of Search: 709224
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/00 Administration; Management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0203 Market surveys; Market polls
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/5032 Generating service level reports
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/5096 wherein the managed service relates to distributed or central networked applications
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/06 Generation of reports
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/0805 by checking availability
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/50 Testing arrangements
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/55 Testing of service level quality, e.g. simulating service usage
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 51/56 Unified messaging, e.g. interactions between e-mail, instant messaging or converged IP messaging [CPM]
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 65/1063 Application servers providing network services systems providing special services to telephonic subscribers H04M3/42
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 67/1001 for accessing one among a plurality of replicated servers
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 67/535 Tracking the activity of the user network monitoring arrangements H04L43/00; recording of computer activity G06F11/34
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 15/58 based on statistics of usage or network monitoring
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/2227 Quality of service monitoring
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/2236 Quality of speech transmission monitoring
• CPC Class Codes: H04W 68/005 Transmission of information for alerting of incoming communication

Abstract

The present disclosure includes descriptions of various aspects of unified communication (UC) systems, including UC management and analysis systems and related tools and techniques. Described systems, tools, and techniques are adapted for enhanced UC data capture, analysis, and reporting; enhanced UC monitoring services; and a user survey service that can be used for conducting user surveys related to UC services. Embodiments disclosed herein include a process for determining location-based quality metrics; a process for calculating weighted availability in a computer system (e.g., a UC system); a process for generating a set of test rules based on automatic inspection of a UC topology; a process for setting a response priority for a rule failure based on classification of the failure; and process for executing a survey instance for users of a UC system based on presence information.

Claims

1. In a computer system comprising a server configured to execute a monitoring service, a method comprising, by the monitoring service:

testing a user communication service workload within a unified communication system, wherein the testing of the user communication service workload is performed according to a corresponding test rule, and wherein the user communication service workload is selected from the group consisting of instant messaging, voice calls, public switched telephone network (PSTN) calls, conference calls, federated user communications, video calls, desktop sharing, and application sharing;

detecting a rule failure associated with the testing of the user communication service workload within the unified communication system according to the test rule;

performing an automatic re-test on the test rule in response to the detected rule failure;

classifying the rule failure as sustained or intermittent based on a result of the automatic re-test;

setting a response priority for responding to the rule failure, wherein the response priority is based on the classification of the rule failure;

detecting an additional rule failure associated with the test rule;

grouping the rule failures as an incident;

classifying the incident as sustained or intermittent; and

further classifying the incident as active or inactive.

2. The method of claim 1, further comprising further classifying the rule failure based on a number of users impacted by the rule failure.

3. The method of claim 1, further comprising further classifying the rule failure as frequent or isolated.

4. The method of claim 1, further comprising transmitting an alert associated with the rule failure.

5. The method of claim 1, further comprising transmitting an alert associated with the incident.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the response priority is further based on timing of the rule failure.

20. The method of claim 1, wherein performing the automatic re-test comprises immediately repeating a failing part of a task in the user communication service workload in response to the detected rule failure and omitting automatic re-test of a part of the task that is not failing.

7. A computer system comprising one or more computing devices programmed to:

test a user communication service workload within a unified communication system, wherein the testing of the user communication service workload is performed according to a corresponding test rule, and wherein the user communication service workload is selected from the group consisting of instant messaging, voice calls, public switched telephone network (PSTN) calls, conference calls, federated user communications, video calls, desktop sharing, and application sharing;

detect a rule failure associated with the testing of the user communication service workload within the unified communication system according to the test rule;

perform an automatic re-test on the test rule in response to the detected rule failure;

classify the rule failure as sustained or intermittent based on a result of the automatic re-test;

set a response priority for responding to the rule failure, wherein the response priority is based on the classification of the rule failure;

detect an additional rule failure associated with the test rule;

group the rule failures as an incident;

classify the incident as sustained or intermittent; and

further classify the incident as active or inactive.

8. The computer system of claim 7, wherein the one or more computing devices are further programmed to further classify the rule failure based on a number of users impacted by the rule failure.

9. The computer system of claim 7, wherein the one or more computing devices are further programmed to further classify the rule failure as frequent or isolated.

10. The computer system of claim 7, wherein the one or more computing devices are further programmed to transmit an alert associated with the rule failure.

11. The computer system of claim 7, wherein the one or more computing devices are further programmed to transmit an alert associated with the incident.

12. The computer system of claim 7, wherein the response priority is further based on timing of the rule failure.

21. The computer system of claim 7, wherein the automatic re-test comprises immediate repetition of a failing part of a task in the user communication service workload in response to the detected rule failure and omitting automatic re-test of a part of the task that is not failing.

13. A non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon computer-executable instructions configured to cause one or more computing devices to:

test a user communication service workload within a unified communication system, wherein the testing of the user communication service workload is performed according to a corresponding test rule, and wherein the user communication service workload is selected from the group consisting of instant messaging, voice calls, public switched telephone network (PSTN) calls, conference calls, federated user communications, video calls, desktop sharing, and application sharing;

detect a rule failure associated with the testing of the user communication service workload within the unified communication system according to the test rule;

perform an automatic re-test on the test rule in response to the detected rule failure;

classify the rule failure as sustained or intermittent based on a result of the automatic re-test;

set a response priority for responding to the rule failure, wherein the response priority is based on the classification of the rule failure;

detect an additional rule failure associated with the test rule;

group the rule failures as an incident;

classify the incident as sustained or intermittent; and

further classify the incident as active or inactive.

14. The computer-readable medium of claim 13, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to cause one or more computing devices to further classify the rule failure based on a number of users impacted by the rule failure.

15. The computer-readable medium of claim 13, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to cause one or more computing devices to further classify the rule failure as frequent or isolated.

16. The computer-readable medium of claim 13, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to cause one or more computing devices to transmit an alert associated with the rule failure.

17. The computer-readable medium of claim 13, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to cause one or more computing devices to transmit an alert associated with the incident.

18. The computer-readable medium of claim 13, wherein the response priority is further based on timing of the rule failure.

19. The computer-readable medium of claim 13, wherein the automatic re-test comprises immediate repetition of a failing part of a task in the user communication service workload in response to the detected rule failure and omitting automatic re-test of a part of the task that is not failing.