The present invention relates to managing telecommunications networks and services. More precisely, it relates to acquiring data for the purposes of such management.
In order to detect breakdowns or losses of performance within a telecommunications network, it is conventional to associate a network management system therewith.
The network management system has means for acquiring data coming from network equipment (routers, switches, repeaters, connections, etc.).
The data can constitute alarms or merely measurements.
Alarms are notified by a piece of network equipment when it has detected a problem (a deficiency, a value crossing a threshold, etc.).
Measurements are values transmitted by pieces of network equipment when there is no such problem situation. They can correspond to a “push” model, i.e. they can be transmitted on request from the network management system. Such transmission can be performed periodically.
They can also correspond to a “pull” model. Under such circumstances, the measurements are available in databases located at the pieces of network equipment. These databases are generally referred to as a management information base (MIB). The management system can then read these measurements by accessing the MIB databases.
On the basis of this data, the network management system is then required to detect any problems and to characterize them.
The network management system may also have the function of determining the impact of these problems on the services conveyed by the network and on the performance thereof.
In order to perform this function correctly, it is important for the network management system to have data available that satisfies constraints in terms of speed and accuracy.
The data is acquired by sensors positioned on all or some of the pieces of equipment in the network, and is then transited to the network management system.
Nevertheless, insofar as the number of pieces of network equipment to be monitored can be large, it is necessary to find a compromise.
It is penalizing to acquire all of the possible data about the network since that would overload:
In contrast, the less data that is available to the network management system, the less capable it is of performing its function properly. In particular, if a data item available about some piece of network equipment is not measured sufficiently often, then the network management system can fail to detect that a threshold is exceeded. An example of such undersampling is illustrated by
In
It can clearly be seen that the curve can cross the threshold without that being detected, since all of the measured values (the crosses) lie beneath the threshold line S.
In the prior art, a compromise is therefore sought during the stage of configuring the network management system. The person in charge of configuring needs to determine where to place sensors, and where appropriate, the periodicity with which data needs to be acquired.
Nevertheless, such a solution is insufficient since it relies on the assumption that the network does not vary over time. In contrast, the Applicant is of the opinion that network variation leads to a loss of performance in network management systems in the present state of the art.
Network variation can be due to traffic variation or indeed to a change to the network itself (adding a piece of equipment to the network, dynamic reconfiguration of routing schemes, etc.).
One solution for solving that problem consists in placing an intermediate layer between the sensors and the network management system proper. The sensors are configured to acquire the maximum possible amount of data and to transmit it to the intermediate layer. The function of the intermediate layer is to filter and correlate the data so as to forward a usable fraction only to the network management system.
The network management system can modify the intermediate layer dynamically so as to modify filtering and correlation criteria as a function of how the network varies.
As an example of the state of the art, mention can be made of the “Temip” product provided by the supplier Compaq, or indeed any network management software based on a rules management product such as “Ilog Rules” from the supplier Ilog.
Nevertheless, that solution is not genuinely satisfactory.
Firstly, it requires additional processing to be added that is implemented in the intermediate layer. Since the intermediate layer acquires the maximum possible amount of data, the additional processing requires enormous processing resources.
It should also be observed that a good portion of this processing can be completely useless since it relates to data in which the network management system will take no interest at any given instant. The problem of network overload due to taking measurements remains.
Furthermore, that technique does not enable modifications to network configuration to be taken into account: if a piece of equipment is added to the network, it will not be taken into account by the network management system unless the network management system is reconfigured manually.
Another solution in the state of the art is described in the article “A passive test and measurement system: traffic sampling for QoS evaluation” by Irene Cozzani and Stefano Giordana, of the University of Pisa. The authors propose varying sampling rates so as to improve the pertinence of the data that is collected.
Nevertheless, such a solution does not solve all of the problems raised above. In particular, it does not solve those that might arise when a new element is added to the network, or when overloading (or more generally a problem) appears in a new location.
The object of the invention is to solve those various problems by proposing a network management system capable of adapting its measurement system as a function of the measured data.
To this end, in a first aspect, the invention provides a network management system comprising a data acquisition module, itself comprising a measurement module for collecting data coming from probes placed on items of network equipment in a network, and for forwarding the data to a supervisor module, the data being collected as a function of measurement parameters associated with said probes. In the network management system, said data acquisition module further comprises a measurement adaptation module having means for adding or removing said probes and for modifying the associated measurement parameters as a function of the collected data.
In a second aspect, the invention provides a service management system comprising such a network management system.
The invention and its advantages appear more clearly from the following description of an implementation given with reference to the accompanying figures.
In this implementation, the network management system NMS comprises at least one supervisor module SM and a data acquisition module DAM.
The data acquisition module DAM receives data coming from probes (not shown) situated on items of network equipment NE1, NE2 in a network N. These probes transmit data as a function of measurement parameters such as, for example, a measurement period or frequency, an algorithm for averaging measurement data, the window over which said averaging should be performed, etc.
The data is initially received by a measurement module MM which transmits it firstly to the supervisor module SM and secondly to a measurement adaptation module MAM.
The supervisor module SM may be of the kind used in state of the art supervisor systems and serves to perform tasks that are conventional for such systems: alarm correlation, displaying a man-machine interface MMI, etc.
The measurement adaptation module MAM has means for acting as a function of the data:
Initially, the measurement module MM collects data coming from probes placed on items of network equipment NE. The data is transmitted in the form of messages 1 which can be transmitted periodically or at the request of the measurement module MM.
As mentioned above, the measurement module then forwards the data it has collected firstly to the supervisor module SM by means of a message 2a, and secondly to the measurement adaptation module MAM by means of a message 2b.
The measurement adaptation module MAM is described in further detail. In this implementation, it comprises four co-operating modules:
The function of the parameter adaptation module Ap is to modify probe parameters as a function of the data as collected and conveyed by the message 2b received by the measurement module MM. It can then transmit modified parameters by means of a message 3a to the measurement module MM. The measurement module in turn forwards these messages to the corresponding items of network equipment NE in messages 4.
The probe adaptation module AS serves to add or remove probes, as a function of the same collected data. It can then transmit information relating to such additions or deletions in messages 3b transmitted to the measurement module MM. As before, the measurement module can forward these messages to items of network equipment NE by means of the messages 4.
The threshold S0 represents the maximum limit which this value V can reach prior to it being necessary to trigger an alarm.
A measurement period is also defined which defines the spacing in time between successive measurements, as represented by crosses on the curve. This measurement period initially has a value Δ.
When the curve crosses a threshold S1, the measurement period is shortened by a certain shortening factor. This threshold may be equal to 90% of the threshold S0, and the shortening may be by a factor of 2. The new measurement period then becomes Δ/2.
This shortening of the measurement period Δ makes it possible to increase the accuracy of the knowledge possessed by the supervisor module SM concerning variation in the value V. This can make it possible to avoid missing a crossing of the threshold S0 as occurs in the prior art solution explained above with reference to
Conversely, when the value V drops back below the threshold S1, the measurement period can return to its initial value Δ.
A second threshold S2 can also be defined so as to further improve the performance of the system of the invention. By way of example, this threshold S2 can be defined as being 80% of the threshold S0.
When the value V drops below the threshold S2, the measurement period may be lengthened by a lengthening factor, for example to a value that is equal to 2×Δ.
This makes it possible to minimize loading of the network and of the measurement module MM. Such minimization is entirely acceptable whenever the value V being far away from the threshold S0 means that the probability of V crossing the threshold is negligible.
A possible improvement to this algorithm is to cause the lengthening and shortening factors to depend on a disparity factor.
The disparity factor δ can be calculated as being a mean, e.g. the geometrical mean, of the differences between two consecutive measurements.
Thus, when the disparity factor is small, the lengthening or shortening factor can be made smaller. Conversely, when the disparity factor is large, then the lengthening or shortening factor can be increased.
Two virtual connections LSP1 and LSP2 have been set up:
A simple rule which can be implemented consists in determining whether the load on each virtual connection does or does not exceed a predetermined threshold.
If the load on a virtual connection exceeds the threshold, then probes are placed on each of the routers contributing to said virtual connection (if they have not already been put into place).
Conversely, if the load drops back below the threshold (or some other threshold), then the probes are eliminated on the routers contributing to the virtual connection.
In an implementation of the invention, the rules governing the behavior of the parameter adaptation modules AP and the probe adaptation modules AS are stored in a rule base RB contained in the measurement adaptation module MAM.
Furthermore, the measurement adaptation module MAM may contain a network model NM so as to enable the rules to be inferred.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
01 14864 | Nov 2001 | FR | national |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4967381 | Lane et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
5193178 | Chillarege et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5664105 | Keisling et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5751964 | Ordanic et al. | May 1998 | A |
5870692 | Millo | Feb 1999 | A |
5872973 | Mitchell et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5878420 | de la Salle | Mar 1999 | A |
5886643 | Diebboll et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5889954 | Gessel et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5892937 | Caccavale | Apr 1999 | A |
5926463 | Ahearn et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5948063 | Cooper et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
6021331 | Cooper et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6094678 | Nethercott et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6097703 | Larsen et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108782 | Fletcher et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6112241 | Abdelnour et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6121816 | Tonks et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6279037 | Tams et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6285966 | Brown et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6289017 | Shani et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6321263 | Luzzi et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6321264 | Fletcher et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6327620 | Tams et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6327677 | Garg et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6336138 | Caswell et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6363056 | Beigi et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363477 | Fletcher et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6424872 | Glanzer et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6438591 | Fehskens et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6473794 | Guheen et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6507804 | Hala et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6515968 | Combar et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6519321 | Swale | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6519638 | Forman et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6611617 | Crampton | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6625648 | Schwaller et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6675209 | Britt | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6689055 | Mullen et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6748434 | Kavanagh | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6748446 | Sato et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6804701 | Muret et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6894972 | Phaal | May 2005 | B1 |
6944681 | Christensen et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6952421 | Slater | Oct 2005 | B1 |
6975655 | Fischer et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
7043560 | Coulombe et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7143159 | Grace et al. | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7539744 | Matthews et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7594009 | Triulzi et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7594260 | Porras et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7660983 | Srivastava et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
7680928 | Lean et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7822871 | Stolorz et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7861084 | Beuque et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7886023 | Johnson | Feb 2011 | B1 |
8145742 | Parker et al. | Mar 2012 | B1 |
8219663 | Faraldo, II | Jul 2012 | B2 |
20010001849 | Felps | May 2001 | A1 |
20020055999 | Takeda | May 2002 | A1 |
20020099817 | Abbott et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020143920 | Dev et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020143929 | Maltz et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020161536 | Suh et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020169871 | Cravo de Almeida et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030069952 | Tams et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030135593 | Lee et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20050027845 | Secor et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20080028083 | Rezvani et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080281963 | Fletcher et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20110035491 | Gelvin et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110119366 | Elman et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Cozzani, Irene and Giordano, Stefano. “A Passive Test and Measurement System: Traffic Sampling for QoS Evaluation,” Global Telecommunications Conference, 1998, pp. 1236-1241. |
Oliveira, R. and Labetoulle, J. “MANIA—Managing Awareness in Networks Through Intelligent Agents,” IEEE Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS), vol. 2, Feb. 15-20, 1998, pp. 431-440. |
Ibraheem, S. et al. “Capturing a Qualitative Model of Network Performance and Predictive Behavior,” Journal of Network and System Management, vol. 6, Issue 2, 1997, pp. 1-26. |
Brodie, Mark et al. “Optimizing Probe Selection for Fault Localization,” 12th International Workshop on Distributed Systems: Operations and Management (DSOM), Oct. 15-17, 2001, pp. 1-13. |
Malan, G. Robert and Jahanian, Farnam. “An Extensible Probe Architecture for Network Protocol Performance Measurement,” Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communication, 1998, pp. 215-227. |
Narten, T. et al. “Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6),” RFC 2461, Dec. 1998, pp. 1-93. |
Deering, S. et al. “Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6,” RFC 2710, Oct. 1999, pp. 1-22. |
Haberman, B. and Worzella, R. “IP Version 6 Management Information Base for the Multicast Listener Discovery Protocol,” RFC 3019, Jan. 2001, pp. 1-15. |
Conta, A. “Extensions to IPv6 Neighbor Discovery for Inverse Discovery Specification,” RFC 3122, Jun. 2001, pp. 1-20. |
Freed, N. and Kille, S. “Network Services Monitoring MIB,” RFC 2248, Jan. 1998, pp. 1-19. |
McCloghrie, K. and Bierman, A. “Entity MIB (Version 2),” RFC 2737, Dec. 1999, pp. 1-56. |
Cozzani I et al.: “A Passive Test and Measurement System: traffic sampling for QoS evaluation” Global Telecommunications Conference, 1998, Globecom 1998. The Bridge to Global Integration. IEEE Sydney, NSW, Australia, Nov. 8-12, 1998, Piscataway, NJ, USA, IEEE, US, Nov. 8, 1998, pp. 1236-1241, XP010339722. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20030097440 A1 | May 2003 | US |