With the evolution and migration of Internet and related informational services to mobile and/or wireless handsets, devices and so on, telecommunications network operators are constantly seeking enhanced ways of rating for their respective data services. The prior art demonstrates considerable limitations, weaknesses and infirmities in this regard.
Consider U.S. Patent Application 20010055291 by Schweitzer, entitled System, method and computer program product for charging for competitive IP-over-wireless service, which details a means for charging Internet Protocol (IP) traffic but no substantial means for differentiating the traffic therein. Similarly, European Patent Application (EP) 1026853 by Yamaguchi et al., entitled Charging Method for Information Communication Network, teaches of art directed at merely counting the number of packets exchanged and nothing again of rating the different types of packets therein according to their pre-established utility and/or value.
Additionally, art which does address the problem of classifying IP traffic remains insufficient or lacks the sophistication of that of present. As with U.S. Patent Application 20020152321 by Le et al., entitled Method and apparatus for classifying IP data, makes reference to classifying said IP packets based only on IP header fields—basically Layer two (2) of the OSI stack (said stack has seven (7) layers). Our method disclosed goes well beyond Layer two (2) and involves classifying packets based on information obtained from Layer two (2) through to Layer seven (7). (For example, Multi-Media Service (MMS) classification performed by the disclosed invention depends on information obtained from layer six (6) and layer seven (7)). Our classification methodology incorporates correlation of data within the seven (7) layers to classify a packet. And similarly, U.S. Patent Application 20020103925 by Sheth et al., entitled Generic programmable internet protocol classification technique for a broadband engine, concentrates on IP classification specifically at the IPv4 header (i.e. layer 2/3). The art thereof is primarily directed at classification for more or less quality of service (QoS) reasons (indeed, the same can be said of the art identified former) and providing differentiated services. Our art is directed primarily at classification for the purpose of packet and application level data type identification(s).
Note also U.S. Patent Application 20020152321 October, 2002 Le et al. 709/238; U.S. Patent Application 20020103925 August, 2002 Sheth et al. 709/236; U.S. Patent Application 20010055291 December, 2001 Schweitzer 370/337; Foreign Patent Document(s) 1026853 August, 2000 EPO.
The present invention relates generally to wireless communications and gateway services; and more specifically, to a method for implementing an Internet Protocol (IP) charging and rating middleware platform and gateway system.
The Internet Protocol (IP) charging and rating middleware platform and gateway system disclosed herewith is intended to equip, in this instance, telecommunications network operators with the ability to rate and bill IP traffic (such as File Transfer Protocol (FTP) and HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP)) based upon any number of informational variables, including volume, quality of service, source address, destination address, and/or time of day. The art also accommodates differentiated billing based upon service type, including Wireless Application Protocol (WAP), Multimedia Message Service (MMS), and other services which utilize the Internet Protocol (IP) as the transport protocol.
The implementation of the architecture preferentially resides at the access gateway point, between the telecommunication provider's and/or wireless operator's IP network (as for instance, GGSN (Gateway GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) Support Node) based or PDSN (Packet Data Service Node) based and the Internet/Intranet. The IP charging and rating middleware platform and gateway system effectively allows for the inspection of IP traffic at definable points within the packet information.
For the purposes of simplicity and elucidation, the architecture of the Internet Protocol (IP) charging and rating middleware platform and gateway system may be divided functionally among the IP Classification Engine (the core of the art seeking protection of Letters Patent) and the residual art, the IP charging controllers.
Inherent to the technology and methodology of the IP Classification Engine (IPCE) remain the rating rules. Such rules are loaded into the IPCE, whereupon a series of system level triggers are then armed to detect the occurrence of certain events as per the existing rating criteria. The arming of triggers and generation of event sets, providing specific charging and/or informational events form the functional foundation of the IPCE.
Triggers may be armed on a real time basis through the provisioning interface which link to a set of underlying Application Programming Interface's (API's) (in this instance), thereby providing application control for non-limiting instantiations of protocol state, destination URL or address, Time of Day, volume message content or type, and text string, among others. Indeed, those skilled in the art shall recognize that a variety of object oriented application programming interfaces will serve the purpose of notification without affecting the intent and scope of the present invention. Triggers may also be armed on a protocol-specific level, including among others, HTTP, POP3, SMTP, FTP, MMS, and WAP.
The IPCE also provides the logic for the blocking of data wherever said subscriber has insufficient funds.
The IP charging controllers in this instance represent much of the residual, generic components of the Internet Protocol (IP) charging and rating middleware platform and gateway system as performing balance queries (which decrements the usage values on each subscriber's temporary token account store, after applying rating specific charges on the data flow information, in real time) and other intermediating functions.
With reference to
Continuing with reference to
The gateway system 200, makes a request to an Open Charging (OC) middleware platform and gateway system 250 as detailed in patent application Ser. No. 10/307,335 to confirm the status of the account in question and related profile capabilities. Technicians skilled in the art will recognize that the invention of present need not be limited to the aforementioned Open Charging (OC) middleware platform and gateway system and other similar network implementations may be employed without diluting the intent and scope as such.
The Open Charging (OC) middleware platform and gateway system 250 accesses the subscriber account server (SCP), removing the access charge from the account (pre-paid). Where the account can not support the requested charge then a negative response is returned (not shown) and a negative authorization is passed to the GGSN as a failed access request.
From the Unified Rating Service 240 the user profile in question is recovered. In the preferred embodiment, assuming both the account check, and the profile were positive an authorization accept 11 is returned to the GGSN 10 via the gateway system's 200 RADIUS Proxy server 260.
The gateway system 200 preloads the said user profile and loads the rating plans (detailed further in
So thus, still in reference in
Simultaneously, the gateway controller 220 obtains the rating and charging information 240 specific to the subscriber. The gateway controller 220 then arms the IPCE 210 with the appropriate information, including MSISDN, IP address, the rating specific inspection criteria etc.
IPCE 210 then internally arms the respective IP Flow Classification triggers (not shown) associated with the specific information. For example, the Flow Classification might specify the URL's allowed for the subscriber, the blocking of streaming service etc. The subscriber specific information is in addition to the regular usage statistic detectors. These generic IP Flow Classifiers perform accounting of usage on IP addresses, ports, protocols and maintain the user state information within the several IP flows.
Where events corresponding to these trigger points occur, the IP Flow Classifiers update the Internet Protocol (IP) charging and rating middleware platform and gateway system 200 accounting interface (not shown), which monitors the usage related to each type of data low within the user data session.
The Internet Protocol (IP) charging and rating middleware platform and gateway system 200 decrements the usage details from the allocated quota. Periodically, these usage statistics are updated on the gateway controller 220, which applies the charging to the usage information with rating information and decrements the credits reserved. Where the allocated tokens are exhausted, a token confirmation report is sent to aCG's Prepay Server 250, in order to debit the users account balance and simultaneously reserve additional credit/quota and allocation of usage quotas.
The Packet Analyzer component of the IP Classification Engine (IPCE) instantiates and configures itself using the downloaded IP Classification Modules Registry. It creates a decision tree based on the IP Classification Modules registry for analyzing and determining packet types.
When a packet is captured, it is passed onto the Packet Analyzer. If the source and destination IP addresses are not blocked, the Packet Analyzer obtains a copy of the packet and immediately re-releases the packet into the network. (Blocked packets are copied and dropped within the system. However, if the source or destination IP addresses or ports are defined to be free, the message is forwarded regardless of the blocking logic.) Using the copy of the captured packet, the Packet Analyzer determines the packet type using the decision tree of
For commercial purposes it must be recognized that only chargeable packets may be analyzed.
When the packet type is determined, the Rating and Charging Component of the IP Classification Engine is notified.
The IP Classification Modules (IPCM) Registry is used to specify the logic for analyzing the packets. It specifies a decision tree for determining the packet type of each packet; it also specifies the IP Classification module to be used for determining each packet type.
As explicated earlier with reference to
Based on this rating profile, the appropriate Flow Classification triggers are armed within the IPCE. During regular inspection of IP flows, when a set of events corresponding to the armed triggers occurs in the data plane, the control plane service logic is triggered to take control of the IP flow to perform further analysis, accounting, routing and control of the session.
Protocols such as FTP, POP, RTPIRTSP and SMTP have well-defined state machines where the service logic session information can indicate when a state has been reached. On the contrary, HTTP does not have well-defined state machines, but can be inspected in a way such that service logic can indicate when a state has been reached. For example, the control plane service logic has been implemented to start the counting the number and type of bytes transported after a HTTP GET Response has been detected. The accounting of packets is terminated when a TCP FIN is detected. Further refined service logic has also been implemented in the service logic of the IPCE, to detect content based on Layer 7 information. For example, particular internet content may have restricted access, or may be free of charge.
Consider further the advances achieved by the IPCM in providing a unique way of identifying and classifying MMS traffic for rating purposes. Now, MMS traffic is usually transported over the standard WAP protocol stack within a GPRS network; the IP classification Flow Monitors detect MMS traffic within the WAP protocol stack through the ‘Content Type’ field within the WSP layer of the WAP protocol or the presence of the MMSC URI in the GET header of the WSP layer of the WAP protocol. All WAP messages with the same Transaction ID as the original MMS packets are considered to be part of the MMS message stream. To ensure that all packets related to a MMS message are correctly rated, session-management is required to correlate all traffic with the same Transaction ID (in the WTP layer).
Grouping by Transaction ID is terminated by either a time-based counter or the arrival of an ‘Abort (0x04) PDU within the Wireless Transaction Protocol layer.
Tables 1A and 1B have been included herewith to further elucidate these advances.
The Internet Protocol (IP) charging and rating middleware platform and gateway system obtains the usage accounting information (not shown), applies the associated rating information to calculate the incurred charge to the subscriber and decrements that from the quota allocated by the Prepaid Application Manager, in the case of prepaid subscribers. When the allocated quota has been depleted (or lower than a defined threshold) the quota usage is confirmed with a request for more. In the event that the subscriber has no more balance in their prepaid account, it is possible to selectively drop the subscriber packets, or direct them to a top-up site, depending on the subscriber specific rating information. In the case of post paid subscribers, the appropriate usage CDR's (or similar type Event Records) are generated for transfer to the network billing system.
This is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/264,137, filed Nov. 3, 2008 (allowed) which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/348,972, filed Jan. 23, 2003, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,457,865, issued Nov. 25, 2008, the entire contents of both incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5852812 | Reeder | Dec 1998 | A |
5963630 | Dabbs et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5995822 | Smith et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6044264 | Huotari et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6226373 | Zhu et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6298383 | Gutman et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6311275 | Jin et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6473622 | Meuronen | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6611875 | Chopra et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6615262 | Schweitzer et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6621793 | Widegren et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6628951 | Grohn et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6661780 | Li | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6667780 | Cho | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6683870 | Archer | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6714515 | Marchand | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6718380 | Mohaban et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6741687 | Coppage | May 2004 | B1 |
6775267 | Kung et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785534 | Ung | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6839684 | Rissanen et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6847708 | Abbasi | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6891811 | Smith et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6895235 | Padgett et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6947531 | Lewis et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6956935 | Brown et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6961858 | Fransdonk | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6981029 | Menditto et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6993360 | Plahte et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7002977 | Jogalekar | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7003307 | Kupsh et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7039037 | Wang et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7062253 | Money et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7076562 | Singhal et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7079521 | Holur et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7092398 | Schweitzer | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7107068 | Benzon et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7139387 | Dahari | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7151939 | Sheynblat | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7171460 | Kalavade et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7191244 | Jennings et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7194235 | Nykanen et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7194554 | Short et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7215970 | Corrigan et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7228427 | Fransdonk | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7233948 | Shamoon et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7239877 | Corneille et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7246173 | Le et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7269431 | Gilbert | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7272133 | Valin et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7274700 | Jin et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7302254 | Valloppillil | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7330721 | Bhatia et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7339937 | Mitra et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7340214 | Hamberg | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7343168 | Valloppillil | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7444669 | Bahl et al. | Oct 2008 | B1 |
7457865 | Ramakrishnan et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7478161 | Bernet et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7487262 | Cardina et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7496111 | Itzkovitz et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7526547 | Rodrigo | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7529711 | Reith | May 2009 | B2 |
7573881 | Cain et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7590225 | Sivula | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7620557 | Nakamatsu et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7643486 | Belz et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7644158 | Ramakrishnan et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7707109 | Odijk et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7792086 | Popoff et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7801171 | Skoczkowski et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7870196 | Requena | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7930340 | Arunachalam | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7974247 | Takatori et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8027360 | Skoczkowski et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
20010026553 | Gallant et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010044893 | Skemer | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010053687 | Sivula | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20010055291 | Schweitzer | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020029197 | Kailamaki et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020032616 | Suzuki et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020052754 | Joyce et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020065774 | Young et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020073167 | Powell | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020103925 | Sheth et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020107754 | Stone | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020107755 | Steed et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020126701 | Requena | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020129088 | Zhou et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020152319 | Amin et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020152321 | Le et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020155823 | Preston et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020156696 | Teicher | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020176377 | Hamilton | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020176378 | Hamilton et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030003932 | Corrigan et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009580 | Chen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030031134 | Chiu | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030035409 | Wang et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030051041 | Kalavade et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030069922 | Arunachalam | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030074286 | Rodrigo | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030083990 | Berg et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030096605 | Schlieben et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030101135 | Myatt et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030105720 | Ishibashi | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030105864 | Mulligan et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030112936 | Brown et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030134614 | Dye | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030134615 | Takeuchi | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030157925 | Sorber et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030158902 | Volach | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030169718 | Hirata et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030187996 | Cardina et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200313 | Peterka et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030207686 | Ramanna et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030208444 | Sauer | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030214958 | Madour et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040022191 | Bernet et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040028055 | Madour et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040066769 | Ahmavaara et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040088244 | Bartter et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040092250 | Valloppillil | May 2004 | A1 |
20040092272 | Valloppillil | May 2004 | A1 |
20040095924 | Holur et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040105424 | Skoczkowski et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040117312 | Lialiamou et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040127215 | Shaw | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040236686 | Bohmer et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050071179 | Peters et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050074014 | Rao et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050100035 | Chiou et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050131984 | Hofmann et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050177506 | Rissanen | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050185661 | Scott et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050185664 | Chaskar et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050195743 | Rochberger et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050272465 | Ahmavaara et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060008063 | Harnesk et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060028980 | Wright | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031297 | Zuidema | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060034281 | Cain et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060039374 | Belz et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060075467 | Sanda et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060168225 | Gunning et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20080013531 | Elliott et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20100303050 | Popoff et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110305330 | Skoczkowski et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
10148540 | Apr 2003 | DE |
1 026 853 | Aug 2000 | EP |
1 054 529 | Nov 2000 | EP |
1 265 397 | Dec 2002 | EP |
1 278 358 | Jan 2003 | EP |
1 278 359 | Jan 2003 | EP |
1 278 383 | Jan 2003 | EP |
1 298 599 | Apr 2003 | EP |
1 309 213 | May 2003 | EP |
1 320 214 | Jun 2003 | EP |
1 278 359 | Jun 2004 | EP |
1 278 359 | Mar 2007 | EP |
WO 0024184 | Apr 2000 | WO |
0163883 | Aug 2001 | WO |
0169891 | Sep 2001 | WO |
WO 02067600 | Aug 2002 | WO |
WO 03014972 | Feb 2003 | WO |
03032618 | Apr 2003 | WO |
03037023 A | May 2003 | WO |
03047164 | Jun 2003 | WO |
WO 2004036825 | Apr 2004 | WO |
WO 2004036890 | Apr 2004 | WO |
2007138407 | Dec 2007 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100067537 A1 | Mar 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12264137 | Nov 2008 | US |
Child | 12623806 | US | |
Parent | 10348972 | Jan 2003 | US |
Child | 12264137 | US |