Method and device for determining same routing risk of circuit and electronic equipment

Abstract

The invention discloses a method and device for determining the same routing risk of a circuit and electronic equipment. The method comprises the following steps: determining whether a main route and a standby route of a single circuit have a same route risk or not by adopting a first mode, and generating a same route risk analysis result of the single circuit; determining whether a plurality of circuits belonging to the same service type and the same office direction have the same routing risk or not by adopting a second mode, and generating a multi-circuit same routing risk analysis result of the plurality of circuits corresponding to each office direction of each service type, in the second mode, whether the same routing risk exists among the multiple circuits or not is determined through multiple preset same routing risk judgment rules of different dimensions for the multiple circuits corresponding to each service type and each office direction. According to the method and the apparatus, the technical problems of inaccurate analysis result and low analysis efficiency caused by dependence on subjective feeling of analysts during same-route risk analysis of a circuit in related technologies are solved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the field of communication networks, and in particular to a method, device, and electronic device for determining the co-routing risk of a circuit. Background Art

[0002] In the field of network technology and security, analyzing transmission service co-routing vulnerabilities is a critical maintenance task, ensuring network robustness and service quality. While this design saves costs and resources when multiple important communication links share the same physical path, a failure can cause multiple links to fail simultaneously, severely impacting network stability and service quality. Related technologies typically rely on manual querying, statistics, and analysis by maintenance personnel. This process is cumbersome and inefficient, requiring engineers to conduct detailed comparisons and inspections of the circuit's starting and ending points, as well as all intermediate nodes and links, by consulting various network resource management systems, transmission equipment network management systems, and optical protection network management systems. Manual analysis is not only time-consuming but also prone to omissions and errors when dealing with large networks and numerous circuits, increasing analysis uncertainty and labor costs.

[0003] To address the above-mentioned problems, no effective solutions have been proposed so far. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The embodiments of the present application provide a method, apparatus, and electronic device for determining the co-routing risk of a circuit, so as to at least solve the technical problem in related technologies that, when performing co-routing risk analysis of a circuit, the risk relies on the subjective feelings of the analyst, resulting in inaccurate analysis results and low analysis efficiency.

[0005] According to one aspect of an embodiment of the present application, a method for determining the co-routing risk of a circuit is provided, comprising: using a first method to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between the main route and the backup route of a single circuit, and generating a co-routing risk analysis result for the single circuit, wherein the first method determines whether there is an overlapping part after comparing the paths of the main route and the backup route of the single circuit; using a second method to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction, and generating a co-routing risk analysis result for multiple circuits corresponding to each office direction of each business type, wherein the second method determines whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits by applying preset co-routing risk judgment rules of multiple different dimensions to the multiple circuits corresponding to each business type and each office direction.

[0006] According to some embodiments of the present application, a first method is used to determine whether the main route and backup route of a single circuit have a same routing risk, including: when the main route and backup route of each single circuit meet at least one of the following conditions, determining that the main route and backup route have a same routing risk: the main route and backup route pass through the same optical cable segment; the main route and backup route pass through the same multiplexing segment, and the multiplexing segment has no protection mechanism; the main route and backup route pass through the same station; the main route and backup route pass through the same line-side network element; the main route and backup route use the same service board.

[0007] According to some embodiments of the present application, a single circuit co-route risk analysis result is generated, including: when the main route and the backup route pass through the same optical cable segment, the single circuit and the same optical cable segment are determined as risk circuits and risk optical cable segments, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk optical cable segment are determined as the single circuit co-route risk analysis result; when the main route and the backup route pass through the same multiplexing segment and the multiplexing segment has no protection mechanism, the single circuit and the same multiplexing segment are determined as risk circuits and risk multiplexing segments, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk multiplexing segments are determined as the single circuit co-route risk analysis result; when the main route and the backup route pass through the same station, the single circuit and the same station are determined as risk circuits and risk stations, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk station are determined as the risk analysis results of the single circuit with the same route; when the main route and the backup route pass through the same line-side network element, the single circuit and the same line-side network element are determined as risk circuits and risk line-side network elements, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk line-side network element are determined as the risk analysis results of the single circuit with the same route; when the main route and the backup route use the same service board, the single circuit and the same service board are determined as risk circuits and risk service boards, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk service board are determined as the risk analysis results of the single circuit with the same route.

[0008] According to some embodiments of the present application, a second method is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction, including: determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to a first business type and a first office direction through a first preset co-routing risk judgment rule, wherein the first office direction is any office direction and the first business type is any business type: obtaining a circuit list of a target area, wherein the circuit list includes circuit information of all circuits in the target area; determining the total circuit bandwidth of the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction based on the circuit list, and determining a first bandwidth threshold based on the total circuit bandwidth; classifying all circuits in the target area according to the type of optical cable route to obtain multiple route groups, and determining the optical cable segment bandwidth carried by the optical cable segment corresponding to each route group, wherein each route group corresponds to an optical cable route; when the bandwidth of any optical cable segment is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, determining that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction.

[0009] According to some embodiments of the present application, a second method is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction, including: determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction through a second preset co-routing risk judgment rule; determining the corresponding multiple multiplexing segments of the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction; determining the multiplexing segment bandwidth carried by each multiplexing segment; and when any multiplexing segment bandwidth is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, determining that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction.

[0010] According to some embodiments of the present application, a second method is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction, including: determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction through a third preset co-routing risk judgment rule: determining the cable node set of the optical cable segment corresponding to each routing group; taking the intersection of any two optical cable node sets, and determining the two optical cable segments corresponding to the two optical cable node sets whose intersection is not empty as a group of optical cable segments to be verified; when the total cable segment bandwidth of any group of optical cable segments to be verified is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction.

[0011] According to some embodiments of the present application, a second method is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same bureau direction, including: determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first bureau direction through a fourth preset co-routing risk judgment rule, wherein the first bureau direction is any bureau direction and the first business type is any business type: determining all bureau stations through which the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first bureau direction pass; determining the bandwidth carried by each bureau station; and when the bandwidth carried by any bureau station is greater than the second bandwidth threshold, determining that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first bureau direction.

[0012] According to some embodiments of the present application, a second method is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction, including: determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction through a fifth preset co-routing risk judgment rule, wherein the first office direction is any office direction and the first business type is any business type: determining all network elements through which the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction pass; determining the bandwidth carried by each network element; when the bandwidth carried by any network element is greater than a third bandwidth threshold, determining that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction.

[0013] According to some embodiments of the present application, a second method is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction, including: determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction through a sixth preset co-routing risk judgment rule, wherein the first office direction is any office direction and the first business type is any business type: determining the business board set of each circuit among the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction; when the intersection of the business board sets of any two circuits is not empty, determining that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction.

[0014] According to another aspect of an embodiment of the present application, a device for determining the co-routing risk of a circuit is also provided, including: a first determination module, used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between the main route and the backup route of a single circuit using a first method, and generate a co-routing risk analysis result for the single circuit, wherein the first method determines whether there is an overlapping part after comparing the paths of the main route and the backup route of the single circuit; a second determination module, used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction using a second method, and generate a co-routing risk analysis result for multiple circuits corresponding to each office direction of each business type, wherein the second method determines whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits by applying preset co-routing risk judgment rules of multiple different dimensions to the multiple circuits corresponding to each business type and each office direction.

[0015] According to another aspect of an embodiment of the present application, a non-volatile storage medium is provided, in which a program is stored. When the program is running, the device where the non-volatile storage medium is located is controlled to execute the method for determining the same-routing risk of the above circuit.

[0016] According to another aspect of an embodiment of the present application, an electronic device is provided, including: a memory and a processor, the processor being configured to run a program stored in the memory, wherein the program executes the above method for determining the same-routing risk of a circuit when running.

[0017] According to another aspect of an embodiment of the present application, a computer program product is provided, including computer instructions, which implement the above method for determining the same-routing risk of a circuit when the computer instructions are executed by a processor.

[0018] In an embodiment of the present application, a first method is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between the main route and the backup route of a single circuit, and to generate a co-routing risk analysis result for the single circuit, wherein the first method determines whether there is an overlapping part after comparing the paths of the main route and the backup route of the single circuit; a second method is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction, and to generate a multi-circuit co-routing risk analysis result for the multiple circuits corresponding to each office direction of each business type, wherein the second method determines whether there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits by applying preset co-routing risk judgment rules of multiple different dimensions to the multiple circuits corresponding to each business type and each office direction. The co-routing risk analysis results of the single circuit and the co-routing risk analysis results of the multiple circuits corresponding to each office direction of each business type are determined respectively by the first method and the second method, thereby achieving the purpose of not relying on the subjective feelings of the analyst. The above-mentioned automated method is used to improve the analysis efficiency at the same time, thereby solving the technical problem in the related art that the co-routing risk analysis of the circuit relies on the subjective feelings of the analyst, resulting in inaccurate analysis results and low analysis efficiency. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0019] The drawings described herein are used to provide a further understanding of the present application and constitute a part of the present application. The illustrative embodiments of the present application and their descriptions are used to explain the present application and do not constitute an improper limitation on the present application. In the drawings:

[0020] Figure 1 This is a hardware structure block diagram of a computer terminal for implementing a method for determining the same-routing risk of a circuit according to an embodiment of the present application;

[0021] Figure 2 This is a flow chart of a method for determining the co-routing risk of a first circuit provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0022] Figure 3 is a flow chart of a method for determining the co-routing risk of a second circuit provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0023] Figure 4 is a flow chart of a method for determining the co-routing risk of a third circuit provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0024] Figure 5 This is a system architecture diagram provided according to an embodiment of the present application;

[0025] Figure 6 1 is a schematic diagram of a circuit co-routing risk determination device according to an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0026] In order to enable those skilled in the art to better understand the present invention, the following will clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention in conjunction with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments in the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without making creative efforts should fall within the scope of protection of this application.

[0027] The information collected in the embodiments of the present application is information and data authorized by the user or fully authorized by all parties, and the collection, storage, use, processing, transmission, provision, disclosure and application of the relevant data comply with the relevant laws, regulations and standards of the relevant regions, take necessary confidentiality measures, do not violate public order and good morals, and provide corresponding operation entrances for users to choose to authorize or reject the automated decision results; if the user chooses to reject, the expert decision-making process will be entered.

[0028] It should be noted that the terms "first", "second", etc. in the specification and claims of the present application and the above-mentioned drawings are used to distinguish similar objects and are not necessarily used to describe a specific order or sequential order. It should be understood that the data used in this way can be interchangeable where appropriate, so that the embodiments of the present application described herein can be implemented in a sequence other than those illustrated or described herein. In addition, the terms "including" and "having" and any of their variations are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusions, for example, a process, method, system, product or device comprising a series of steps or units is not necessarily limited to those steps or units clearly listed, but may include other steps or units that are not clearly listed or inherent to these processes, methods, products or devices.

[0029] In order to better understand the embodiments of the present application, the technical terms involved in the embodiments of the present application are explained as follows:

[0030] Transmission: In the communications field, this refers to the service of transferring information such as data, voice, and video through various communication networks (such as fiber optic, microwave, and satellite). Transmission is a fundamental and critical component of the telecommunications industry, ensuring that information can be efficiently and reliably transmitted from one location to another.

[0031] Optical Line Protection (OLP) is a common protection mechanism used in fiber-optic communication systems to ensure high availability and fault resilience of fiber links. OLP operates primarily based on switching between primary and backup fibers. If a primary fiber fails, the OLP system automatically switches to the backup fiber, ensuring continuous and stable communication.

[0032] In related technologies, methods for analyzing transmission service co-routing risks typically rely on manual querying, statistics, and analysis by maintenance personnel. Consequently, related technologies often rely on the subjective perceptions of analysts when analyzing circuit co-routing risks, resulting in inaccurate analysis results and low analysis efficiency. To address this issue, the present application provides a solution in the following embodiments, which is described in detail below.

[0033] According to an embodiment of the present application, an embodiment of a method for determining the co-routing risk of a circuit is provided. It should be noted that the steps shown in the flowchart of the accompanying drawings can be executed in a computer system such as a set of computer-executable instructions, and although a logical order is shown in the flowchart, in some cases, the steps shown or described can be executed in an order different from that shown here.

[0034] The method embodiments provided in the embodiments of the present application can be executed in a computer terminal or a similar computing device. Figure 1 The hardware structure block diagram of a computer terminal for implementing a method for determining the same-route risk of a circuit is shown. Figure 1 As shown, the computer terminal 10 may include one or more (illustrated as 102a, 102b, ..., 102n in the figure) processors 102 (the processor 102 may include but is not limited to a processing device such as a microprocessor MCU or a programmable logic device FPGA), a memory 104 for storing data, and a transmission device 106 for communication functions. In addition, it may also include: a display, an input / output interface (I / O interface), a universal serial bus (USB) port (which may be included as one of the ports of the BUS bus), a network interface, a power supply and / or a camera. It will be understood by those skilled in the art that Figure 1 The structure shown is only for illustration and does not limit the structure of the above electronic device. Figure 1 More or fewer components than shown, or with Figure 1 Different configurations shown.

[0035] It should be noted that the one or more processors 102 and / or other data processing circuits described above may generally be referred to herein as "data processing circuitry." The data processing circuitry may be embodied in whole or in part as software, hardware, firmware, or any other combination thereof. Furthermore, the data processing circuitry may be a single, independent processing module, or may be incorporated in whole or in part into any of the other components of the computer terminal 10. As described in the embodiments of the present application, the data processing circuitry serves as a processor control (e.g., selection of a variable resistor terminal path connected to an interface).

[0036] The memory 104 can be used to store software programs and modules of application software, such as the program instructions / data storage device corresponding to the method for determining the same-routing risk of a circuit in the embodiment of the present application. The processor 102 executes various functional applications and data processing by running the software programs and modules stored in the memory 104, that is, implementing the above-mentioned method for determining the same-routing risk of a circuit. The memory 104 may include a high-speed random access memory and may also include a non-volatile memory, such as one or more magnetic storage devices, flash memory, or other non-volatile solid-state memory. In some examples, the memory 104 may further include a memory remotely located relative to the processor 102, and these remote memories may be connected to the computer terminal 10 via a network. Examples of the above-mentioned network include, but are not limited to, the Internet, an intranet, a local area network, a mobile communication network, and combinations thereof.

[0037] The transmission device 106 is configured to receive or transmit data via a network. A specific example of the aforementioned network may include a wireless network provided by the communications provider of the computer terminal 10. In one embodiment, the transmission device 106 includes a network interface controller (NIC), which can be connected to other network devices via a base station to enable communication with the Internet. In another embodiment, the transmission device 106 may be a radio frequency (RF) module, which is configured to communicate with the Internet wirelessly.

[0038] The display may be, for example, a touch screen liquid crystal display (LCD) that enables a user to interact with a user interface of the computer terminal 10 .

[0039] In the above-mentioned operating environment, an embodiment of the present application provides an embodiment of a method for determining the co-routing risk of a circuit. It should be noted that the steps shown in the flowchart of the accompanying drawings can be executed in a computer system such as a set of computer-executable instructions, and although a logical order is shown in the flowchart, in some cases, the steps shown or described can be executed in an order different from that shown here.

[0040] like Figure 2 FIG. 1 is a flow chart of a method for determining the co-routing risk of a first circuit according to an embodiment of the present application, including:

[0041] Step S202: Determine whether there is a same-route risk between the primary route and the backup route of a single circuit using the first method, and generate a single-circuit same-route risk analysis result.

[0042] In the technical solution provided in step S202 , the first approach is to determine whether there is an overlapping portion by performing a path comparison between the main route and the backup route of a single circuit.

[0043] There are many ways to implement the first method of determining whether the main route and backup route of a single circuit have the risk of same routing. For example: when the main route and backup route of each single circuit meet at least one of the following conditions, it is determined that the main route and backup route have the risk of same routing: the main route and backup route pass through the same optical cable segment; the main route and backup route pass through the same multiplexing segment, and the multiplexing segment has no protection mechanism; the main route and backup route pass through the same station; the main route and backup route pass through the same line-side network element; the main route and backup route use the same service board.

[0044] There are many ways to generate the risk analysis results of a single circuit with the same route, for example: when the main route and the backup route pass through the same optical cable segment, the single circuit and the same optical cable segment are determined as the risk circuit and the risk optical cable segment, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk optical cable segment are determined as the risk analysis results of the single circuit with the same route; when the main route and the backup route pass through the same multiplexing segment, and the multiplexing segment has no protection mechanism, the single circuit and the same multiplexing segment are determined as the risk circuit and the risk multiplexing segment, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk multiplexing segment are determined as the risk analysis results of the single circuit with the same route; when the main route and the backup route pass through the same station, the single circuit and the same multiplexing segment are determined as the risk circuit and the risk multiplexing segment, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk multiplexing segment are determined as the risk analysis results of the single circuit with the same route The same office station is determined as a risk circuit and a risk office station, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk office station are determined as the risk analysis result of the single circuit with the same route; when the main route and the backup route pass through the same line-side network element, the single circuit and the same line-side network element are determined as the risk circuit and the risk line-side network element, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk line-side network element are determined as the risk analysis result of the single circuit with the same route; when the main route and the backup route use the same service board, the single circuit and the same service board are determined as the risk circuit and the risk service board, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk service board are determined as the risk analysis result of the single circuit with the same route.

[0045] As some optional embodiments of this application:

[0046] The risk of co-routing transmission services refers to the situation in which multiple important communication links share the same physical path within a communications network. While this design can save costs and resources, a failure can cause multiple links to fail simultaneously, severely impacting network stability and service quality. The aforementioned co-routing risk refers to the risk of co-routing transmission services. The risk of co-routing a single circuit occurs when the primary and backup routes of a circuit partially or completely physically overlap, traversing the same network equipment, line segments, or facilities. The risk of co-routing multiple circuits occurs when the physical paths of multiple circuits partially or completely overlap. Transmission trunks carry a large number of data services, such as CN2 (a data bearer network used to carry enterprise virtual private network (VPN) services and high-quality Internet services), the Smart Transport Network (STN), a high-bandwidth, low-latency bearer network used to carry 5G mobile services, and the Internet Protocol Radio Access Network (IP RAN), a wireless access network using IP technology, mainly used to carry 4G mobile services and packetize and backhaul different service data on the Internet.

[0047] For a single circuit, when determining whether there is a co-routing risk (or called a transmission service co-routing risk), it is necessary to consider the primary and backup co-routing problem of a single circuit (i.e., whether there is a co-routing risk for the primary and backup routes). The primary and backup co-routing problem of a single circuit refers to the situation in which the primary path (i.e., the primary route, the default or preferred path for data transmission) and the backup path (i.e., the pre-planned alternative path, when the primary path fails or the performance degrades to an unacceptable level, the network automatically switches to the backup path) physically overlap partially or completely, that is, they pass through the same transmission line or equipment. This configuration has obvious security risks and reliability issues, mainly for the following reasons: (1) Single point failure: If the primary and backup routes share a certain line or equipment, then this shared part becomes a single point of failure. Once this part fails, whether due to hardware failure, human error or natural disaster, the primary and backup routes will fail at the same time, and automatic switching cannot be achieved, resulting in service interruption. (2) Difficulty in maintenance: When performing network maintenance or upgrades, if the primary and backup paths are routed in the same way, operations on the shared parts may affect both paths, increasing the difficulty and risk of maintenance. The problem of multiple circuits having the same primary and backup paths refers to the situation in which the primary and backup paths of multiple circuits in a communication network physically overlap partially or completely, which means that they share the same transmission line or equipment. Since the primary and backup paths of multiple circuits share certain parts, a failure in any shared part will affect all related circuits, which is more serious than the problem of a single circuit having the same route and may cause a wider range of business interruptions. When the primary and backup paths (primary and backup routes) of multiple circuits have the same route, once a failure occurs, not only a single circuit needs to be restored, but all affected circuits need to be restored at the same time, which greatly increases the complexity and time of fault recovery. When designing a network, if the primary and backup paths of multiple circuits have the same route, it may lead to uneven resource allocation, with some lines or equipment bearing excessive loads while other parts are not fully utilized, which is not conducive to the overall performance and cost-effectiveness of the network. To improve the reliability of the data-focused CN2, IP RAN, and STN network architecture, all uplink circuits for prefecture-level and municipal equipment are required to be carried via distinct physical optical paths, providing three routes. CN2, IP RAN, and STN services carried in the same office direction within the transmission network should be evenly distributed across different transmission routes to prevent single-point failures in the transmission network from causing congestion in the data service network. In this context, "same office direction" means that data originates from the same starting point and travels to the same destination, meaning the starting and destination points are the same.

[0048] In the maintenance of the transmission network, it is necessary to conduct a business co-routing risk analysis to provide a basis for network optimization, thereby improving network robustness. The transmission business co-routing risk analysis is divided into single-circuit co-routing risk analysis and multi-circuit co-routing risk analysis. In this application, the single-circuit co-routing risk (that is, the above-mentioned first method is used to determine whether the main route and backup route of a single circuit have co-routing risks) is, for example, because some customers' private networks need to achieve an end-to-end availability rate of 99.99%, it is required that the nodes and paths passed by the main and backup routes of important government and enterprise customers do not overlap. Otherwise, a single-point failure in the transmission network may cause the main route and backup route of the customer's private network business to be interrupted at the same time. At this time, determining whether the main route and backup route of a single circuit have co-routing risks is a good preventive measure. Analysis of hidden dangers of multiple circuits with the same route (i.e., using the second method mentioned above to determine whether there is a risk of the same route between multiple circuits of the same service type and the same office direction). For example, to improve the reliability of the network architecture, the CN2, IP RAN, and STN services of the same office direction carried by the transmission network should be evenly distributed on different transmission routes to avoid congestion of the data service network caused by a single point failure of the transmission network. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the nodes and paths passed by the service circuits of the same office direction and the same service type to identify hidden dangers and deal with them in a timely manner.

[0049] It should be noted that there is no specific order in which steps S202 and S204 are executed. Before executing steps S202 and S204, it is necessary to first integrate and associate circuit-related data stored in different systems, for example, by the following method:

[0050] The transmission integrated network management collects alarm information and performance information from the transmission equipment network management: the transmission integrated network management collects alarm information of optical line-related disks from the transmission equipment network management, including optical amplifier disks (pre-amplifier (PA), boost-amplifier (BA), line amplifier (LA), optical supervisory channel (OSC)). Among them, the specific disk name, alarm name and manufacturer, equipment model. The transmission integrated network management collects performance information (i.e., line-side optical power information of the optical amplifier disk, including receiving optical power and transmitting optical power, etc., and the specific port information collected during collection is related to the manufacturer and equipment model of the transmission equipment) from the transmission equipment network management. The transmission integrated network management is used to realize the centralized management of network elements and optical protection equipment of the transmission network in the target area (for example, a province), and complete the alarm, performance and configuration data collection work. The algorithm involved in this application is implemented in the transmission integrated network management. Transmission equipment network management is used to achieve centralized management of transmission equipment, and complete functions such as alarm, performance, configuration, fault handling, user management, and information storage and backup management. For example, transmission equipment network management is divided into primary transmission equipment network management and secondary transmission equipment network management (secondary transmission equipment network management is a layer of transmission equipment network management below the primary network. For example, primary transmission equipment network management is responsible for connecting major cities and regions, carrying large amounts of data transmission across provinces and internationally, while secondary transmission equipment network management is mainly used to connect various cities and regions within the same province, and undertakes the task of data transmission within the province).

[0051] The integrated transmission network management system collects alarm and performance information from the optical protection network management system. First, it obtains OLP switching alarm information. Then, based on the OLP switching alarm information, it determines the specific locations of the OLP ports at both ends of the relay segment (part of the transmission link) corresponding to the OLP switching (OLP switching refers to the process in which the OLP system automatically switches communication services to the backup path when the primary path fails). When the integrated transmission network management system receives an OLP switching alarm, it first parses the alarm information to extract information about the transmission system, relay segment, and the specific station (starting and ending points) where the switching occurred. Based on this information, it determines the specific locations of the OLP ports at both ends of the relay segment corresponding to the OLP switching (including the computer room, rack, subframe, slot, etc.). Finally, it collects the optical power information of the OLP ports at both ends as performance information. For example, after receiving an OLP switching alarm, the transmission system and the station where the switch occurred can be determined based on this OLP switching alarm. Then, based on the OLP system relay segment and equipment port location mapping table (which primarily records the correspondence between the OLP equipment ports at both ends of each relay segment in the OLP system and their specific physical locations, including detailed information such as the equipment room, rack, subframe, and slot), information such as the equipment room, rack, subframe, and slot can be obtained. When collecting optical power information for the OLP ports at both ends, for example, a total of 12 optical power values ​​need to be collected for each relay segment. The optical power values ​​collected for the OLP ports are defined as follows: RX is the OLP received optical power, R1 is the OLP primary route received optical power, R2 is the OLP backup route received optical power, TX is the OLP transmitted optical power, T1 is the OLP primary route transmitted optical power, and T2 is the OLP backup route transmitted optical power. The aforementioned optical protection network management system is used to centrally manage OLP equipment, performing functions such as alarm, performance, configuration, fault handling, user management, and information storage and backup management.

[0052] The Transmission Integrated Network Management System collects resource data from the Long-Distance Resource Management System (a system used to manage long-distance communication network resources, including information on bureaus, computer rooms, racks, boards, optical cables, and cable segments, used for efficient resource allocation and management during network planning, construction, and operation and maintenance). Resource data includes, but is not limited to, bureaus, computer rooms, racks, sub-frames, boards, optical cables, and cable segments. This information is stored in the relevant database tables of the Long-Distance Resource Management System and is interrelated. Data collection can be performed using the I3 interface, one of the interfaces provided by the Long-Distance Resource Management System, used to exchange data with other systems (such as the Transmission Integrated Network Management System) to achieve automated collection and updating of resource information.

[0053] After collecting all of the above information, the alarm information, performance information, and resource data from the transmission equipment network management, optical protection network management, and long-haul resource management system are organically linked, using the optical cable segment and system segment of the long-haul resource management system as the standard. This creates a comprehensive, cross-referenced network information view, facilitating more accurate analysis of transmission service and routing vulnerabilities. Specifically, the optical cable segment data from the long-haul resource management system is used to correlate alarm information from the transmission equipment network management and optical protection network management. By identifying the optical cable segment ID in the alarm information, it is possible to determine which optical cable segment has a problem and the scope of the affected circuit. A system segment refers to a specific part of the optical transmission network, such as a specific multiplex section or relay segment. By correlating system segment information with performance data from the transmission equipment network management or optical protection network management, it is possible to identify which system segments have performance anomalies and the potential impact of these anomalies on services. Combining resource data from the long-haul resource management system with alarm and performance information provides the precise physical location and context of the faulty equipment. For example, alarm information can be used to determine a fault in a specific optical cable segment or multiplexer segment. Combined with resource data, the corresponding equipment room, rack, and equipment location for this faulty segment can be determined, facilitating on-site maintenance and problem location. For example, if an optical protection network management system reports an OLP switchover alarm, data correlation can be performed to directly obtain the OLP device port and transmission device port from the optical protection network management system and the transmission equipment network management system, respectively. Based on the mapping between transmission systems and optical cables, the optical cable and optical cable where the switchover occurred can be obtained from the long-haul resource management system. Furthermore, based on the transmission network management's optical relay segment port mapping table (an optical relay segment in an optical transmission network refers to the physical path for optical signals to travel from one site to another, consisting of multiple optical cable segments and relay equipment. The port mapping table records the mapping from optical relay segments to network elements, boards, and ports), information such as the equipment room, network element number, subframe, slot, disk name, and port can be obtained. This data correlation allows for the simultaneous acquisition of all alarm-related information.

[0054] After linking data from the transmission equipment network management, optical protection network management, and long-haul resource management systems, the integrated data from these systems is used to obtain information about each circuit, including its starting point, end point, and all nodes and links along the way. A network topology diagram is then constructed based on this information for each circuit. Nodes in the diagram represent physical devices or locations (such as stations, network elements, and service boards), while edges represent the physical links connecting these nodes (such as fiber optic cable segments and multiplexer segments). This topology diagram provides a visual overview of the distribution and connectivity of each circuit in the network, providing a straightforward reference for subsequent path analysis and vulnerability identification. The diagram clearly defines the complete physical path for each circuit (including both the primary and backup routes), providing detailed path information for assessing common routing vulnerabilities (or risks) and conducting targeted network optimization. For each circuit, from its starting point to its end point, the complete path it passes through in the network topology diagram is extracted, including the optical cable segment, multiplexing segment, station (station is a facility in the telecommunications network used to aggregate and distribute communication signals), network element (such as line-side network element, which refers to the equipment directly connected to the line (such as optical cable) in the network and is used to process the signal transmitted on the line), service board (also known as branch board, which is used to process specific types or levels of service signals in transmission network equipment), etc. For the complete physical paths extracted from the network topology diagram for different circuits, if there is any overlap, that is, if two or more circuits have common nodes or path segments, then they are considered to be co-routed and there is a co-route risk.

[0055] The purpose of the primary and backup co-routing analysis for a single circuit is to evaluate and ensure that, in the event of a failure in the primary route, the backup route can effectively take over the circuit service transmission without being affected by the failure. When using the first method to determine whether the primary and backup routes of a single circuit have a co-routing risk, the primary and backup routes are considered to have a co-routing risk if they meet at least one of the following conditions: the primary and backup routes pass through the same optical cable segment; the primary and backup routes pass through the same multiplexing segment, and the multiplexing segment has no protection mechanism; the primary and backup routes pass through the same station; the primary and backup routes pass through the same line-side network element; and the primary and backup routes use the same service board. Specifically: after the above-mentioned data association is performed, the data in the long-distance resource management system (the main and backup route information of the circuit, alarm information, performance data, and resource information and port information related to the optical cable segment, etc.) are used to analyze and compare the optical cable segments passed by the main route and the backup route of a single circuit, and each section of optical cable passed in the main route is compared with each section of optical cable in the backup route. If it is detected that the main route and the backup route of a single circuit pass through the same optical cable segment, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk between the main route and the backup route, and the single circuit and the same optical cable segment are determined as a risky circuit and a risky optical cable segment, and the resource information of the risky circuit (at least including the circuit identification, the starting station and the ending station of the circuit, the main route and the backup route, alarm and performance information, etc.) and the resource information of the risky optical cable segment (at least including the optical cable segment identification, physical location and geographical information, optical cable segment attributes, associated equipment information, etc.) are determined as the single circuit co-routing risk analysis results. Using the data in the long-distance resource management system, the multiplexing sections passed by the main route and the backup route of a single circuit are analyzed and compared, and each multiplexing section passed in the main route is compared one by one with each multiplexing section in the backup route. If it is detected that the main route and the backup route of a single circuit pass through the same multiplexing section and there is no protection mechanism for the multiplexing section, it is determined that there is a risk of co-routing between the main route and the backup route. The single circuit and the same multiplexing section are determined as risky circuits and risky multiplexing sections, and the resource information of the risky circuit and the resource information of the risky multiplexing section (including multiplexing section identification, location information, connection equipment information, protection mechanism status, physical characteristics, equipment information at both ends of the multiplexing section, etc.) are determined as the results of the single circuit co-routing risk analysis.Using the data in the long-distance resource management system, the stations through which the main route and backup route of a single circuit pass are analyzed and compared. If it is detected that the main and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same station, it is determined that there is a risk of the main route and the backup route having the same route. The single circuit and the same station are identified as risky circuits and risky stations, and the resource information of the risky circuit and the resource information of the risky station (including basic station information (station name, ID, etc.), equipment list in the station (all relevant transmission equipment, optical protection equipment, power supply equipment and environmental control equipment in the station), network connection information (describing the network connection relationship between the station and other stations), etc.) are identified as the results of the single circuit same-route risk analysis. Using the data in the long-distance resource management system, the line-side network elements passed by the main route and backup route of a single circuit are analyzed and compared. If it is detected that the main and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same line-side network element, it is determined that there is a same-route risk for the main route and the backup route. The single circuit and the same line-side network element are identified as a risky circuit and a risky line-side network element, and the resource information of the risky circuit and the resource information of the risky line-side network element (including the basic information of the risky line-side network element (network element identification, manufacturer, etc.), physical location and connection information, and a list of bearer circuits (the names or IDs of all circuits passing through the network element, as well as the starting and ending points of each circuit), etc.) are identified as the single circuit same-route risk analysis results. Using the data in the long-distance resource management system, the service boards of the main route and backup route of a single circuit are analyzed and compared. If it is detected that the main and backup routes of a single circuit use the same service board, it is determined that there is a risk of same routing for the main route and the backup route. The single circuit and the same service board are identified as risky circuits and risky service boards, and the resource information of the risky circuit and the resource information of the risky service board (basic information of the service board (service board model, manufacturer, etc.), physical location (name of the station where the service board is installed, specific room where the service board is located in the station, rack number, subframe number and slot number of the service board, etc.), circuit association information (names or IDs of all circuits using this service board, etc.) are identified as the results of the same routing risk analysis for a single circuit.

[0056] In the case that the main route and the backup route of each single circuit do not meet all the above conditions, it is determined that there is no same-route risk between the main route and the backup route of the single circuit, and there is no hidden danger.

[0057] like Figure 3The figure shows a flow chart of a method for determining co-routing risk for a second circuit according to an embodiment of the present application. This flowchart illustrates the process of performing co-routing risk analysis on a single circuit. One of the design principles for primary and backup routes (primary and backup routes) is to avoid co-cabling whenever possible, i.e., to prevent both primary and backup routes from simultaneously passing through the same section of optical cable. This is done to prevent simultaneous failure of the primary and backup routes due to a failure in a single optical cable section, thereby ensuring communication continuity and stability. S302: Do the primary and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same optical cable segment? If it is detected that the primary and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same optical cable segment, proceed to step S314; otherwise, proceed to step S304. Do the primary and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same multiplex section and the multiplex section has no protection mechanism? If it is detected that the primary and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same multiplex section and the multiplex section has no protection mechanism, proceed to step S314; otherwise, proceed to step S306. Do the primary and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same station? To improve the robustness and fault tolerance of the network, the primary and backup routes (primary and backup routes) will avoid passing through the same station as much as possible. In this way, even if a station fails, it will not affect both the primary and backup paths, thereby ensuring communication continuity. If it is detected that the primary and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same station, proceed to step S314; otherwise, proceed to step S308. Do the primary and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same line-side network element? Ideally, to enhance the robustness and fault tolerance of the network, the primary and backup routes should avoid sharing the same line-side network element as much as possible. Doing so can prevent the situation where the primary and backup paths fail at the same time due to a single device failure, thereby ensuring the continuity of communication and service quality. If it is detected that the primary and backup routes of a single circuit pass through the same line side network, go to step S314, otherwise go to step S310 to check whether the primary and backup routes of a single circuit share a business board (branch board). Ideally, in order to improve the reliability and fault tolerance of the network, the primary and backup routes should use different business boards to avoid the risk of the primary and backup paths failing at the same time due to a single board failure. If it is detected that the primary and backup routes of a single circuit use the same business board (branch board), go to step S314, otherwise go to step S312. Analysis of the primary and backup routes of a single circuit: There are no hidden dangers, that is, if the primary and backup routes of a single circuit do not have the same optical cable segment, do not pass through the same multiplexing segment and the multiplexing segment is unprotected, do not pass through the same station, do not pass through the same line side network element, and do not share a business board (branch board), then it is considered that the primary and backup routes of a single circuit have no hidden dangers. Step S314: Single-line primary and backup co-routing analysis: if there is a hidden danger, output the hidden danger circuit and the cause of the hidden danger (i.e., generate the single circuit co-routing risk analysis result). The algorithm for executing the above steps S302-S314 is as follows:

[0058] The input data is the data of a single circuit in the long-distance resource management system (for example, the port information is initialized to danger = yes; danger is a variable representing the result of the algorithm. Danger = yes means that it is initially assumed that the circuit has a co-routing risk. Enter a continuous loop until it is determined whether the primary and backup routes of the circuit really have a co-routing risk. In the loop, first check "whether the primary route and the backup route pass through the same optical cable segment." If they do not pass through the same optical cable segment, continue to check the next condition: "whether the primary route and the backup route pass through the same multiplexing segment, and the multiplexing segment has no protection mechanism." If this situation does not exist for the primary and backup routes of the current circuit, that is, they either do not pass through the same multiplexing segment, or the multiplexing segment has protection, continue to check the next condition: "whether the primary route and the backup route pass through the same station." If the primary and backup routes of the circuit do not share a station, the algorithm continues to check the next condition: "whether the primary route and the backup route pass through the same station." line-side network elements". If the primary and backup routes of this circuit use different line-side network elements, continue to check the next condition: "Do the primary and backup routes share the same service board (or branch board)?" If the primary and backup routes of the circuit do not use the same service board, it is considered that there is no co-routing risk in the primary and backup routes of this circuit. If all the checks in the previous steps show that the primary and backup routes do not pass through the same optical cable segment, multiplexing segment, station, line-side network element, and do not share a service board, then the danger status is changed to "No", which means that there is no co-routing risk in the circuit. When it is determined that the circuit danger status is "No", exit the loop and end the risk analysis process. If it is found in any step that the primary and backup routes have a co-routing risk point (the same optical cable segment, multiplexing segment, station, line-side network element or shared service board), the danger status will not be changed and will remain "Yes", and the loop will not be exited. The next risk point will be checked until all risk points have been checked.

[0059] It should be noted that in another optional method, steps S302, S304, S306, S308, and S3010 can also be executed in parallel without being in the same order, that is, S314 is executed when any one of S302, S304, S306, S308, and S3010 exists, and S312 is executed when all of them are not satisfied.

[0060] Step S204: Use the second method to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits of the same business type and the same office direction, and generate a multi-circuit co-routing risk analysis result for multiple circuits corresponding to each office direction of each business type.

[0061] In the technical solution provided in step S204, the second method determines whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits corresponding to the same service type and the same office direction by applying multiple preset co-routing risk judgment rules of different dimensions to each circuit. The multiple preset co-routing risk judgment rules of different dimensions include a first preset co-routing risk judgment rule, a second preset co-routing risk judgment rule, a third preset co-routing risk judgment rule, a fourth preset co-routing risk judgment rule, a fifth preset co-routing risk judgment rule, and a sixth preset co-routing risk judgment rule. When at least one of the multiple preset co-routing risk judgment rules of different dimensions determines that there is a co-routing risk for multiple circuits corresponding to the same service type and the same office direction, the multiple circuits corresponding to the same service type and the same office direction are determined to have a co-routing risk. Each preset co-routing risk judgment rule can be executed in parallel or sequentially. The office direction describes the specific direction or channel of information transmission between different offices in the network. Multiple circuits corresponding to the same office direction are circuits with the same starting and ending offices.

[0062] The first preset co-routing risk judgment rule focuses on the bandwidth carrying capacity at the optical cable segment level, pays attention to the bandwidth carrying imbalance of the optical cable segment, and judges whether there is a co-routing risk (or co-routing hidden danger) by comparing the ratio of the optical cable segment bandwidth to the total bandwidth. The second preset co-routing risk judgment rule focuses on the multiplexing segment level, analyzing whether multiple circuits belonging to a specific business type and office direction are overly concentrated on the multiplexing segment. The analysis is on the bandwidth carrying capacity of the multiplexing segment rather than the optical cable segment. The third preset co-routing risk judgment rule analyzes at the optical cable node level, considering the possible intersection of different optical cable segments at the intermediate nodes, and pays attention to the overlap of optical cable segments at the intermediate nodes. The fourth preset co-routing risk judgment rule focuses on the bandwidth carrying analysis at the station level, considering the bandwidth distribution at the station level. The fifth preset co-routing risk judgment rule analyzes the bandwidth carrying capacity at the network element level, focusing on the network element. The sixth preset co-routing risk assessment rule analyzes at the service board level to determine whether a specific service type and multiple circuits in the office direction are overly dependent on the same service board. It directly focuses on the specific boards used by the circuits and is not restricted by bandwidth thresholds, but rather focuses on the physical sharing of boards. The first to fifth preset co-routing risk assessment rules analyze at different physical levels, such as optical cable segments, multiplexing segments, optical cable nodes, office sites, and network elements, while the sixth preset co-routing risk assessment rule goes deeper into the service board level used within the circuit. These six preset co-routing risk assessment rules conduct in-depth and detailed analysis of specific service types and multiple circuits in the office direction at multiple dimensions, such as optical cables, multiplexing segments, optical cable nodes, office sites, network elements, and service boards, to ensure comprehensive coverage and assessment of possible co-routing risk points in the network.

[0063] Taking determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to a first business type and a first office direction as an example, the first office direction is any office direction, and the first business type is any business type. Determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction through a first preset co-routing risk judgment rule can be achieved in the following manner: obtaining a circuit list of a target area, wherein the circuit list includes circuit information of all circuits in the target area; determining the total circuit bandwidth of the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction based on the circuit list, and determining a first bandwidth threshold based on the total circuit bandwidth; classifying all circuits in the target area according to the type of optical cable route to obtain multiple route groups, and determining the optical cable segment bandwidth carried by the optical cable segment corresponding to each route group, wherein each route group corresponds to an optical cable route; when the bandwidth of any optical cable segment is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, determining that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction.

[0064] As some examples of this application:

[0065] The integrated transmission network management system obtains the circuit list of the target area (for example, a province) from the resource management system (responsible for storing and managing all data related to network resources, including but not limited to detailed information on circuits, equipment, optical cables, stations, computer rooms, etc.). The circuit list includes the circuit information of all circuits in the target area (including circuit identification, starting and ending point information of the circuit, including the specific station name and the port number of the connected device, the type of service carried by the circuit, the physical path (the optical cable segment, optical cable route, multiplexing section, transmission equipment and other physical resources passed by the circuit), routing information, etc.), and then checks the total circuit capacity of each station direction and each service type. For example, based on the circuit list of the target area (for example, a province), the set of initial stations (i.e., starting stations) involved in all circuits is determined to be {a1, a2,…, a m}, a1 to a m represents each starting station, m is an integer greater than 2, and the terminal station (terminal station) set is {b1, b2…, b n}, b1 to b m Represents each terminal station, and n is an integer greater than 2. m} to {b1, b2…, b n For a certain service type (e.g., the first service type), the total bandwidth of the circuits involved in the analysis and the total bandwidth of the circuits carried by each optical cable segment are counted to obtain the bandwidth matrix X = (x ij ) m×n ,Right now:

[0066]

[0067] Among them, x ij For the station a i Arrive at Station B j Total bandwidth between offices; a i is any initial station, i = 1, 2, ..., m; b j For any terminal station, j = 1, 2, ..., n.

[0068] If the first station is station a i Arrive at Station B j Office direction, the total bandwidth of multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction is x ij The Q circuits involved in the analysis (Q is the total number of circuits in the target area) are divided into several routing groups, and the circuits with the same optical cable route (i.e., resource medium route) are grouped into one routing group (i.e., all circuits in the target area are classified according to the type of optical cable route to obtain multiple routing groups). i Arrive at Station B j The total bandwidth between x ij (i.e. the total bandwidth of the circuits of the first service type and the first direction) will be transmitted through c optical cables (c represents the number of all optical cable lines connecting two stations, corresponding to c routing groups) and recorded. in, represents the set of optical cable segment bandwidths carried by the optical cable segments corresponding to c optical cables, The bandwidth of the optical cable segment carried by the optical cable segment corresponding to the kth optical cable is determined in the range of 1 to c. The first bandwidth threshold is determined according to the total bandwidth of the circuit: x ij / 3 is the first bandwidth threshold mentioned above. If there is (Percentage conversion, supports custom configuration), then a i to b jThere are hidden dangers in the optical cable segment corresponding to the kth optical cable in the bureau direction, and it is determined that there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first bureau direction (that is, when the bandwidth of any optical cable segment is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first bureau direction). When it is determined by the first preset co-routing risk judgment rule that there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first bureau direction, the optical cable segment corresponding to the optical cable segment bandwidth greater than the first bandwidth threshold is determined as a risky optical cable segment, and the multiple circuits in the routing group to which the risky optical cable segment belongs are determined as risky circuits, and the resource information of the risky circuit and the resource information of the risky optical cable segment are determined as the co-routing risk analysis results of multiple circuits corresponding to the first bureau direction of the first business type. It should be noted that if the number of routing groups is less than 3, that is, c is less than 3, it is directly determined that there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first bureau direction.

[0069] Determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction through the second preset co-routing risk judgment rule can be achieved in the following ways: determining the multiple multiplexing segments corresponding to the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction; determining the multiplexing segment bandwidth carried by each multiplexing segment; and determining that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction when any multiplexing segment bandwidth is greater than the first bandwidth threshold. When it is determined through the second preset co-routing risk judgment rule that there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction, the multiplexing segment corresponding to the multiplexing segment bandwidth greater than the first bandwidth threshold is determined as a risky multiplexing segment, and the multiple circuits corresponding to the risky multiplexing segment are determined as risky circuits. The resource information of the risky circuit and the resource information of the risky multiplexing segment are determined as the co-routing risk analysis results of the multiple circuits corresponding to the first business type and the first direction.

[0070] As some examples of this application:

[0071] First, determine the corresponding multiplex sections of the multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction, and the first service type and the first office direction (a i to b j The multiplex section bandwidth of each multiplex section carried by multiple circuits in the office direction can be determined, and the multiplex section bandwidth of each multiplex section carried by multiple circuits in the office direction belonging to the first service type can be determined. (percentage conversion, custom configuration supported), then the kth multiplex section has a hidden danger (that is, when the bandwidth of any multiplex section is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a risk of co-routing between multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first direction), where k represents the number of bits in any multiplex section, Indicates the multiplex section bandwidth of the kth multiplex section.

[0072] Determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction through the third preset co-routing risk judgment rule can be achieved in the following way: determining the cable node set of the optical cable segment corresponding to each routing group; taking the intersection of any two optical cable node sets, and determining the two optical cable segments corresponding to the two optical cable node sets whose intersection is not empty as a group of optical cable segments to be verified; when the total cable segment bandwidth of any group of optical cable segments to be verified is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, determining that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction.

[0073] As some examples of this application:

[0074] When different optical cables have different starting and ending stations, some optical cable nodes (optical cable nodes refer to key connection points on the optical cable route, including but not limited to optical cable joints, optical cable cross-connections, optical cable branching points, optical cable convergence points, etc.) in the middle of the optical cable segment may have the same route due to the same trench, the same pipeline, the same pole route, etc. Analyze the optical cable nodes passed by different optical cable segments to find out where they have the same optical cable nodes, and then summarize and count the services open on the optical cables of these same optical cable nodes. If the bandwidth carried by the optical cables of the same optical cable node exceeds the first bandwidth threshold, it is considered that the optical cable node has the hidden danger of the same route service (i.e., the above-mentioned same route risk).

[0075] Known first office direction (office station a i Arrive at Station B j The business data between the two stations will be transmitted through c (c represents the number of all optical cable lines connecting the two stations) optical cables, and the cable node set of the optical cable segment corresponding to each routing group determined in the first preset same-route risk judgment rule is determined (the cable node set of the optical cable segment corresponding to each routing group includes all the optical cable nodes in the optical cable route corresponding to the routing group except the initial optical cable node (the first optical cable node) and the terminal optical cable node (the last optical cable node)). The cable node set passed by the optical cable segment 1 (corresponding to routing group 1) is recorded as P1, and the cable node set passed by the optical cable segment 2 is recorded as P2, and so on, until the cable node set of the optical cable segment c (corresponding to routing group c) is obtained. For any two optical cable node sets P l 、P k Take the intersection S kl =P k ∩P l , where k, l range from 1 to c, but P l 、P k When comparing, k is less than l, that is, k and l cannot take the same value at the same time, S klRepresents the intersection result. This means that optical cable k and optical cable l will pass through the same optical cable node. The two optical cable segments corresponding to the two optical cable node sets whose intersection is not empty are determined as a set of optical cable segments to be verified. The bandwidth of the optical cable segment carried by optical cable k is Optical cable segment bandwidth carried by optical cable l Then, the total bandwidth of the optical cable segments to be verified is If both meet (Percentage conversion, custom configuration supported), it is considered that there is a hidden danger of the same optical cable node between optical cable k and optical cable l, and it is determined that there is a risk of same routing between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction (that is, when the sum of the cable segment bandwidths of any group of optical cable segments to be verified is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a risk of same routing between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction). When it is determined by the third preset same routing risk judgment rule that there is a risk of same routing between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction, the optical cable nodes commonly contained in the optical cable segments in each group of optical cable segments to be verified whose sum of the cable segment bandwidths is greater than the first bandwidth threshold are determined as risky optical cable nodes, and multiple circuits passing through the risky optical cable nodes are determined as risky circuits, and the resource information of the risky circuits and the resource information of the risky optical cable nodes are determined as the results of the same routing risk analysis of multiple circuits corresponding to the first direction of the first business type. The intersection of any two sets of optical cable nodes is empty, indicating that there is no risk of same optical cable nodes between the optical cables.

[0076] The fourth preset co-routing risk judgment rule is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction. This can be achieved in the following ways: determine all the stations through which the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction pass; determine the bandwidth carried by each station; and when the bandwidth carried by any station is greater than the second bandwidth threshold, determine that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction.

[0077] As some examples of this application:

[0078] The multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first direction pass through the site (with the machine room) to which the network element belongs, and are connected in series according to the routing order to form the station route, thereby determining all the stations that the multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first direction pass through. i Arrive at Station B j There will be n stations between the two directions, where n is the total number of stations passed. i Arrive at Station B j The bandwidth (specifically, circuit bandwidth) carried by each station in the office direction) is the second bandwidth threshold value, which is half of the total bandwidth of the circuits, that is, xij / 2, traverse each intermediate station, if there is (Percentage conversion, supports custom configuration, the value of k can be any one from 1 to n, represents the bandwidth of the kth station), then a i to b j There is a hidden danger at the kth station in the office direction, and it is determined that there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction (that is, when the bandwidth carried by any station is greater than the second bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction). When it is determined through the fourth preset co-routing risk judgment rule that there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction, the station with the carried bandwidth greater than the second bandwidth threshold is determined as a risky station, and multiple circuits passing through the risky station are determined as risky circuits. The resource information of the risky circuits and the resource information of the risky station are determined as the result of the multi-circuit co-routing risk analysis of the multiple circuits corresponding to the first business type and the first office direction.

[0079] Determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction through the fifth preset co-routing risk judgment rule can be achieved in the following ways: determining all network elements (for example, line-side network elements) through which the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction pass; determining the bandwidth carried by each network element; and when the bandwidth carried by any network element is greater than the third bandwidth threshold, determining that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction.

[0080] As some examples of this application:

[0081] The customer-oriented and business-oriented unified transmission network operation platform (Open Transmission Management System, referred to as OTMS system) interface is called to obtain the network elements passed by multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first direction, and the third bandwidth threshold is determined according to the total bandwidth of the multiple circuits. For example, the third bandwidth threshold is half of the total bandwidth of the multiple circuits, that is, x ij / 2, the first direction (station a) is known i Arrive at Station B j Office direction) will pass through h network elements (h represents the first office direction (station a i Arrive at Station B j The total number of network elements that will pass between the first office and the second office) determines the bandwidth carried by each network element (specifically, the circuit bandwidth), and traverses each network element in turn. If there is in, Indicates the bandwidth carried by the kth network element, where k is the number of bits of any network element, ranging from 1 to h. Then a i to b j The kth network element in the office direction has a hidden danger, and a co-routing risk is determined to exist between multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction (i.e., when the bandwidth carried by any network element is greater than the third bandwidth threshold, a co-routing risk is determined to exist between multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction). When the fifth preset co-routing risk judgment rule determines that there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction, the network element carrying a bandwidth greater than the third bandwidth threshold is determined as a risky network element, and multiple circuits passing through the risky network element are determined as risky circuits. The resource information of the risky circuit and the resource information of the risky network element are determined as the result of the multi-circuit co-routing risk analysis for the multiple circuits corresponding to the first service type and the first office direction.

[0082] The sixth preset co-routing risk judgment rule is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction. This can be achieved in the following way: determine the business board set of each circuit among the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction; when the intersection of the business board sets of any two circuits is not empty, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction.

[0083] As some examples of this application:

[0084] Call the interface of the OTMS system to obtain the circuit route, which records the service board information used by each circuit. According to the service board information used by each circuit, the service board set of each circuit in the multiple circuits of the first service type and the first direction is determined. i Arrive at Station B j There are S circuits between the first and second office directions (S represents the total number of circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction), and the service board sets passed by each circuit are R1 to R S , for any two service board sets R d , R f , where f, d range from 1 to S, but R d , R f When comparing, d is less than f, that is, d and f cannot take the same value at the same time. Then circuit d and circuit f have the hidden danger of the same business board, and it is determined that there is a risk of same routing between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction (that is, when the intersection of the business board sets of any two circuits is not empty, it is determined that there is a risk of same routing between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction). When it is determined through the sixth preset same routing risk judgment rule that there is a risk of same routing between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction, the circuit whose intersection of the business board sets is not empty is determined as a risk circuit, and is determined as a risk business board through the intersection of the business board sets, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk business board are determined as the result of the same routing risk analysis of multiple circuits corresponding to the first business type and the first direction. Through the above-mentioned preset same routing risk judgment rules of multiple different dimensions, it is determined that there is no same optical cable segment, same multiplexing segment, same optical cable node, same station, same network element or same business board between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction, then there is no risk of same routing between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction, and a corresponding analysis report on the risk of no same routing is obtained. The steps in S204 are used to finally determine the risk analysis results of multiple circuits co-routing corresponding to each office direction of each service type.

[0085] Figure 4This is a flow chart of a method for determining the co-routing risk of a third circuit provided in an embodiment of the present application, showing a method for determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits of the same business type and the same direction. Step S402 checks the total bandwidth of the circuits of each direction and each business type. Step S404 determines whether there is a hidden danger of the same optical cable segment for the same business type in the same direction (i.e., the above-mentioned determination of whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits of the first business type and the first direction through the first preset co-routing risk judgment rule). If there is a hidden danger of the same optical cable segment for the same business type in the same direction, Go to S418, otherwise proceed to S406 to determine whether there is a risk of the same multiplexing section for the same business type in the same direction (i.e., the above-mentioned second preset same-route risk judgment rule is used to determine whether there is a risk of the same route between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction). If there is a risk of the same multiplexing section for the same business type in the same direction, go to S418, otherwise proceed to step S408 to determine whether there is a risk of the same optical cable node for the same business type in the same direction (i.e., the above-mentioned third preset same-route risk judgment rule is used to determine whether there is a risk of the same route between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction). ), the same office direction and the same business type business has the same optical cable node hidden danger, go to S418, otherwise go to step S410 to see if the same office direction and the same business type business has the same station hidden danger (that is, the above-mentioned fourth preset same route risk judgment rule is used to determine whether there is a same route risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction), the same office direction and the same business type business has the same station hidden danger, go to S418, otherwise go to step S412 to see if the same office direction and the same business type business has the same network element hidden danger (that is, the above-mentioned fifth preset same route risk judgment rule is used to determine whether there is a same route risk between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first office direction). Is there a risk of co-routing between multiple circuits in one direction), and there is a hidden danger of the same network element in the same business type business in the same direction, go to S418, otherwise proceed to step S414 to determine whether there is a hidden danger of the same business board in the same business type business in the same direction (that is, the above-mentioned sixth preset co-routing risk judgment rule is used to determine whether there is a risk of co-routing between multiple circuits belonging to the first business type and the first direction), and there is a hidden danger of the same business board in the same business type business in the same direction, go to S418, otherwise proceed to step S416, analysis of the main and backup co-routing of multiple circuits: no hidden danger, that is, there is no risk of co-routing for multiple circuits. Step S418, analysis of the main and backup co-routing of multiple circuits: there is a hidden danger, that is, there is a risk of co-routing for multiple circuits.

[0086] Steps S402 to S418 are implemented using the following algorithm, which analyzes the co-routing risks of multiple circuits across different dimensions, including optical cables, multiplex sections, optical cable nodes, office stations, network elements, and service boards. The algorithm's input data includes the total bandwidth matrix, the total bandwidth matrix of the multiplex section, the set of optical cable nodes, and the set of service boards. The algorithm outputs a cell array, a data type (a type of array) whose elements can be of different data types. This cell array stores the final judgment results for the six indicators corresponding to S404, S406, S408, S410, S412, and S414. During the initialization phase, six empty cell arrays are created to store the analysis results for co-routing risks for optical cables, multiplex sections, optical cable nodes, office stations, network elements, and service boards, respectively. The algorithm iterates over all service types and all office directions using two nested for loops. For each combination of service type and office direction, the algorithm performs the following six sub-analyses to determine whether a co-routing risk exists: 1. Co-cable vulnerability analysis (corresponding to the first preset co-routing risk judgment rule): First, the algorithm creates a logical vector to indicate whether each optical cable carries bandwidth exceeding a threshold. If the bandwidth of a cable segment carried by a cable exceeds a specified percentage of the total bandwidth (i.e., the first bandwidth threshold mentioned above), this cable segment is considered to have a co-cable vulnerability, and its identifier is stored in the corresponding cell array. 2. Co-multiplexing section vulnerability analysis (corresponding to the second preset co-routing risk judgment rule): The algorithm creates another logical vector to indicate whether the multiplex section carries excessive bandwidth. If the bandwidth carried by a multiplex section exceeds a specified percentage of the total bandwidth (i.e., the first bandwidth threshold mentioned above), a co-multiplexing section vulnerability exists, and the corresponding multiplex section identifier is recorded. 3. Co-cable node vulnerability analysis (corresponding to the third preset co-routing risk judgment rule): The algorithm analyzes the set of cable nodes, determining whether any two cables pass through the same cable node by calculating the intersection of their cable node sets. If two optical cables have common optical cable nodes and the sum of their bandwidths exceeds the specified proportion of the total bandwidth (i.e., the first bandwidth threshold mentioned above), it is determined that there are hidden dangers at the same optical cable nodes, and these optical cable nodes will be collected into the corresponding cell array. 4. Analysis of hidden dangers at the same station (corresponding to the fourth preset same-route risk judgment rule): The algorithm continues to analyze and compares the bandwidth carried by the station with the second bandwidth threshold. If the bandwidth carried by a station exceeds the second bandwidth threshold, it is considered that the station has hidden dangers at the same station, and the station identifier will be added to the corresponding cell array. 5. Analysis of hidden dangers at the same network element level (corresponding to the fifth preset same-route risk judgment rule): The algorithm checks the service carrying situation at the network element level. If the bandwidth carried by any network element exceeds the third bandwidth threshold, it is considered that there are hidden dangers at the same network element, and the network element information will be recorded.6. Analysis of hidden dangers on the same business board (corresponding to the sixth preset same-route risk judgment rule): Finally, the algorithm analyzes the load situation of the business board, and determines whether there is a shared business board by comparing the intersection of the business board sets of any two circuits. If the two circuits have a common business board, it is determined that there is a same-business board hidden danger, and the corresponding business board information will be collected. For each combination of business type and office direction, the algorithm stores the analysis results in six cell arrays. Each element of each array represents the identifier of a hidden danger point (such as optical cable ID, multiplexing segment ID, node name, office station name, network element name or business board ID), and if the element is not an empty set, it indicates that there is a corresponding same-route risk. When all combinations of business types and office directions have been analyzed, the algorithm ends. Finally, the cell array contains information on all detected same-route risk points, which provides network operators with comprehensive hidden danger analysis results, helps them identify potential vulnerabilities in the network, and provides a basis for subsequent network optimization and maintenance decisions. It should be noted that steps S404, S406, S408, S410, S412, and S414 may be executed concurrently out of sequence.

[0087] Figure 5It is a system architecture diagram provided according to the embodiment of the present application, which shows the connection, function and information transmission logic of each system module in the all-optical network intelligent operation. The second-trunk transmission equipment network management, the first-trunk transmission equipment network management and the long-distance resource management system serve as the network basic layer. Through the I2 interface (I2 is the channel from the second-trunk transmission equipment network management and the first-trunk transmission equipment network management to OTMS) and the I3 interface, the equipment operation and resource data are transmitted to the all-optical network intelligent operation base (implemented through the OTMS system, OTMS serves as the intelligent operation base), thereby realizing basic data collection and aggregation. After OTMS integrates the data, it forwards the information to the Dynamic Cloud Optical Operations System (DCOOS, a platform focusing on network performance analysis and operations optimization) through the I1 interface (I1 is the data transmission channel between the OTMS system and the DCOOS platform). At the same time, it connects upward to the transmission integrated network management and sends alarm data to NSQ (NSQ is a message queue component that implements asynchronous data transmission, decouples the system, and ensures stable data flow). It also outputs configuration data to the provincial slave database (provincial slave database (refers to one or more database copies outside the master database)) through the WebService interface (WebService interface is a cross-system data interaction standard that allows different systems to communicate and transfer data across platforms and languages) to form a complete management closed loop and become the core hub of data flow. The OLP (Optical Line Protection) network management system reports alarm information (such as fiber disconnection and equipment failure alarms) to the integrated transmission network management system through the WebService interface to ensure fault monitoring of the optical transmission link.

[0088] The embodiment of the present application also provides a schematic diagram of a structure of a device for determining the same-route risk of a circuit. Figure 6 Shown, including:

[0089] The first determination module 602 is used to determine whether there is a risk of same routing between the main route and the backup route of a single circuit using a first method, and generate a single circuit same routing risk analysis result, wherein the first method determines whether there is an overlapping part after comparing the paths of the main route and the backup route of the single circuit.

[0090] The second determination module 604 is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction using a second method, and generate multiple circuit co-routing risk analysis results for multiple circuits corresponding to each office direction of each business type. The second method determines whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits by applying preset co-routing risk judgment rules of multiple different dimensions to the multiple circuits corresponding to each business type and each office direction.

[0091] It should be noted that Figure 6 The circuit shown is used to determine the risk of routing the device for performing Figure 2 The method for determining the co-routing risk of the circuit shown is therefore Figure 2 The relevant explanations in the method for determining the same-routing risk of the circuit in are also applicable to the device for determining the same-routing risk of the circuit, and will not be repeated here.

[0092] It should be noted that the various modules in the device for determining the same-routing risk of the above-mentioned circuit can be program modules (for example, a set of program instructions that implement a certain specific function) or hardware modules. For the latter, it can be expressed in the following forms, but is not limited to this: the expression form of each of the above-mentioned modules is a processor, or the functions of each of the above-mentioned modules are implemented by a processor.

[0093] An embodiment of the present application further provides a non-volatile storage medium, which includes a stored program, wherein when the program is running, the device where the non-volatile storage medium is located is controlled to execute the method for determining the same-routing risk of the circuit in any of the above embodiments.

[0094] An embodiment of the present application further provides an electronic device, the electronic device including a processor, the processor being configured to run a program, wherein the method for determining the same-routing risk of a circuit in any one of the above embodiments is executed when the program is running.

[0095] According to another aspect of the embodiments of the present application, a computer program product is further provided, including a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the method for determining the co-routing risk of the circuit in any one of the above embodiments.

[0096] In the above embodiments of the present application, the description of each embodiment has its own focus. For parts that are not described in detail in a certain embodiment, please refer to the relevant description of other embodiments.

[0097] In the several embodiments provided in this application, it should be understood that the disclosed technical content can be implemented in other ways. Among them, the device embodiments described above are only exemplary. For example, the division of the units can be a logical function division. In actual implementation, there may be other division methods, such as multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another system, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be through some interfaces, indirect coupling or communication connection of units or modules, which can be electrical or other forms.

[0098] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separate, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed across multiple units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the present embodiment.

[0099] In addition, the functional units in the various embodiments of the present application may be integrated into a single processing unit, or each unit may exist physically separately, or two or more units may be integrated into a single unit. The aforementioned integrated units may be implemented in the form of hardware or software functional units.

[0100] If the integrated unit is implemented in the form of a software functional unit and sold or used as an independent product, it can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present application is essentially or the part that contributes to the relevant technology or all or part of the technical solution can be embodied in the form of a software product, and the computer software product is stored in a storage medium, including a number of instructions for enabling a computer device (which can be a personal computer, a server or a network device, etc.) to execute all or part of the steps of the method described in each embodiment of the present application. The aforementioned storage medium includes: various media that can store program codes, such as a USB flash drive, a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), a mobile hard disk, a magnetic disk or an optical disk.

[0101] The above is only a preferred embodiment of the present application. It should be pointed out that for ordinary technicians in this technical field, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the principles of the present application. These improvements and modifications should also be regarded as the scope of protection of the present application.

Claims

1. A method for determining the same-route risk of a circuit, characterized in that: include: Determine whether there is a risk of a same route between the primary route and the backup route of a single circuit by using a first method, and generate a single circuit same route risk analysis result, wherein the first method determines whether there is an overlap by comparing the paths of the primary route and the backup route of the single circuit; The second method is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction, and generate multiple circuit co-routing risk analysis results for multiple circuits corresponding to each office direction of each business type. Among them, the second method determines whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits by applying preset co-routing risk judgment rules of multiple different dimensions to multiple circuits corresponding to each business type and each office direction.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The first method of determining whether the primary route and the backup route of a single circuit have the same route risk includes: When the primary route and the backup route of each single circuit meet at least one of the following conditions, it is determined that the primary route and the backup route have a same-route risk: The primary route and the backup route pass through the same optical cable segment; The primary route and the backup route pass through the same multiplex section, and the multiplex section has no protection mechanism; The primary route and the backup route pass through the same station; The primary route and the backup route pass through the same line-side network element; The main router and the backup router use the same service board.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that Generating a single circuit co-routing risk analysis result includes: In the case where the primary route and the backup route pass through the same optical cable segment, determining the single circuit and the same optical cable segment as a risky circuit and a risky optical cable segment, and determining resource information of the risky circuit and resource information of the risky optical cable segment as a risk analysis result of the single circuit and the same route; In a case where the primary route and the backup route pass through the same multiplex section and the multiplex section has no protection mechanism, determining the single circuit and the same multiplex section as a risky circuit and a risky multiplex section, and determining resource information of the risky circuit and resource information of the risky multiplex section as a risk analysis result of the single circuit and the same route; In the case where the primary route and the backup route pass through the same office station, determining the single circuit and the same office station as a risk circuit and a risk office station, and determining the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk office station as the risk analysis result of the single circuit and the same route; In a case where the primary route and the backup route pass through the same line-side network element, determining the single circuit and the same line-side network element as a risk circuit and a risky line-side network element, and determining resource information of the risky circuit and resource information of the risky line-side network element as a risk analysis result of the single circuit and the same route; When the main route and the backup route use the same service board, the single circuit and the same service board are determined as a risk circuit and a risk service board, and the resource information of the risk circuit and the resource information of the risk service board are determined as the risk analysis results of the single circuit and the same route.

4. The method according to claim 1, wherein The second method of determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits of the same service type and the same office direction includes: Determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to a first service type and a first office direction through a first preset co-routing risk judgment rule, wherein the first office direction is any office direction and the first service type is any service type: Acquire a circuit list of a target area, wherein the circuit list includes circuit information of all circuits in the target area; Determining, based on the circuit list, a total circuit bandwidth of multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction, and determining a first bandwidth threshold based on the total circuit bandwidth; Classifying all circuits in the target area according to the type of optical cable routing to obtain a plurality of routing groups, and determining the optical cable segment bandwidth carried by the optical cable segment corresponding to each routing group, wherein each routing group corresponds to one optical cable routing; When the bandwidth of any one of the optical cable segments is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk among the multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The second method of determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits of the same service type and the same office direction includes: Determine whether there is a co-routing risk among multiple circuits of the first service type and the first office direction using the second preset co-routing risk judgment rule: Determining a plurality of multiplex sections corresponding to the plurality of circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction; Determine the multiplex section bandwidth carried by each multiplex section; When any one of the multiplex section bandwidths is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk among the multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction.

6. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The second method of determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits of the same service type and the same office direction includes: Determine whether there is a co-routing risk among multiple circuits of the first service type and the first office direction using the third preset co-routing risk judgment rule: Determine a set of optical cable nodes of an optical cable segment corresponding to each routing group; Take the intersection of any two optical cable node sets, and determine the two optical cable segments corresponding to the two optical cable node sets whose intersection is not empty as a group of optical cable segments to be verified; When the total bandwidth of the optical cable segments of any group of the optical cable segments to be verified is greater than the first bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk among the multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The second method of determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits of the same service type and the same office direction includes: Determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to a first service type and a first office direction through a fourth preset co-routing risk judgment rule, wherein the first office direction is any office direction and the first service type is any service type: Determine all the offices through which the plurality of circuits of the first service type and the first office direction pass; Determining the bandwidth carried by each of the stations; When the bandwidth carried by any of the offices is greater than the second bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk among the multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The second method of determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits of the same service type and the same office direction includes: Determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to a first service type and a first office direction through a fifth preset co-routing risk judgment rule, wherein the first office direction is any office direction and the first service type is any service type: Determine all network elements through which the plurality of circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction pass; Determine the bandwidth carried by each network element; When the bandwidth carried by any one of the network elements is greater than a third bandwidth threshold, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk among the multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction.

9. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The second method of determining whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits of the same service type and the same office direction includes: Determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to a first service type and a first office direction through a sixth preset co-routing risk judgment rule, wherein the first office direction is any office direction and the first service type is any service type: Determine a service board set for each of the plurality of circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction; When the intersection of the service board sets of any two circuits is not empty, it is determined that there is a co-routing risk between the multiple circuits belonging to the first service type and the first office direction.

10. A device for determining the same-route risk of a circuit, characterized in that: include: a first determining module, configured to determine whether there is a risk of a same route between the primary route and the backup route of a single circuit by using a first method, and to generate a single circuit same route risk analysis result, wherein the first method determines whether there is an overlap by comparing the paths of the primary route and the backup route of the single circuit; The second determination module is used to determine whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits belonging to the same business type and the same office direction using a second method, and generate multiple circuit co-routing risk analysis results for multiple circuits corresponding to each office direction of each business type, wherein the second method determines whether there is a co-routing risk between multiple circuits by applying preset co-routing risk judgment rules of multiple different dimensions to the multiple circuits corresponding to each business type and each office direction.

11. A non-volatile storage medium, characterized in that: The non-volatile storage medium stores a program, wherein when the program is running, the device where the non-volatile storage medium is located is controlled to execute the method for determining the same-routing risk of the circuit according to any one of claims 1 to 9.

12. An electronic device, characterized in that: include: A memory and a processor, wherein the processor is configured to run a program stored in the memory, wherein the method for determining the same-route risk of a circuit according to any one of claims 1 to 9 is executed when the program is run.

13. A computer program product comprising computer instructions, characterized in that When the computer instructions are executed by a processor, the method for determining the same-routing risk of a circuit according to any one of claims 1 to 9 is implemented.

Images