Communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis
By using big data analysis to assess the reliability of communication networks and generating switching scores, forwarding scores, and encapsulation scores, the problems of inaccurate assessment and untimely maintenance in traditional methods are solved. This enables efficient automated decision-making and preventative maintenance, thereby improving the stability and transmission quality of communication networks.
Patent Information
- Application Number
- CN202511693805.3
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Applications(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- Filing Date
- 2025-11-18
- Publication Date
- 2026-01-09
AI Technical Summary
Traditional reliability assessment methods for communication networks lack standardized mechanisms, resulting in time-consuming and labor-intensive fault repair, making it difficult to achieve automated decision support and preventive maintenance, and affecting transmission quality and the stability of communication services.
Based on big data analytics, this method acquires detection data through network-connected communication devices, categorizes it into cross-connect datasets, routing datasets, and gateway datasets, evaluates the communication status of cross-connectors, routers, and gateways, generates switching scores, forwarding scores, and encapsulation scores, comprehensively assesses the reliability of the communication network, and outputs optimization suggestions.
It enables multi-dimensional and accurate assessment, automated decision support, and preventative maintenance, thereby improving the stability and transmission quality of the communication network and reducing the risk of communication service loss.
Smart Images
Figure CN121309370A_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] This invention relates to the field of communication network operation and maintenance management technology, specifically a communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis. Background Technology
[0002] Data switching networks in communication networks are a highly efficient and flexible network topology. They interconnect multiple input and output ports through crossbar switches and connecting elements, forming complex data transmission paths. Data is transmitted in the network in the form of "messages" or "frames," each data packet containing destination address information. This information is crucial for the switching network to determine the data forwarding path. In a data switching network, devices such as crossbar switches, routers, and gateways collaborate, dynamically or statically configuring the crossbar switch status and establishing physical or logical connections based on the destination address information of the data packets. This configuration method allows data from input ports to be forwarded to designated output ports on demand, thus achieving efficient data transmission between different devices or network nodes. Furthermore, data switching networks possess dynamic scheduling capabilities, flexibly adjusting data transmission paths and resource allocation according to network conditions and service requirements to ensure smooth voice, video, and data transmission. This efficient data transmission and communication mechanism provides powerful support for modern communication networks.
[0003] Currently, traditional communication network reliability assessment methods have significant shortcomings in the fault repair process. They lack standardized assessment mechanisms, and troubleshooting a large number of devices is not only time-consuming and labor-intensive, but also makes it difficult to achieve automated decision support and preventive maintenance, resulting in difficulty in guaranteeing transmission quality and increasing the risk of loss of communication services. Summary of the Invention
[0004] To address the shortcomings of existing technologies, this invention provides a communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis. This method has advantages such as high accuracy in multi-dimensional assessment and strong stability in intelligent management, solving the problems of traditional communication network reliability assessment methods lacking standardized assessment mechanisms and being difficult to perform preventative maintenance.
[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides the following technical solution: a communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis, comprising the following steps: Step 1: Connect the communication network, bit error rate tester, NetFlow analyzer, and spectrum analyzer to obtain the detection data of the communication equipment, and classify them into cross datasets, routing datasets, and gateway datasets; Step 2: Based on the cross-dataset, evaluate the communication status of each cross switch and generate the corresponding exchange score. ; Step 3: Based on the routing dataset, evaluate the communication status of each router and generate a corresponding forwarding score. ; Step 4: Based on the gateway dataset, evaluate the communication status of each gateway and generate a corresponding encapsulation score. ; Step 5: Based on the exchange score Forwarding rating and packaging score It comprehensively evaluates the reliability of the communication network and outputs corresponding evaluation results and optimization suggestions.
[0006] Preferably, the cross-dataset includes the total operating time, total number of failures, design lifetime, bit error rate, latency, bandwidth utilization, fixed latency, and design bandwidth utilization for each cross switch.
[0007] Preferably, the routing dataset includes the signal power, noise power, total number of oscillations, total running time, vulnerability exposure time, and total firewall running time for each router.
[0008] Preferably, the gateway dataset includes the total running time, total number of failures, repair time, total number of encapsulations, and total number of lost data for each gateway.
[0009] Preferably, in step two, the scores are exchanged. The evaluation process is as follows: S11. Based on the cross-dataset, extract the first... The management data of the first cross switch, and the first The total operating time of the cross switches is marked as follows: , will the The total number of faults of each cross switch is marked as follows: , will the The design life of each cross switch is marked as , will the The bit error rate of each cross switch is denoted as In chronological order, from morning to night, the first... The delay of each cross switch is marked as follows: Then, from morning to night, the first The bandwidth utilization of each cross switch is denoted as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of data transmissions performed by the cross switch; S12, Calculate the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each cross switch ; S13. Set a fixed value for the loss coefficient. This is used to measure the impact of the total number of failures on the remaining service life, and then calculate the... The remaining service life of the cross switch ; S14, Calculate the... Delay volatility of each cross switch ; S15, Calculate the... Average bandwidth utilization of each cross switch ; S16. Based on S11-S15, evaluate the first... The cross switch exchange score The process is as follows: By connecting to the communication network, standard fault-free duration applicable to all cross switches can be obtained. Standard remaining service life Fluctuation threshold and standard bit error rate All cross switches exchange scores The initial values are all 0 points; Based on the device dataset, the first The fixed delay of each cross switch is marked as , will the The design bandwidth utilization of each cross switch is denoted as... ; If the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each cross switch ≤Standard mean time between failures , indicating the first The first cross switch has a risk of performance degradation, and the second... The cross switch exchange score Decrease by 1 point; If the first The remaining service life of the cross switch ≤Standard remaining service life , indicating the first The first cross switch is at risk of aging and failure. The cross switch exchange score Decrease by 1 point; If the first Average delay of cross switches > Fixed delay or delayed volatility > Fluctuation threshold , indicating the first The first cross switch has an abnormal delay, which will affect the second cross switch. The cross switch exchange score Reduce by 3 points; If the first Bit error rate of a cross switch ≥ Standard Bit Error Rate , indicating the first The data transmission quality of the first cross switch degrades, which will affect the second... The cross switch exchange score Reduce by 3 points; If the first Average bandwidth utilization of each cross switch ≥ Design bandwidth utilization , indicating the first The first cross switch has been in an overload state for a long time, which will... The cross switch exchange score Reduce by 3 points.
[0010] Preferably, in step three, the forwarding score is... The evaluation process is as follows: S21. Based on the routing dataset, extract the first... The management data of each router is then sorted chronologically from earliest to latest. The signal power of each router is marked as follows: , will the The noise power of each router is denoted as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of times each router forwards data; S22, Calculate the first Average signal-to-noise ratio of each router ; S23. Based on the device dataset, the first... The total number of oscillations of each router is marked as follows: , will the The total operating time of each router is marked as Then calculate the first The oscillation frequency of each router ; S24. Based on the device dataset, sort the devices in chronological order from earliest to latest. The duration of vulnerability exposure for each router is marked as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of times a router has vulnerabilities; S25. Based on the device dataset, the first... The total runtime of the router firewall is marked as follows: Then calculate the first Risk exposure rate of individual routers ; S26. Based on S21-S25, evaluate the first... Forwarding score of each router The process is as follows: By connecting to the communication network, obtain frequency thresholds applicable to all routers. and exposure threshold All router forwarding scores The initial values are all 0 points; If the first Average signal-to-noise ratio of each router <30dB, indicating the The electromagnetic interference immunity of the router decreases, which will affect the first router. Forwarding score of each router Decrease by 1 point; If the first The oscillation frequency of each router ≥ Frequency threshold , indicating the first The first router has a risk of frequent disconnections, so the second... Forwarding score of each router Decrease by 1 point; If the first Risk exposure rate of individual routers ≥ Exposure rate threshold , indicating the first The router poses a data security risk, and the first router... Forwarding score of each router Decrease by 1 point.
[0011] Preferably, in step four, the encapsulation score is... The evaluation process is as follows: S31. Based on the gateway dataset, extract the first... The management data of the first gateway, and the first The total runtime of each gateway is marked as , will the The total number of failures for each gateway is marked as follows: Then, in chronological order, from morning to night, the first... The repair time for each gateway is marked as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of times the gateway automatically repaired; S32, Calculate the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each gateway ; S33, Calculate the first Average repair time per gateway ; S34. Based on the device dataset, the first... The total number of encapsulations for each gateway is marked as follows: , will the The total number of lost gateways is marked as Then calculate the first Packet loss rate of each gateway ; S35. Based on S31-S34, evaluate the first... Encapsulation score for each gateway The process is as follows: By connecting to the database via the network, the rated mean time between failures (MTBF) applicable to all gateways can be obtained. and rated repair time All gateway encapsulation scores The initial values are all 0 points; If the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each gateway <Rated mean time between failures , indicating the first The first gateway has a risk of performance degradation, and the second gateway will... Encapsulation score for each gateway Decrease by 1 point; If the first Average repair time per gateway >Rated repair time , indicating the first The first gateway has a configuration fault, which will... Encapsulation score for each gateway Decrease by 1 point; If the first Packet loss rate per gateway ≥0.1%, indicating the first The encapsulation quality of the first gateway deteriorates, which will affect the second gateway. Encapsulation score for each gateway Decrease by 1 point.
[0012] Preferably, in step five, in the communication network, if the switching score of any cross switch... A score ≤-3 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding cross switches should be disconnected promptly. If the switching score of all cross switches is... ≥-2 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time point is relatively stable, and the frequency of routine checks should be maintained.
[0013] Preferably, in step five, in the communication network, if the forwarding score of any router... A value less than 0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding router should be disconnected immediately. If the forwarding score of all routers is... =0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is relatively stable, and the daily inspection frequency should be maintained.
[0014] Preferably, in step five, in the communication network, if the encapsulation score of any gateway... A score less than 0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding gateway should be disconnected immediately. If the encapsulation score of all gateways is less than 0, it means the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding gateway should be disconnected immediately. =0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is relatively stable, and the daily inspection frequency should be maintained.
[0015] Compared with existing technologies, this invention provides a communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis, which has the following beneficial effects: 1. This invention acquires detection data from communication devices by connecting a communication network, a bit error rate analyzer, a NetFlow analyzer, and a spectrum analyzer. This data is then categorized into cross-datasets, routing datasets, and gateway datasets, covering various indicators throughout the entire lifecycle of the devices, including performance, security status, and stability. Based on the cross-datasets, the communication status of each cross-switch is evaluated, generating a corresponding switching score. It accurately detects bandwidth status, prevents network congestion caused by resource exhaustion, and evaluates the communication status of each router based on routing datasets to generate corresponding forwarding scores. It transforms security vulnerabilities into computable metrics, evaluates the communication status of each gateway based on the gateway dataset, and generates corresponding encapsulation scores. It provides real-time monitoring of repair efficiency and high accuracy in multi-dimensional assessment.
[0016] 2. This invention utilizes exchange scoring... Forwarding rating and packaging score The reliability of core communication network equipment is quantified, and these scores are then aggregated to comprehensively assess the reliability of the communication network. Corresponding assessment results and optimization suggestions are then output, enabling automated decision support and preventive maintenance, and providing intelligent management of strong communication stability. Attached Figure Description
[0017] Figure 1 This is a diagram illustrating the steps of the method of the present invention. Detailed Implementation
[0018] The technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.
[0019] Example 1 Please see Figure 1This invention provides a method for reliability assessment of communication networks based on big data analysis, comprising the following steps: Step 1: Connect the communication network, bit error rate tester, NetFlow analyzer, and spectrum analyzer to obtain the detection data of the communication equipment, and classify them into cross datasets, routing datasets, and gateway datasets; The cross-dataset includes the total operating time, total number of failures, design lifetime, bit error rate, latency, bandwidth utilization, fixed latency, and design bandwidth utilization for each cross switch; The routing dataset includes the signal power, noise power, total number of oscillations, total running time, vulnerability exposure time, and total firewall running time for each router. The gateway dataset includes the total runtime, total number of failures, repair time, total number of packages, and total number of lost packages for each gateway. Specifically, in communication networks, cross switches are mainly responsible for achieving parallel transmission and switching of multiple signals, routers are responsible for forwarding data packets between different networks and implementing routing functions, and gateways are used to carry out protocol conversion and data exchange between heterogeneous networks. For example, they encapsulate data in a local area network into the format required by a wide area network. Through multi-dimensional data fusion, various indicators throughout the entire life cycle of equipment, such as performance, security status, and stability, are covered. Step 2: Based on the cross-dataset, evaluate the communication status of each cross switch and generate the corresponding exchange score. Accurately detect bandwidth status to prevent network congestion caused by resource exhaustion; Step 3: Based on the routing dataset, evaluate the communication status of each router and generate a corresponding forwarding score. This transforms security vulnerabilities into computable metrics. Step 4: Based on the gateway dataset, evaluate the communication status of each gateway and generate a corresponding encapsulation score. Real-time monitoring of repair efficiency; Step 5: Based on the exchange score Forwarding rating and packaging score It comprehensively evaluates the reliability of the communication network and outputs corresponding evaluation results and optimization suggestions; In a communication network, if the switching score of any crossbar switch... A score ≤-3 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding cross switches should be disconnected promptly. If the switching score of all cross switches is... ≥-2 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current point in time is relatively stable, and the frequency of routine checks should be maintained. In a communication network, if the forwarding score of any router... A value less than 0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding router should be disconnected immediately. If the forwarding score of all routers is... =0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is relatively stable, and the daily inspection frequency should be maintained; In a communication network, if the encapsulation score of any gateway... A score less than 0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding gateway should be disconnected immediately. If the encapsulation score of all gateways is less than 0, it means the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding gateway should be disconnected immediately. =0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is relatively stable, and the daily inspection frequency should be maintained.
[0020] In this embodiment, by exchanging scores Forwarding rating and packaging score The reliability of core communication network equipment is quantified separately, and these scores are finally summarized to form a network-wide reliability assessment. The multi-dimensional assessment has high accuracy and solves the problem of one-sidedness caused by the use of a single indicator in traditional methods. This enables automated decision support and preventive maintenance, and provides intelligent management of strong communication stability.
[0021] Example 2 Please refer to Table 1 for the exchange scoring experiment data. This example is based on the explanation of Example 1. Specifically, the exchange scoring... The evaluation process is as follows: S11. Based on the cross-dataset, extract the first... The management data of the first cross switch, and the first The total operating time of the cross switches is marked as follows: , will the The total number of faults of each cross switch is marked as follows: , will the The design life of each cross switch is marked as , will the The bit error rate of each cross switch is denoted as In chronological order, from morning to night, the first... The delay of each cross switch is marked as follows: Then, from morning to night, the first The bandwidth utilization of each cross switch is denoted as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of data transmissions performed by the cross switch; S12, Calculate the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each cross switch Its expression is as follows: S13, Calculate the... The remaining service life of the cross switch Its expression is as follows: In the formula, Indicates the remaining service life under ideal operating conditions. This represents the depreciation factor, used to measure the impact of the total number of failures on the remaining service life. Indicates the amount of damage caused by malfunction; Specifically, since each failure reduces the remaining service life of the cross switch to some extent, the loss factor... The settings and values are closely related to the design characteristics of the cross switch, such as materials, processes, and operating environment. S14, Calculate the... Delay volatility of each cross switch Its expression is as follows: In the formula, This represents the average latency of data transmission. Indicates the first The cross switch performs the first Delay during secondary data transmission; S15, Calculate the... Average bandwidth utilization of each cross switch Its expression is as follows: Specifically, average bandwidth utilization It can intuitively reflect whether the cross switch has fully utilized its bandwidth potential during actual operation, thereby avoiding excessive idleness or overuse of resources; S16. Based on S11-S15, evaluate the first... The cross switch exchange score The process is as follows: By connecting to the communication network, standard fault-free duration applicable to all cross switches can be obtained. Standard remaining service life Fluctuation threshold and standard bit error rate All cross switches exchange scores The initial values are all 0 points; Specifically, the standard parameters applicable to all cross switches are derived from long-term statistical analysis of historical operating data, including the standard fault-free duration. Reflects the mean time between failures (MTBF) and standard remaining service life of all cross switches throughout their historical operation. This represents the average remaining working life of all cross switches during their historical operation, with a fluctuation threshold. The standard bit error rate is determined by calculating the average delay fluctuation rate over the historical operation of all cross switches. These parameters are derived from the average bit error rate of all cross switches during long-term operation, and these standardized parameters provide a unified quantitative basis for the performance evaluation of cross switches. Based on the device dataset, the first The fixed delay of each cross switch is marked as , will the The design bandwidth utilization of each cross switch is denoted as... ; If the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each cross switch ≤Standard mean time between failures , indicating the first The first cross switch has a risk of performance degradation, and the second... The cross switch exchange score Decrease by 1 point; If the first The remaining service life of the cross switch ≤Standard remaining service life , indicating the first The first cross switch is at risk of aging and failure. The cross switch exchange score Decrease by 1 point; If the first Average delay of cross switches > Fixed delay or delayed volatility > Fluctuation threshold , indicating the first The first cross switch has an abnormal delay, which will affect the second cross switch. The cross switch exchange score Reduce by 3 points; If the first Bit error rate of a cross switch ≥ Standard Bit Error Rate , indicating the first The data transmission quality of the first cross switch degrades, which will affect the second... The cross switch exchange score Reduce by 3 points; If the first Average bandwidth utilization of each cross switch ≥ Design bandwidth utilization , indicating the first The first cross switch has been in an overload state for a long time, which will... The cross switch exchange score Reduce by 3 points; Specifically, mean time between failures (MTBF) and remaining service life are key indicators reflecting the basic performance of cross switches. When these two indicators are low, it indicates that the cross switch version is low and needs to be updated. However, their impact on the reliability of the communication network is relatively small. Therefore, the first and second evaluation criteria are each set to 1 point. On the other hand, average delay, bit error rate, and average bandwidth utilization directly threaten the normal operation of the communication network and have a higher risk level. Therefore, the third, fourth, and fifth evaluation criteria are each set to 3 points.
[0022] Table 1. Data from the Exchange Scoring Experiment Table 1 shows that in the same communication network, cross switches 1, 2, and 3 of the same model were selected as experimental objects. Statistical analysis showed that cross switch 1 had a total operating time of 87,600 hours, a total of 1 failure, and a design life of 96,360 hours. Cross switch 1 transmitted data a total of 5 times, with delays of 5µs, 5.1µs, 4.9µs, 5.2µs, and 5.0µs for each transmission. The bandwidth utilization rates for each transmission were 42%, 44%, 43%, 45%, and 44%, respectively. The fixed delay was 6µs, and the designed bandwidth utilization rate was 50%. The total operating time of cross switch 2 is 70,000 hours, with a total of 2 failures and a design life of 87,600 hours. Cross switch 2 performs data transmission a total of 5 times, with delays of 10µs, 12µs, 11µs, 15µs, and 12µs for each transmission. The bandwidth utilization rates for each transmission are 48%, 52%, 51%, 49%, and 50%, respectively. The fixed delay is 8µs, and the design bandwidth utilization rate is 50%. The total operating time of cross switch 3 is 100,000 hours, the total number of failures is 1, and the design life is 200,000 hours. Cross switch 3 performs data transmission a total of 5 times, with delays of 20µs, 25µs, 30µs, 28µs, and 32µs for each transmission. The bandwidth utilization rates for each transmission are 55%, 60%, 65%, 58%, and 62%, respectively. The fixed delay is 30µs, and the design bandwidth utilization rate is 50%. Loss factor applicable to all cross switches Standard mean time between failures (MTBF) h, standard remaining service life h, fluctuation threshold Standard bit error rate ; Based on the assessment, the switching score of cross switch 2 in the communication network is... <-3, Cross switch 3 exchange score = -3 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and cross switch 2 and cross switch 3 should be disconnected in time.
[0023] In this embodiment, the mean time between failures (MTBF) This is a key indicator used to measure the reliability of cross switches; the higher the value, the higher the reliability. A fixed loss factor is set. Compared to static life prediction, it is closer to actual engineering practice, can accurately identify abnormal fluctuations in cross switches, and trigger maintenance operations in advance.
[0024] Example 3 Please refer to Table 2 for the forwarding score experimental data. This example is based on the explanation of Example 1. Specifically, the forwarding score... The evaluation process is as follows: S21. Based on the routing dataset, extract the first... The management data of each router is then sorted chronologically from earliest to latest. The signal power of each router is marked as follows: , will the The noise power of each router is denoted as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of times each router forwards data; S22, Calculate the first Average signal-to-noise ratio of each router Its expression is as follows: In the formula, Indicates the first The router Signal power during each data relay Indicates the first The router Noise power during data forwarding , Indicates the first The router Signal-to-noise ratio during data forwarding; S23, Calculate the first The oscillation frequency of each router Its expression is as follows: Based on the device dataset, the first The total number of oscillations of each router is marked as follows: , will the The total operating time of each router is marked as ; S24. Based on the device dataset, sort the devices in chronological order from earliest to latest. The duration of vulnerability exposure for each router is marked as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of times a router has vulnerabilities; S25, Calculate the first Risk exposure rate of individual routers Its expression is as follows: Based on the device dataset, the first The total runtime of the router firewall is marked as follows: ; In the formula, This indicates the total duration during which all vulnerabilities existed while the firewall was running; S26. Based on S21-S15, evaluate the first... Forwarding score of each router The process is as follows: By connecting to the communication network, obtain frequency thresholds applicable to all routers. and exposure threshold All router forwarding scores The initial values are all 0 points; Specifically, frequency thresholds applicable to all routers and exposure threshold All were determined through long-term statistical analysis of historical operating data, including the frequency threshold. This intuitively reflects the average oscillation frequency level and exposure rate threshold of all routers during their historical operation. This represents the average risk exposure level during the historical operation of all routers. The standardized threshold setting provides a unified quantitative benchmark for router performance evaluation. If the first Average signal-to-noise ratio of each router <30dB, indicating the The electromagnetic interference immunity of the router decreases, which will affect the first router. Forwarding score of each router Decrease by 1 point; If the first The oscillation frequency of each router ≥ Frequency threshold , indicating the first The first router has a risk of frequent disconnections, so the second... Forwarding score of each router Decrease by 1 point; If the first Risk exposure rate of individual routers ≥ Exposure rate threshold , indicating the first The router poses a data security risk, and the first router... Forwarding score of each router Decrease by 1 point.
[0025] Table 2 Forwarding scoring experimental data Table 2 shows that in the same communication network, routers 1, 2, and 3 of the same model were selected as experimental subjects. According to statistics, router 1 forwarded data a total of 5 times, with signal power of 18W, 19W, 18W, 20W, and 17W each time, and noise power of 2W, 1W, 3W, 8W, and 4W each time. Router 1 had vulnerabilities a total of 2 times, with exposure time of 0.5h and 0.3h for each vulnerability. Router 2 forwarded data a total of 5 times, with signal power of 10W, 11W, 9W, 8W and 12W each time, and noise power of 3W, 4W, 2W, 6W and 1W each time. Router 2 had a vulnerability a total of 1 time, and the exposure time of each vulnerability was 1 hour. Router 3 forwarded data a total of 5 times, with signal power of 20W, 24W, 21W, 19W and 24W each time, and noise power of 4W, 2W, 8W, 1W and 3W each time. Router 3 had vulnerabilities a total of 2 times, with exposure time of 1.5h and 2h for each vulnerability. Frequency thresholds applicable to all routers Exposure rate threshold (times / hour) ; Based on the assessment, the forwarding scores of routers 2 and 3 in the communication network are... <0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and routers 2 and 3 should be disconnected immediately.
[0026] In this embodiment, the router's signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is one of the important indicators for measuring device performance. A higher value indicates a stronger ability of the device to resist interference, while the oscillation frequency... The level of this frequency is closely related to the stability of multi-user connections; a higher oscillation frequency indicates a higher stability. This often means that the stability is poor when multiple users are connected, and a series of problems such as network congestion and disconnection are likely to occur due to the increase in the number of users.
[0027] Example 4 Please refer to Table 3 for the packaging scoring experimental data. This example is based on the explanation of Example 1. Specifically, the packaging score... The evaluation process is as follows: S31. Based on the gateway dataset, extract the first... The management data of the first gateway, and the first The total runtime of each gateway is marked as , will the The total number of failures for each gateway is marked as follows: Then, in chronological order, from morning to night, the first... The repair time for each gateway is marked as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of times the gateway automatically repaired; S32, Calculate the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each gateway Its expression is as follows: S33, Calculate the first Average repair time per gateway Its expression is as follows: S34, Calculate the first Packet loss rate per gateway Its expression is as follows: Based on the device dataset, the first The total number of encapsulations for each gateway is marked as follows: , will the The total number of lost gateways is marked as ; S35. Based on S31-S34, evaluate the first... Encapsulation score for each gateway The process is as follows: By connecting to the database via the network, the rated mean time between failures (MTBF) applicable to all gateways can be obtained. and rated repair time All gateway encapsulation scores The initial values are all 0 points; Specifically, the rated mean time between failures (MTBF) applies to all gateways. and rated repair time All were determined through long-term statistical analysis of historical operating data, including the rated fault-free duration. This reflects the average fault-free duration and rated repair time of all gateways throughout their historical operation. This represents the average time taken for all historical repair processes of gateways. The standardized parameter settings provide a unified quantitative benchmark for gateway performance evaluation. If the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each gateway <Rated mean time between failures , indicating the first The first gateway has a risk of performance degradation, and the second gateway will... Encapsulation score for each gateway Decrease by 1 point; If the first Average repair time per gateway >Rated repair time , indicating the first The first gateway has a configuration fault, which will... Encapsulation score for each gateway Decrease by 1 point; If the first Packet loss rate per gateway ≥0.1%, indicating the first The encapsulation quality of the first gateway deteriorates, which will affect the second gateway. Encapsulation score for each gateway Decrease by 1 point.
[0028] Table 3 Packaging scoring experimental data Table 3 shows that, in the same communication network, gateways 1, 2, and 3 of the same model were selected as experimental subjects. According to statistics, the repair time of gateway 1 was 20 min, 19 min, 18 min, 17 min, 21 min, 16 min, 22 min, 15 min, 18 min, 19 min, 17 min, and 20 min each time; the repair time of gateway 2 was 34 min, 80 min, 60 min, 15 min, and 48 min each time; and the repair time of gateway 3 was 2 min, 7 min, 14 min, 10 min, 8 min, 6 min, 15 min, and 18 min each time. Rated mean time between failures (MTBF) applicable to all gateways h, rated repair time ; Based on the assessment, the encapsulation scores of Gateway 1, Gateway 2, and Gateway 3 in the communication network were determined. <0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and gateways 1, 2 and 3 should be disconnected in time.
[0029] In this embodiment, by comprehensively analyzing multi-dimensional parameters, configuration faults are accurately located, guiding operation and maintenance personnel to prioritize troubleshooting software configuration issues such as routing policies and firewall rules, and triggering preventive maintenance mechanisms in a timely manner, thereby improving resource utilization.
[0030] The threshold is set to facilitate comparison. The size of the threshold depends on the amount of sample data and the number of bases set by those skilled in the art for each set of sample data; as long as it does not affect the ratio between the parameter and the quantized value, it is acceptable.
[0031] The above formulas are all derived from software simulation using a large amount of data and are selected to be close to the actual values. The coefficients in the formulas are set by those skilled in the art according to the actual situation. The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any equivalent substitutions or changes made by those skilled in the art within the technical scope disclosed in the present invention, based on the technical solution and inventive concept of the present invention, should be covered within the protection scope of the present invention.
Claims
1. A reliability assessment method for communication networks based on big data analysis, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Step 1: Connect the communication network, bit error rate tester, NetFlow analyzer, and spectrum analyzer to obtain the detection data of the communication equipment, and classify them into cross datasets, routing datasets, and gateway datasets; Step 2: Based on the cross-dataset, evaluate the communication status of each cross switch and generate the corresponding exchange score. ; Step 3: Based on the routing dataset, evaluate the communication status of each router and generate a corresponding forwarding score. ; Step 4: Based on the gateway dataset, evaluate the communication status of each gateway and generate a corresponding encapsulation score. ; Step 5: Based on the exchange score Forwarding rating and packaging score It comprehensively evaluates the reliability of the communication network and outputs corresponding evaluation results and optimization suggestions.
2. The communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step one, the cross dataset includes the total operating time, total number of failures, design life, bit error rate, delay, bandwidth utilization, fixed delay, and design bandwidth utilization for each cross switch.
3. The communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis according to claim 2, characterized in that: In step one, the routing dataset includes the signal power, noise power, total number of oscillations, total running time, vulnerability exposure time, and total firewall running time for each router.
4. The communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis according to claim 3, characterized in that: In step one, the gateway dataset includes the total running time, total number of failures, repair time, total number of encapsulations, and total number of lost data for each gateway.
5. The communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis according to claim 4, characterized in that: In step two, the scores are exchanged. The evaluation process is as follows: S11. Based on the cross-dataset, extract the first... The management data of the first cross switch, and the first The total operating time of the cross switches is marked as follows: , will the The total number of faults of each cross switch is marked as follows: , will the The design life of each cross switch is marked as , will the The bit error rate of each cross switch is denoted as In chronological order, from morning to night, the first... The delay of each cross switch is marked as follows: Then, from morning to night, the first The bandwidth utilization of each cross switch is denoted as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of data transmissions performed by the cross switch; S12, Calculate the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each cross switch ; S13. Set a fixed value for the loss coefficient. This is used to measure the impact of the total number of failures on the remaining service life, and then calculate the... The remaining service life of the cross switch ; S14, Calculate the... Delay volatility of each cross switch ; S15, Calculate the... Average bandwidth utilization of each cross switch ; S16. Based on S11-S15, evaluate the first... The cross switch exchange score The process is as follows: By connecting to the communication network, standard fault-free duration applicable to all cross switches can be obtained. Standard remaining service life Fluctuation threshold and standard bit error rate All cross switches exchange scores The initial values are all 0 points; Based on the device dataset, the first The fixed delay of each cross switch is marked as , will the The design bandwidth utilization of each cross switch is denoted as... ; If the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each cross switch ≤Standard mean time between failures , indicating the first The first cross switch has a risk of performance degradation, and the second... The cross switch exchange score Decrease by 1 point; If the first The remaining service life of the cross switch ≤Standard remaining service life , indicating the first The first cross switch is at risk of aging and failure. The cross switch exchange score Decrease by 1 point; If the first Average delay of cross switches > Fixed delay or delayed volatility > Fluctuation threshold , indicating the first The first cross switch has an abnormal delay, which will affect the second cross switch. The cross switch exchange score Reduce by 3 points; If the first Bit error rate of a cross switch ≥ Standard Bit Error Rate , indicating the first The data transmission quality of the first cross switch degrades, which will affect the second... The cross switch exchange score Reduce by 3 points; If the first Average bandwidth utilization of each cross switch ≥ Design bandwidth utilization , indicating the first The first cross switch has been in an overload state for a long time, which will... The cross switch exchange score Reduce by 3 points.
6. The communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis according to claim 5, characterized in that: In step three, forwarding score The evaluation process is as follows: S21. Based on the routing dataset, extract the first... The management data of each router is then sorted chronologically from earliest to latest. The signal power of each router is marked as follows: , will the The noise power of each router is denoted as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of times each router forwards data; S22, Calculate the first Average signal-to-noise ratio of each router ; S23. Based on the device dataset, the first... The total number of oscillations of each router is marked as follows: , will the The total operating time of each router is marked as Then calculate the first The oscillation frequency of each router ; S24. Based on the device dataset, sort the devices in chronological order from earliest to latest. The duration of vulnerability exposure for each router is marked as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of times a router has vulnerabilities; S25. Based on the device dataset, the first... The total runtime of the router firewall is marked as follows: Then calculate the first Risk exposure rate of individual routers ; S26. Based on S21-S25, evaluate the first... Forwarding score of each router The process is as follows: Connect to the communication network via the network to obtain the frequency threshold applicable to all routers. and exposure threshold All router forwarding scores The initial values are all 0 points; If the first Average signal-to-noise ratio of each router <30dB, indicating the The electromagnetic interference immunity of the router decreases, which will affect the first router. Forwarding score of each router Decrease by 1 point; If the first The oscillation frequency of each router ≥ Frequency threshold , indicating the first The first router has a risk of frequent disconnections, so the second... Forwarding score of each router Decrease by 1 point; If the first Risk exposure rate of individual routers ≥ Exposure rate threshold , indicating the first The router poses a data security risk, and the first router... Forwarding score of each router Decrease by 1 point.
7. The communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis according to claim 6, characterized in that: In step four, the scoring is encapsulated. The evaluation process is as follows: S31. Based on the gateway dataset, extract the first... The management data of the first gateway, and the first The total runtime of each gateway is marked as , will the The total number of failures for each gateway is marked as follows: Then, in chronological order, from morning to night, the first... The repair time for each gateway is marked as follows: , Indicates the first The total number of times the gateway automatically repaired; S32, Calculate the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each gateway ; S33, Calculate the first Average repair time per gateway ; S34. Based on the device dataset, the first... The total number of encapsulations for each gateway is marked as follows: , will the The total number of lost gateways is marked as Then calculate the first Packet loss rate per gateway ; S35. Based on S31-S34, evaluate the first... Encapsulation score for each gateway The process is as follows: By connecting to the database via the network, the rated mean time between failures (MTBF) applicable to all gateways can be obtained. and rated repair time All gateway encapsulation scores The initial values are all 0 points; If the first Average mean time between failures (MTBF) of each gateway <Rated mean time between failures , indicating the first The first gateway has a risk of performance degradation, and the second gateway will... Encapsulation score for each gateway Decrease by 1 point; If the first Average repair time per gateway >Rated repair time , indicating the first The first gateway has a configuration fault, which will... Encapsulation score for each gateway Decrease by 1 point; If the first Packet loss rate per gateway ≥0.1%, indicating the first The encapsulation quality of the first gateway deteriorates, which will affect the second gateway. Encapsulation score for each gateway Decrease by 1 point.
8. The communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis according to claim 7, characterized in that: In step five, within the communication network, if the switching score of any cross switch... A score ≤-3 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding cross switches should be disconnected promptly. If the switching score of all cross switches is... ≥-2 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time point is relatively stable, and the frequency of routine checks should be maintained.
9. The communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis according to claim 8, characterized in that: In step five, within the communication network, if the forwarding score of any router... A value less than 0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding router should be disconnected immediately. If the forwarding score of all routers is... =0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is relatively stable, and the daily inspection frequency should be maintained.
10. The communication network reliability assessment method based on big data analysis according to claim 9, characterized in that: In step five, within the communication network, if the encapsulation score of any gateway... A score less than 0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding gateway should be disconnected immediately. If the encapsulation score of all gateways is less than 0, it means the reliability of the communication network at the current time is threatened, and the corresponding gateway should be disconnected immediately. =0 indicates that the reliability of the communication network at the current time is relatively stable, and the daily inspection frequency should be maintained.