Inter-satellite nano-management method based on centerless competitive judgment

Abstract

The invention discloses an inter-satellite nano-management method based on centerless competition judgment, the method is applied to a satellite-borne network management node of a third satellite, and the method comprises the following steps: responding to fault information of a first satellite, and starting nano-management of satellite-borne network equipment of the first satellite; in response to a management condition query request of the satellite-borne network management node of the second satellite, feeding back a management success result to the satellite-borne network management node of the second satellite; wherein the third satellite is a target satellite which is determined according to an adjacent satellite nano-management priority set of the first satellite and meets a nano-management condition, and the second satellite is an adjacent satellite, except the third satellite, of the first satellite. According to the invention, the satellite-borne network equipment on the first satellite can be managed and controlled, and inter-satellite dynamic collaborative management and control are realized.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the field of satellite Internet network management technology, and in particular to an inter-satellite management method based on decentralized competition arbitration. Background Art

[0002] This section is intended to provide a background or context to the embodiments of the present application that are recited in the claims. No admission is made that the description herein is prior art by virtue of its inclusion in this section.

[0003] With the rise of satellite Internet, in order to solve the "last mile" management and control problems, an onboard network management node is deployed on each satellite as an onboard edge management node to manage the onboard network equipment of a single satellite, assume the management function of the satellite edge node, and form an integrated satellite-ground management and control mode with the ground network management system to solve problems such as slow satellite-ground response and poor onboard processing capabilities.

[0004] However, existing methods only focus on the management of a single satellite. For example, when a single-point failure occurs on a satellite, it is impossible to control the onboard network equipment on that satellite. This poses an extremely high risk and cannot achieve the goal of providing wide-area intelligent connectivity services that can be accessed anytime, anywhere around the world. Summary of the Invention

[0005] The present embodiment provides an inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration to manage and control onboard network equipment on a first satellite, thereby achieving dynamic inter-satellite collaborative management and control. The method is applied to an onboard network management node of a third satellite, and includes:

[0006] In response to the fault information of the first satellite, enabling management of the onboard network equipment of the first satellite;

[0007] In response to a management status query request from the onboard network management node of the second satellite, feeding back a management success result to the onboard network management node of the second satellite;

[0008] The third satellite is a target satellite that meets the management conditions and is determined according to the management priority set of the neighboring satellites of the first satellite, and the second satellite is a neighboring satellite of the first satellite except the third satellite.

[0009] The present application also provides another inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration to manage and control onboard network equipment on a first satellite, thereby achieving dynamic inter-satellite collaborative management and control. The method is applied to an onboard network management node of a second satellite, and includes:

[0010] In response to the fault information of the first satellite, if the second satellite can establish a connectivity relationship with the target satellite, sending a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the target satellite, and waiting to receive feedback from the onboard network management node of the target satellite;

[0011] In response to the fault information of the first satellite, if the second satellite cannot establish a connection with the target satellite, sending a management status query request to the ground network management system and waiting for the ground network management system to feedback a management success result;

[0012] The target satellite is a satellite determined according to a neighboring satellite inclusion priority set of the first satellite, and the second satellite is a neighboring satellite of the first satellite except the target satellite.

[0013] An embodiment of the present application also provides a computer device, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor. When the processor executes the computer program, the above-mentioned inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration is implemented.

[0014] An embodiment of the present application further provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the computer program implements the above-mentioned inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration.

[0015] An embodiment of the present application further provides a computer program product, which includes a computer program. When the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the above-mentioned inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration.

[0016] The beneficial effects of the embodiments of the present application are as follows: Traditional satellite networks rely on ground control centers or main satellites for centralized management, which carries the risk of high command transmission delays and control node failures leading to paralysis of the entire network. The present application uses a decentralized competition arbitration mechanism to enable the third satellite to autonomously assume the network management responsibilities of the first satellite based on a priority set, without relying on a centralized node. The management authority is clarified through the neighboring satellite management priority set to ensure that only the third satellite that meets the conditions will perform management when multiple neighboring satellites compete. This mechanism can avoid resource conflicts caused by multiple satellites trying to take over at the same time. When the third satellite completes the management, it actively feeds back the success result to the second satellite, terminates the redundant query and competition process, reduces unnecessary signaling interactions in the network, and is particularly suitable for high-density satellite networks. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0017] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present application or the technical solutions in the prior art, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for the embodiments or the description of the prior art. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present application. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative work. In the drawings:

[0018] Figure 1 This is a flow chart of an inter-satellite management method based on non-centralized competition arbitration in an embodiment of the present application;

[0019] Figure 2 This is a flow chart of another inter-satellite management method based on non-centralized competition arbitration in an embodiment of the present application;

[0020] Figure 3 This is a flowchart of the management process based on the non-central competition arbitration result when all neighboring satellites of the first satellite are operating normally in an embodiment of the present application;

[0021] Figure 4 This is a flowchart of the management process based on the result of the decentralized competition arbitration when the second satellite cannot connect to the third satellite in an embodiment of the present application;

[0022] Figure 5 This is a flowchart of the management process based on the decentralized competition arbitration result when the onboard network management node of the highest priority neighboring satellite fails in an embodiment of the present application;

[0023] Figure 6 This is a flowchart of a management process based on a decentralized competition arbitration result when the onboard network management node of the highest priority neighboring satellite has reached the upper limit of its management capacity in an embodiment of the present application;

[0024] Figure 7 This is a flowchart of a management process based on a decentralized competition arbitration result when the satellite-borne network management node of the highest-priority neighboring satellite obtains management authority first and then fails in an embodiment of the present application;

[0025] Figure 8 Schematic diagram of the structure of an inter-satellite management device based on non-centralized competition arbitration in an embodiment of the present application;

[0026] Figure 9 This is a structural diagram of another inter-satellite management device based on non-centralized competition arbitration in an embodiment of the present application;

[0027] Figure 10 Schematic diagram of a computer device in an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0028] In order to make the purpose, technical solutions and advantages of the embodiments of the present application more clear, the embodiments of the present application are further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Here, the illustrative embodiments of the present application and their descriptions are used to explain the present application, but are not intended to limit the present application.

[0029] In the embodiment of the present application, the management strategy based on the decentralized competition arbitration result must follow two principles, as follows:

[0030] Principle 1: A neighboring satellite that cannot connect to the ground network management system cannot take over the first satellite.

[0031] Neighboring satellites of the first satellite that cannot connect to the ground network management system cannot transmit their own management information to the ground network management system, and the ground network management system cannot obtain the operating status and management status of all satellites in the entire system. If a neighboring satellite that cannot connect to the ground network management system is allowed to manage the first satellite, when a second satellite sends a management request to the ground network management system, because the first satellite is already managed by the neighboring satellite that cannot connect to the ground network management system, but the managing neighboring satellite cannot transmit the management information to the ground network management system, the ground network management system does not have this management information. Therefore, the ground network management system approves the management request of the second satellite, which will cause the first satellite to be managed by two or more neighboring satellites at the same time, resulting in management confusion.

[0032] Principle 2: All neighboring satellites of the first satellite are reachable. (If a second satellite cannot connect to a third satellite, the second satellite sends a management status query request to the ground network management system.)

[0033] When using a decentralized contention-based control strategy, all neighboring satellites of the first satellite must interact with each other to determine which neighboring satellite is controlled. If a second satellite cannot connect to a third satellite, it will not be able to learn about the control status of the first satellite. This may cause the first satellite to be controlled by two or more third satellites at the same time, resulting in control confusion.

[0034] In order to solve the technical problem in the existing technology that it is impossible to control the onboard network equipment on the target object first satellite, which is extremely risky and cannot achieve the goal of providing wide-area intelligent connection services that can be accessed anytime and anywhere for the world, this application proposes an inter-satellite management method based on decentralized competition arbitration to control the onboard network equipment on the first satellite and realize dynamic inter-satellite collaborative management.

[0035] Figure 1 This is a flow chart of an inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration in an embodiment of the present application, which is applied to an onboard network management node of a third satellite, including:

[0036] Step 101: In response to fault information of a first satellite, enable management of an onboard network device of the first satellite.

[0037] Step 102: In response to the query request for management status from the onboard network management node of the second satellite, feeding back a management success result to the onboard network management node of the second satellite;

[0038] The third satellite is a target satellite that meets the management conditions and is determined according to the management priority set of the neighboring satellites of the first satellite, and the second satellite is a neighboring satellite of the first satellite except the third satellite.

[0039] The method proposed in the embodiment of the present application is that traditional satellite networks rely on ground control centers or main satellites for centralized management, which has the risk of high command transmission delays and control node failures leading to paralysis of the entire network. The present application uses a decentralized competition arbitration mechanism to enable the third satellite to autonomously assume the network management responsibilities of the first satellite based on a priority set, without relying on a centralized node. The management authority is clarified through the neighboring satellite management priority set to ensure that only the third satellite that meets the conditions will perform management when multiple neighboring satellites compete. This mechanism can avoid resource conflicts caused by multiple satellites trying to take over at the same time. When the third satellite completes the management, it actively feeds back the success result to the second satellite, terminates the redundant query and competition process, reduces unnecessary signaling interactions in the network, and is particularly suitable for high-density satellite networks.

[0040] In the embodiment of the present application, the neighboring satellite priority set can be stored and managed in the form of a list, vector, etc., which is not limited here.

[0041] In this embodiment of the present application, the first satellite is a satellite that needs to be managed. For example, the first satellite may be a satellite with a single point of failure, and the first satellite has at least one neighboring satellite. Steps 101 and 102 are applied to the onboard network management node of the third satellite.

[0042] In an embodiment of the present application, when determining the third satellite based on the neighboring satellite priority set of the first satellite, each neighboring satellite of the first satellite (i.e., the second satellite and the third satellite) locally stores the neighboring satellite priority set of the first satellite. The target neighboring satellite with the highest priority in the neighboring satellite priority set is obtained. If the target satellite also meets the acceptance conditions, it is used as the third satellite.

[0043] In the above embodiment, the neighboring satellite with the highest priority is directly selected from the neighboring satellite inclusion priority set as the target satellite, eliminating the complex negotiation and competition process. Clearly using priority as the primary judgment criterion avoids decision-making confusion caused by ambiguous judgment criteria. Furthermore, the unique target satellite determination method prevents multiple neighboring satellites from simultaneously accepting the first satellite, avoiding management conflicts and ensuring the orderly acceptance process. The neighboring satellite with the highest priority is typically pre-determined based on factors such as the satellite's performance and location. This method offers advantages in terms of acceptance capability and interoperability with the first satellite. This method for determining the target satellite has clear rules and procedures, facilitating unified execution by the onboard network management nodes of each neighboring satellite. When the satellite network topology changes or new faults occur, this method can quickly adjust according to pre-determined rules, ensuring that the target satellite determination is not excessively affected by complex external factors. Furthermore, the clear decision path facilitates system maintenance and upgrades, enhancing the adaptability and robustness of the satellite network management system, enabling it to better cope with various complex space environments and network conditions.

[0044] In one embodiment, responding to the fault information of the first satellite includes:

[0045] Sending a heartbeat request to the onboard network management node of the first satellite according to a preset period;

[0046] If no heartbeat feedback is received within the second preset time period for a second consecutive preset number of times, a connection relationship is established with the first satellite;

[0047] If the connectivity is established successfully, fault information of the first satellite is generated.

[0048] In this embodiment of the present application, the preset period is dynamically adjusted based on the current relative motion state between the neighboring satellite and the second satellite. When the two satellites are in orbital convergence (where relative velocity is relatively high), the preset period is shortened (for example, to 1 second / time), ensuring timely status awareness through high-frequency monitoring. When the two satellites are in stable orbital flight (where relative position changes are minimal), the preset period is extended (to 5 seconds / time), reducing onboard resource consumption. The triggering condition for the preset period adjustment is calculated in real time by the onboard orbit prediction module. When the relative velocity exceeds a threshold (e.g., 100 m / s), the high-frequency mode is automatically activated. This determination method can indicate a failure of the first satellite.

[0049] In one embodiment, when sending heartbeat requests to the onboard network management node of a neighboring satellite according to a preset period, a dual-link parallel sending strategy is adopted. That is, the heartbeat requests are sent simultaneously through the primary communication link (such as a laser link) and the backup link (such as a microwave link), reducing the risk of monitoring failure caused by a single link failure. For low-priority neighboring satellites, a single link is used to balance resource usage and monitoring needs.

[0050] In addition to the method of determining a neighboring satellite as the first satellite to be managed proposed in the above embodiment, an enhanced solution may also be adopted, specifically including:

[0051] If no feedback is received for a second preset number of times (e.g., three times), a warning threshold is set (e.g., no feedback is received for three consecutive times). At this point, instead of directly determining an anomaly, an enhanced detection packet (containing hardware diagnostic instructions) is sent to the onboard network management node of the neighboring satellite. If the heartbeat feedback contains warning information such as CPU overload or memory leak, the neighboring satellite is marked as a potential first satellite in advance, and the ground management system is notified to initiate a resource allocation plan.

[0052] In this embodiment of the present application, the second preset duration is dynamically set based on link quality. When the current link packet loss rate exceeds a preset ratio, the second preset duration is extended, for example, from the default 3 seconds to 8 seconds, to avoid misjudging abnormalities due to momentary link fluctuations. After the timeout, two retransmission requests are sent, with gradually increasing retransmission intervals (1 second, 2 seconds). If there is still no response, the connection establishment phase begins.

[0053] In this embodiment, the heartbeat request embeds information such as the current satellite's managed load and remaining capacity. Upon receiving this information, the second satellite can simultaneously update its understanding of the third satellite's status. When the second satellite determines that the third satellite has managed the first satellite, the heartbeat response it sends back (if the connection is established successfully) can include its own management priority information, accelerating the subsequent target satellite selection process.

[0054] In this embodiment, the heartbeat request utilizes dynamic frequency hopping technology. Before each transmission, the onboard encryption module generates a random frequency sequence (based on a preset algorithm and timestamp), which is synchronized in real time with neighboring satellites. Furthermore, a CRC checksum and a time window (valid for ±1 second) are added to the packet header to prevent replay attacks and the injection of forged heartbeat packets.

[0055] In one embodiment, the management condition is that the operation is normal, the system has the ability to manage the onboard network equipment of the first satellite, and the management capability does not reach the upper limit of the management capability.

[0056] The target satellite must meet certain conditions for inclusion, such as not reaching its inclusion capacity limit. This prevents the inclusion of neighboring satellites due to excessive loads. By dynamically assessing the inclusion capacity of neighboring satellites, resources are allocated rationally, allowing those with sufficient spare capacity to take on inclusion tasks. This improves the overall utilization of onboard equipment and avoids resource waste.

[0057] In one embodiment, after enabling management of the onboard network device of the first satellite, the method further includes:

[0058] Send the successful management result to the ground network management system.

[0059] The ground network management system stores and registers the successful management result after receiving it.

[0060] During specific implementation, the third satellite can also receive configuration parameter update instructions (such as management strategy adjustment) returned by the ground network management system and complete local configuration updates in a short time.

[0061] In one embodiment, the method further comprises:

[0062] After enabling management of the onboard network device of the first satellite, a management permission token including a timestamp and a digital signature is generated, stored in a local blockchain module of the third satellite, and broadcast to the second satellite.

[0063] In the above embodiment, the management permission locking mechanism (generating a token with a timestamp and digital signature) prevents conflicts in the management operations initiated simultaneously by multiple satellites, ensures the uniqueness and accuracy of the management process, and reduces the risk of intersatellite network chaos caused by misoperation.

[0064] The third satellite's onboard network management node scans the first satellite's onboard network devices, obtaining basic information such as device model, IP address, and operating parameters, and compiling a device inventory. Management authority is transferred batch by batch, prioritizing core devices (such as communication modules and power systems) and then auxiliary devices (such as sensors and storage units). Each batch of equipment transfers takes a short time, for example, no more than 5 seconds. The third satellite samples the operating status of the first satellite's onboard network devices once per second, focusing on key indicators such as load rate, temperature, and error codes. If a metric exceeds a threshold (e.g., temperature exceeding 60°C), an early warning mechanism is automatically triggered and a log is recorded.

[0065] Figure 2 This is a flow chart of another inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration in an embodiment of the present application, which is applied to the onboard network management node of the second satellite, including:

[0066] Step 201: In response to the fault information of the first satellite, if the second satellite can establish a connection with the target satellite, the second satellite sends a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the target satellite, and waits to receive feedback from the onboard network management node of the target satellite;

[0067] Step 202: In response to the fault information of the first satellite, if the second satellite cannot establish a connection with the target satellite, a request for querying the management status is sent to the ground network management system, and a successful management result is fed back by the ground network management system.

[0068] The target satellite is a satellite determined according to a neighboring satellite inclusion priority set of the first satellite, and the second satellite is a neighboring satellite of the first satellite except the target satellite.

[0069] In this embodiment of the present application, in a decentralized architecture, multiple secondary satellites may simultaneously detect a primary satellite failure. Lack of unified scheduling can easily lead to repeated attempts to take control. By prioritizing querying target satellites, secondary satellites proactively confirm the take control status with the highest-priority target satellite, rather than directly initiating the take control operation. This design avoids the waste of computing resources and communication conflicts caused by multiple secondary satellites simultaneously performing take control. Steps 201 and 202 form a two-tier query system with intersatellite priority and ground-based backup. When a secondary satellite is connected to a target satellite, it rapidly obtains the take control status through direct intersatellite communication, with response latency controlled to milliseconds. If the intersatellite link is interrupted, it automatically switches to querying the ground system, ensuring uninterrupted synchronization of the take control status. This hierarchical mechanism solves the problem of traditional intersatellite management paralysis caused by the failure of a single communication path. As a non-target neighbor, the secondary satellite's core role is to confirm status, not to perform take control. Through the query-feedback mechanism, the secondary satellite does not need to continuously monitor the status of the primary satellite or prepare take control resources. Instead, it releases relevant computing and communication resources upon receiving feedback from the target satellite. Compared with the traditional continuous monitoring scheme for all neighboring satellites, this on-demand participation model can reduce on-board resource usage. In a decentralized architecture, information islands of management status may lead to conflicting decisions among neighboring satellites. This application uses the active query behavior of the second satellite to force state synchronization across neighboring satellites. The feedback results of the target satellite can be received by multiple second satellites, ensuring that all neighboring satellites reach a consensus on the successful management. The feedback from the ground network management system serves as a global synchronization signal, further eliminating state deviations when inter-satellite links are abnormal. This consistency guarantee mechanism provides a reliable premise for subsequent business recovery and avoids data forwarding failures due to inconsistent status.

[0070] The successful management result includes key fields such as the third satellite's ID, the first satellite's status, and the takeover time. Encryption algorithms (such as AES-256) are used to ensure secure transmission of the management success result. Management status query requests can be sent to the target satellite's onboard network management node at a preset interval to continuously monitor the target satellite's management data.

[0071] If a second satellite cannot establish connectivity with the target satellite, it sends a request to the ground network management system, along with auxiliary information such as its location coordinates and communication link status. Based on this information, the ground network management system selects the optimal relay satellite to forward the successful acquisition result, ensuring information transmission within 30 seconds.

[0072] In specific implementations, the connectivity established between the secondary satellite and the target satellite includes multiple communication links, such as microwave and laser links. If a secondary satellite is unable to connect to the target satellite via a conventional communication link, it automatically switches to a backup link to ensure unimpeded information transmission. Furthermore, adaptive communication link adjustment technology dynamically adjusts communication parameters based on the real-time status of the link, improving communication reliability and stability. If multiple communication links fail to establish successfully, the system determines that connectivity has failed.

[0073] The transmission of successful management results utilizes encryption algorithms (such as AES-256) to ensure the security of information during inter-satellite and satellite-to-ground transmissions, preventing tampering or leakage of management information. Furthermore, information synchronization mechanisms between the target satellite, the secondary satellite, and the ground system (e.g., responding to query requests within 1 second and synchronizing with the ground system within 3 seconds) ensure that each node has real-time visibility into management status, facilitating timely adjustments to management strategies.

[0074] In one embodiment, waiting to receive feedback from the onboard network management node of the target satellite includes:

[0075] If the feedback is a successful management result, it is confirmed that the target satellite is the third satellite, and the successful management result is saved locally on the second satellite. The third satellite is the target satellite that meets the management conditions.

[0076] For the second satellite, if it sends a management status query request to the target network onboard network management node and receives a successful management result, it means that the target satellite is the third satellite. Therefore, the second satellite can save the successful management result locally on the second satellite.

[0077] In one embodiment, the method further comprises:

[0078] Sending a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the third satellite according to a preset period;

[0079] If no feedback is received from the onboard network management node of the third satellite within the first preset time period for a first preset number of consecutive times, a target satellite is obtained that is re-determined according to the neighboring satellite management priority set.

[0080] In an embodiment of the present application, if the third satellite has normally taken over the management of the first satellite, but may no longer be able to take over the management of the first satellite due to a fault during operation, and the third satellite needs to be replaced, the second satellite will send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the third satellite according to a preset period. If no feedback is received from the onboard network management node of the third satellite within a first preset time period for a first preset number of consecutive times, it means that the second satellite has sensed that the third satellite can no longer take over the management of the first satellite. The onboard network management node of the second satellite queries the local neighboring satellite management priority set and re-determines the target satellite. At this time, the process returns to steps 101 and 102. That is, in response to the fault information of the first satellite, if the second satellite can establish a connection relationship with the re-determined target satellite, it sends a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the target satellite and waits to receive feedback from the onboard network management node of the target satellite; if the second satellite cannot establish a connection relationship with the target satellite, it sends a management status query request to the ground network management system.

[0081] In one embodiment, waiting to receive feedback from the onboard network management node of the target satellite includes:

[0082] If the feedback is not received within the first preset time period for a first preset number of times in a row, or the feedback is a result of a management failure, a target satellite is re-determined according to the neighboring satellite management priority set.

[0083] During specific implementation, the first preset number of times and the first preset duration can be determined according to actual conditions. For example, the first preset number of times is 3, and the first preset duration is 3 seconds.

[0084] If the feedback is not received within the first preset time period for a first preset number of consecutive times, it means that the target satellite itself is faulty. If the feedback is a management failure, it means that the onboard network management node of the target satellite has reached the management capacity limit. In both cases, the target satellite cannot manage the first satellite, and it is necessary to re-determine the target satellite based on the neighboring satellite management priority set. The determination process is to find the next highest priority neighboring satellite according to the neighboring satellite management priority set. Of course, if the next highest priority neighboring satellite cannot manage the first satellite, then continue to select the third priority neighboring satellite.

[0085] In one embodiment, after obtaining the target satellite re-determined according to the neighboring satellite inclusion priority set, the method further includes:

[0086] When the second satellite is the re-determined target satellite and meets the management condition, updating the second satellite to a third satellite;

[0087] When the second satellite is not the re-determined target satellite, a management status query request is sent to the onboard network management node of the re-determined target satellite.

[0088] In the above embodiment, when the second satellite becomes the new target satellite and meets the requirements for management, it is automatically upgraded to the third satellite and takes over the mission, ensuring that management responsibility always falls to the optimal satellite. If the second satellite does not become the new target satellite, a management request is sent to the re-determined target satellite via an inter-satellite direct query mechanism, rather than directly initiating a management attempt. This design eliminates ground transit and reduces communication latency. The logic of upgrading the second satellite to the third satellite enables a seamless transfer of management responsibility. For example, if the original target satellite is unable to continue management due to a power failure, the new target satellite, after being re-determined using a priority set, immediately takes over the mission and maintains the communication link, ensuring uninterrupted data forwarding. This smooth transition mechanism reduces mission observation latency. Dynamic priority adjustment in a decentralized architecture ensures normal operation even when some satellites fail or links are interrupted.

[0089] In this application, the neighboring satellite priority set of the first satellite is key. The neighboring satellite priority set of the first satellite is pre-configured and can be configured by the ground network management system and sent to each neighboring satellite of the first satellite. The steps of determining the neighboring satellite priority set include:

[0090] Obtaining satellite data collected by onboard network management nodes of neighboring satellites of the first satellite, wherein the satellite data includes resource utilization, communication link quality data, and managed data;

[0091] Calculate the dynamic priority score of each neighboring satellite based on its satellite data;

[0092] According to the dynamic priority scores of the neighboring satellites, the priority of each neighboring satellite for taking control of the first satellite is determined, and a neighboring satellite priority set for taking control of the first satellite is formed.

[0093] In specific implementations, the resource utilization of the first satellite includes, but is not limited to, CPU usage, memory usage, and storage space usage, and can be collected once per second. Communication link quality data between each first satellite and its neighboring satellites, including but not limited to signal strength, transmission rate, and packet loss rate, can be collected every 500 milliseconds. The managed data of the first satellite includes the number of managed devices and managed load, and can be updated and stored in real time. Before calculating each satellite's dynamic priority score, the satellite data can be preprocessed to remove outliers and noise. For example, if the signal strength of a particular acquisition significantly deviates from the normal range, it is identified as an outlier and removed. The preprocessed data is then normalized and mapped to a uniform value range of 0-1 for subsequent priority calculation. Resource utilization and packet loss rate are reverse normalized (higher values ​​indicate lower normalized values), while signal strength and transmission rate are forward normalized (higher values ​​indicate higher normalized values).

[0094] Based on the standardized data, a weighted summation method is used to calculate the dynamic priority score of each satellite. Preset weights are assigned to each indicator, such as 0.3 for resource utilization, 0.4 for communication link quality (a normalized value that combines signal strength, transmission rate, and packet loss rate), and 0.3 for current managed load. The dynamic priority score = (normalized resource utilization × 0.3) + (normalized communication link quality × 0.4) + (1 - normalized current managed load × 0.3). A higher score indicates a higher priority.

[0095] In addition, the management priority of neighboring satellites can be adjusted based on the calculated dynamic priority score at a preset period (for example, every 30 seconds). When the dynamic priority score of a neighboring satellite exceeds 10% of the current highest-priority neighboring satellite's score, its priority is raised to the highest priority; when the dynamic priority score of a neighboring satellite is less than 10% of the current lowest-priority neighboring satellite's score, its priority is lowered.

[0096] Within 10 seconds after the priority is adjusted, the ground network management system broadcasts the neighboring satellite priority set to the first satellite's neighboring satellites. After receiving the priority information, the first satellite's neighboring satellites update the locally stored neighboring satellite priority set.

[0097] The above-described embodiments promote satellite-ground collaborative management and enhance global control capabilities. Successful onboarding results are promptly synchronized to the ground network management system, enabling real-time monitoring of inter-satellite onboarding status and adjustments to onboarding policies through configuration parameter update instructions. The ground system intelligently iterates priority sets based on satellite data from neighboring satellites, enabling dynamic satellite-ground collaborative management and enhancing global control over the entire satellite network, facilitating timely response to network changes and potential risks.

[0098] In this embodiment of the present application, when two or more neighboring satellites have the same dynamic priority score and are tied for the highest, a conflict resolution mechanism is triggered. In this case, based on the preset basic priorities of each neighboring satellite, the neighboring satellite with the higher basic priority is assigned a higher dynamic priority. If the basic priorities are also the same, the distance between each neighboring satellite and the first satellite is compared, and the neighboring satellite with the closer distance is assigned a higher priority.

[0099] Five specific examples are given below to illustrate the specific application of the method proposed in the embodiments of this application.

[0100] In one embodiment of the present application, scenario 1 is: all neighboring satellites to be managed by the first satellite are operating normally.

[0101] The normal operation of all neighboring satellites of the first satellite includes the following conditions: ① The onboard network management nodes of the neighboring satellites operate normally and have the ability to manage the onboard network equipment of the first satellite; ② The onboard network management nodes of the neighboring satellites have not reached their management capacity limit and still have the ability to manage the onboard network equipment of the first satellite; ③ The onboard network management nodes of the neighboring satellites are connected to the ground network management system and have the ability to exchange various management information with the ground network management system.

[0102] When the first satellite fails, all of its neighboring satellites respond to the first satellite's failure information. Based on a pre-set set of neighboring satellite management priorities, the onboard network management node of the neighboring satellite with the highest management priority is granted management permission and begins managing the first satellite's onboard network equipment, becoming the third satellite. The onboard network management nodes of the first satellite's second satellite, other than the third satellite, all send management status query requests to the onboard network management node of the third satellite. The onboard network management node of the third satellite then responds to the onboard network management node of the second satellite with a successful management result (indicating that the third satellite has taken over management). Simultaneously, the onboard network management node of the third satellite notifies the ground network management system of the successful management result.

[0103] by Figure 3 For example, Figure 3 This is a flowchart of a management process based on the results of decentralized contention arbitration under the condition that all neighboring satellites of a first satellite are operating normally, according to an embodiment of the present application. In the event of a failure on the onboard network management node of satellite 1, the onboard network management nodes of all its neighboring satellites (neighboring satellite 1, neighboring satellite 2, neighboring satellite 3, and neighboring satellite 4) detect that satellite 1 needs to be managed. Based on the previously preset neighboring satellite management priority set for satellite 1 (neighboring satellite 1 > neighboring satellite 2 > neighboring satellite 3 > neighboring satellite 4), the onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1 obtains management permission and manages the onboard network equipment of satellite 1. The onboard network management nodes of neighboring satellites 2, 3, and 4 all send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1. The onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1 returns a management success result (Satellite 1 has been managed by neighboring satellite 1) to the onboard network management nodes of neighboring satellites 2, 3, and 4. Simultaneously, the onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1 sends a management success result to the ground network management system, indicating that satellite 1 is now managed by neighboring satellite 1.

[0104] In another embodiment of the present application, scenario 2 is: a second satellite of the first satellite cannot connect to the third satellite

[0105] The second satellite cannot connect to the third satellite under the following conditions: ① The onboard network management node of the third satellite operates normally and has the ability to manage the onboard network equipment of the first satellite; ② The onboard network management node of the third satellite has not reached its management capacity limit; ③ The onboard network management node of the third satellite is connected to the ground network management system and has the ability to exchange various management information with the ground network management system; ④ The onboard network management node of the second satellite cannot connect to the third satellite.

[0106] When a first satellite fails, the onboard network management nodes of all of its neighboring satellites detect that the first satellite needs to be taken into management. Based on a pre-configured set of neighboring satellite management priorities, the onboard network management node of the neighboring satellite with the highest management priority is granted management permission and begins managing the neighboring satellite's onboard network equipment, becoming the third satellite. Neighboring satellites other than the third satellite serve as second satellites. The onboard network management nodes of the second satellites send management status query requests to the onboard network management node of the third satellite. The onboard network management node of the third satellite responds to the onboard network management node of the second satellite with a successful management status (currently managed by the highest-priority neighboring satellite). However, the onboard network management node of a second satellite cannot connect to the onboard network management node of the third satellite and therefore sends a management status query request to the ground network management system. The onboard network management node of the third satellite notifies the ground network management system of the successful management status, which then sends the management success result of the first satellite to the onboard network management node of the second satellite.

[0107] by Figure 4 For example, Figure 4 This is a flowchart of the management process based on decentralized contention arbitration in the case where the second satellite cannot connect to the third satellite in an embodiment of the present application. In this case, the onboard network management node of satellite 1 fails. After the onboard network management nodes of all its neighboring satellites (neighboring satellites 1, 2, 3, and 4) detect that satellite 1 needs to be managed, the onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1 obtains management permission based on the preset neighboring satellite management priority set (neighboring satellite 1 > neighboring satellite 2 > neighboring satellite 3 > neighboring satellite 4) and manages the onboard network equipment of satellite 1. The onboard network management nodes of neighboring satellites 2, 3, and 4 all send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1. However, neighboring satellite 2 cannot connect to neighboring satellite 1 at this time. The onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1 returns a management success result (Satellite 1 has been managed by neighboring satellite 1) to the onboard network management nodes of neighboring satellites 3 and 4. The onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 2 then sends a management status query request to the ground network management system. The onboard network management node of Neighbor Satellite 1 sends a successful management result indicating that Satellite 1 has been managed by Neighbor Satellite 1 to the ground network management system, and the ground network management system sends the successful management result of Satellite 1 to the onboard network management node of Neighbor Satellite 2.

[0108] In another embodiment of the present application, scenario 3 is: the first satellite has the highest priority neighboring satellite that cannot manage the first satellite (neighboring satellite failure or reaching the management limit).

[0109] The highest-priority neighboring satellite of the first satellite is unable to manage the onboard network equipment of the first satellite when the following conditions are met: ① The onboard network management node of the highest-priority neighboring satellite fails or has reached the upper limit of its management capacity and can no longer manage the first satellite, and the onboard network management nodes of the remaining second satellites are operating normally and their management capacity has not reached the upper limit, and they have the ability to manage the onboard network equipment of the first satellite; ② The onboard network management nodes of all neighboring satellites are connected to the ground network management system and have the ability to exchange various management information with the ground network management system. If the highest-priority neighboring satellite does not have the management capability due to a failure of its onboard network management node, it does not have the ability to interact with the ground network management system.

[0110] Since the above scenario 3 targets two situations, they are introduced separately below.

[0111] 1) The onboard network management node of the highest priority neighboring satellite fails

[0112] When the onboard network management node of the highest-priority neighboring satellite fails, after the onboard network management nodes of all second satellites detect the failure of the first satellite, the highest-priority neighboring satellite is first selected as the target satellite according to the previously preset neighboring satellite management priority set. The onboard network management nodes of other second satellites except the target satellite all send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the target satellite. Since the onboard network management node of the target satellite fails at this time, it is unable to reply the management success result to the onboard network management node of the second satellite. After the onboard network management node of the second satellite makes three unsuccessful attempts, it determines a new target satellite for managing the first satellite based on the neighboring satellite management priority set of the first satellite. For example, it determines that the onboard network management node of the second highest priority satellite obtains the management authority of the onboard network equipment of the first satellite and uses it as the new target satellite. When the second satellite is the re-determined target satellite and meets the management conditions, the second satellite is updated to the third satellite and the first satellite is managed. At this time, other second satellites send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the third satellite, and the third satellite feeds back a successful management result. When the second satellite is not the re-determined target satellite, a management status query request is sent to the onboard network management node of the re-determined target satellite.

[0113] by Figure 5 For example, Figure 5This is a flowchart of the management process based on the results of decentralized competition arbitration in the case of a failure of the onboard network management node of the highest-priority neighboring satellite in an embodiment of the present application. In the case of a failure of the onboard network management node of Satellite 1, and also of Neighbor 1, the onboard network management node of Neighbor 1 fails. According to the previously preset neighboring satellite management priority set (Neighbor 1 > Neighbor 2 > Neighbor 3 > Neighbor 4), Neighbor 1 is the target satellite. After the onboard network management nodes of all its secondary satellites (Neighbor 2, Neighbor 3, and Neighbor 4) detect the failure of Satellite 1, they all send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of Neighbor 1. However, at this time, the onboard network management node of Neighbor 1 fails and cannot reply with a successful management result to the onboard network management nodes of Neighbor 2, Neighbor 3, and Neighbor 4. After the above management status query request is repeated three times without success, the onboard network management node of Neighbor 2 detects that it has the second-highest priority, obtains management authority, and manages the onboard network equipment of Satellite 1, making it the new target satellite, which is now the third satellite. The onboard network management nodes of Neighbor Satellite 3 and Neighbor Satellite 4 send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of Neighbor Satellite 2. The onboard network management node of Neighbor Satellite 2 replies with a management success result to the onboard network management nodes of Neighbor Satellite 3 and Neighbor Satellite 4, and notifies the ground network management system of the management success result.

[0114] 2) The onboard network management node of a high-priority neighboring satellite has reached its management capacity limit

[0115] When the onboard network management node of the highest-priority neighboring satellite has reached its management capacity limit and all of its secondary satellites detect a failure in the first satellite, the highest-priority neighboring satellite, based on the preset neighboring satellite management priority set, is selected as the target satellite. The onboard network management nodes of all secondary satellites other than the target satellite send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the target satellite. Since the target satellite has reached its management capacity limit, the onboard network management nodes of the other secondary satellites respond with a management failure response. The next-highest-priority neighboring satellite is then selected as the new target satellite. The onboard network management nodes of the other secondary satellites then send management status query requests to the onboard network management node of the new target satellite. The onboard network management node of the new target satellite responds to the onboard network management nodes of the other secondary satellites with a management success response, indicating that the satellite has been successfully managed by the onboard network management node of the next-highest-priority neighboring satellite. Furthermore, the onboard network management node of the next-highest-priority neighboring satellite sends a management success response to the ground network management system.

[0116] by Figure 6 For example, Figure 6This is a flowchart of a management process based on decentralized contention arbitration results when the onboard network management node of the highest-priority neighboring satellite has reached its management capacity limit in an embodiment of the present application. In the case of a failure on the onboard network management node of Satellite 1, and the onboard network management node of Neighboring Satellite 1 has reached its management capacity limit, the onboard network management nodes of all secondary satellites (Neighboring Satellite 2, Neighboring Satellite 3, and Neighboring Satellite 4) detect the failure of Satellite 1 and, based on a pre-set neighboring satellite management priority set (Neighboring Satellite 1 > Neighboring Satellite 2 > Neighboring Satellite 3 > Neighboring Satellite 4), determine that Neighboring Satellite 1 is the target satellite. They then send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of Neighboring Satellite 1. However, at this point, the onboard network management node of Neighboring Satellite 1 has reached its management capacity limit and responds with a management failure result to the onboard network management nodes of Neighboring Satellites 2, 3, and 4. Upon receiving the management failure result for Neighboring Satellite 1 and detecting that it is the next-highest-priority neighboring satellite, the onboard network management node of Neighboring Satellite 2 obtains management authority and manages the onboard network equipment of Satellite 1, updating it to the third satellite. The onboard network management nodes of Neighbor Satellite 3 and Neighbor Satellite 4 send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of Neighbor Satellite 2 with the second highest priority. The onboard network management node of Neighbor Satellite 2 replies with a successful management result to the onboard network management nodes of Neighbor Satellite 3 and Neighbor Satellite 4, and notifies the ground network management system of the successful management result.

[0117] In another embodiment of the present application, scenario 4 is: the neighboring satellite with the highest priority of the first satellite obtains the management authority first and then fails and cannot continue to manage.

[0118] After the first satellite's highest-priority neighbor satellite obtains the first satellite's management authority according to the preset neighbor satellite management priority set, the onboard network management nodes of the remaining low-priority neighbor satellites periodically send management status query requests (which can be heartbeat requests) to the highest-priority neighbor satellite to monitor the management data of the highest-priority neighbor satellite at all times. If the onboard network management node of the highest-priority neighboring satellite fails, and the onboard network management nodes of the remaining lower-priority neighboring satellites fail to respond to management status query requests for a first preset number of times and within a preset time period (tentatively, three no-responses indicate no successful management response), the onboard network management nodes of all second satellites of the first satellite detect the failure of the first satellite. Based on the preset neighboring satellite management priority set, the onboard network management node of the next-highest-priority satellite obtains management authority for the failed satellite equipment. The onboard network management nodes of the remaining lower-priority neighboring satellites then send management status query requests to the onboard network management node of the next-highest-priority neighboring satellite. The onboard network management node of the next-highest-priority neighboring satellite then responds to the onboard network management nodes of the remaining lower-priority neighboring satellites with a successful management response indicating that the satellite has been managed by the onboard network management node of the next-highest-priority neighboring satellite. Furthermore, the onboard network management node of the next-highest-priority neighboring satellite sends a successful management response to the ground network management system.

[0119] by Figure 7 For example, Figure 7 This is a flowchart of a management process based on decentralized contention arbitration results in an embodiment of the present application, where the onboard network management node of the highest-priority neighboring satellite first obtains management authority and then fails. The onboard network management node of satellite 1 fails, and neighboring satellite 1 has the highest management priority and successfully obtains management authority for satellite 1's onboard network equipment. During operation, the onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1 fails. The onboard network management nodes of all its secondary satellites (neighboring satellites 2, 3, and 4) detect that satellite 1 needs to be managed. Based on the previously preset neighboring satellite management priority set (neighboring satellite 1 > neighboring satellite 2 > neighboring satellite 3 > neighboring satellite 4), they identify neighboring satellite 1 as the target satellite and send management status query requests to the onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1. However, due to the failure, the onboard network management node of neighboring satellite 1 is unable to reply to the onboard network management nodes of neighboring satellites 2, 3, and 4 with a management success result. After the query request is repeated three times without success, the onboard network management node of Neighbor Satellite 2 detects that it has the second-highest priority, obtains management authority, and manages the onboard network equipment of Satellite 1. The onboard network management nodes of Neighbor Satellites 3 and 4 send a management status query request to the onboard network management node of Neighbor Satellite 2, which has the second-highest priority. The onboard network management node of Neighbor Satellite 2 responds with a successful management result to the onboard network management nodes of Neighbor Satellites 3 and 4, and notifies the ground network management system of the successful management result.

[0120] The present application also proposes an inter-satellite management device based on non-central competition arbitration. Figure 8 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an inter-satellite management device based on decentralized contention arbitration in an embodiment of the present application. The device is applied to the onboard network management node of the third satellite, including:

[0121] The management activation module 801 is configured to activate the management of the onboard network device of the first satellite in response to the fault information of the first satellite;

[0122] The management feedback module 802 is configured to respond to the management status query request of the onboard network management node of the second satellite and feedback a management success result to the onboard network management node of the second satellite;

[0123] The third satellite is a target satellite that meets the management conditions and is determined according to the management priority set of the neighboring satellites of the first satellite, and the second satellite is a neighboring satellite of the first satellite except the third satellite.

[0124] In one embodiment, the management feedback module 802 is used to:

[0125] After enabling management of the onboard network equipment of the first satellite, a management success result is sent to the ground network management system.

[0126] The present application also proposes another inter-satellite management device based on non-centralized contention arbitration. Figure 9 This is a schematic structural diagram of another inter-satellite management device based on decentralized contention arbitration in an embodiment of the present application. The device is applied to the onboard network management node of the second satellite, including:

[0127] The request processing module 901 is used to:

[0128] In response to the fault information of the first satellite, if the second satellite can establish a connectivity relationship with the target satellite, sending a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the target satellite, and waiting to receive feedback from the onboard network management node of the target satellite;

[0129] In response to the fault information of the first satellite, if the second satellite cannot establish a connection with the target satellite, sending a management status query request to the ground network management system and waiting for the ground network management system to feedback a management success result;

[0130] The target satellite is a satellite determined according to a neighboring satellite inclusion priority set of the first satellite, and the second satellite is a neighboring satellite of the first satellite except the target satellite.

[0131] In one embodiment, the request processing module 901 is configured to:

[0132] If the feedback is a successful management result, it is confirmed that the target satellite is the third satellite, and the successful management result is saved locally on the second satellite. The third satellite is the target satellite that meets the management conditions.

[0133] In one embodiment, the system further includes a target satellite re-determination module 902, configured to:

[0134] Sending a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the third satellite according to a preset period;

[0135] If no feedback is received from the onboard network management node of the third satellite within the first preset time period for a first preset number of consecutive times, a target satellite is obtained that is re-determined according to the neighboring satellite management priority set.

[0136] In one embodiment, the target satellite re-determination module 902 is configured to:

[0137] If the feedback is not received within the first preset time period for a first preset number of times in a row, or the feedback is a result of a management failure, a target satellite is re-determined according to the neighboring satellite management priority set.

[0138] In one embodiment, the target satellite re-determination module 902 is configured to:

[0139] After obtaining the target satellite re-determined according to the neighboring satellite management priority set, if the second satellite is the re-determined target satellite and meets the management condition, updating the second satellite to a third satellite;

[0140] When the second satellite is not the re-determined target satellite, a management status query request is sent to the onboard network management node of the re-determined target satellite.

[0141] In summary, the beneficial effects achieved by the method and device proposed in the embodiments of the present application are as follows: Traditional satellite networks rely on ground control centers or main satellites for centralized management, which carries the risk of high command transmission delays and control node failures leading to paralysis of the entire network. The present application uses a decentralized competition arbitration mechanism to enable the third satellite to autonomously assume the network management responsibilities of the first satellite based on a priority set, without relying on a centralized node. The management authority is clarified through the neighboring satellite management priority set to ensure that only the third satellite that meets the conditions will perform management when multiple neighboring satellites compete. This mechanism can avoid resource conflicts caused by multiple satellites trying to take over at the same time. When the third satellite completes the management, it actively feeds back the success result to the second satellite, terminates the redundant query and competition process, reduces unnecessary signaling interactions in the network, and is particularly suitable for high-density satellite networks.

[0142] The embodiment of the present application also provides a computer device, Figure 10 This is a schematic diagram of a computer device in an embodiment of the present application. The computer device 1000 includes a memory 1010, a processor 1020, and a computer program 1030 stored in the memory 1010 and executable on the processor 1020. When the processor 1020 executes the computer program 1030, the above-mentioned inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration is implemented.

[0143] An embodiment of the present application further provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the computer program implements the above-mentioned inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration.

[0144] An embodiment of the present application further provides a computer program product, which includes a computer program. When the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the above-mentioned inter-satellite management method based on decentralized contention arbitration.

[0145] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the embodiments of the present application may be provided as methods, systems, or computer program products. Therefore, the present application may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment, or an embodiment combining software and hardware. Furthermore, the present application may take the form of a computer program product implemented on one or more computer-usable storage media (including but not limited to magnetic disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, etc.) containing computer-usable program code.

[0146] The present application is described with reference to the flowcharts and / or block diagrams of the methods, devices (systems), and computer program products according to the embodiments of the present application. It should be understood that each process and / or block in the flowchart and / or block diagram, as well as the combination of processes and / or blocks in the flowchart and / or block diagram, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions can be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, an embedded processor, or other programmable data processing device to produce a machine, so that the instructions executed by the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing device generate instructions for implementing the processes in the flowchart and / or block diagram. Figure 1 a process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A device that provides the functions specified in a block or multiple blocks.

[0147] These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer readable memory that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing device to work in a specific manner, so that the instructions stored in the computer readable memory produce an article of manufacture comprising an instruction device, which implements the process Figure 1 a process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The function specified in one or more boxes.

[0148] These computer program instructions can also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing device so that a series of operational steps are executed on the computer or other programmable device to produce a computer-implemented process, thereby providing the instructions executed on the computer or other programmable device for implementing the process. Figure 1 a process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A step that specifies a function in one or more boxes.

[0149] The specific embodiments described above further illustrate the purpose, technical solutions and beneficial effects of the present application. It should be understood that the above description is only a specific embodiment of the present application and is not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present application. Any modifications, equivalent replacements, improvements, etc. made within the spirit and principles of the present application should be included in the scope of protection of the present application.

Claims

1. A method for inter-satellite management based on decentralized competition arbitration, characterized in that: The onboard network management node used for the third satellite includes: In response to the fault information of the first satellite, enabling management of the onboard network equipment of the first satellite; In response to a management status query request from the onboard network management node of the second satellite, feeding back a management success result to the onboard network management node of the second satellite; The third satellite is a target satellite that meets the management conditions and is determined according to the management priority set of the neighboring satellites of the first satellite, and the second satellite is a neighboring satellite of the first satellite except the third satellite.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein The management conditions are that the operation is normal, the system has the ability to manage the onboard network equipment of the first satellite, and the management capability does not reach the upper limit of the management capability.

3. The method according to claim 1, wherein After enabling management of the onboard network equipment of the first satellite, the following steps are also included: Send the successful management result to the ground network management system.

4. A method for inter-satellite management based on decentralized competition arbitration, characterized in that: The onboard network management node used for the second satellite includes: In response to the fault information of the first satellite, if the second satellite can establish a connectivity relationship with the target satellite, sending a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the target satellite, and waiting to receive feedback from the onboard network management node of the target satellite; In response to the fault information of the first satellite, if the second satellite cannot establish a connection with the target satellite, sending a management status query request to the ground network management system and waiting for the ground network management system to feedback a management success result; The target satellite is a satellite determined according to a neighboring satellite inclusion priority set of the first satellite, and the second satellite is a neighboring satellite of the first satellite except the target satellite.

5. The method according to claim 4, wherein Waiting for feedback from the target satellite's onboard network management node, including: If the feedback is a successful management result, it is confirmed that the target satellite is the third satellite, and the successful management result is saved locally on the second satellite. The third satellite is the target satellite that meets the management conditions.

6. The method according to claim 5, wherein Also includes: Sending a management status query request to the onboard network management node of the third satellite according to a preset period; If no feedback is received from the onboard network management node of the third satellite within the first preset time period for a first preset number of consecutive times, a target satellite is obtained that is re-determined according to the neighboring satellite management priority set.

7. The method according to claim 4, wherein Waiting for feedback from the target satellite's onboard network management node, including: If the feedback is not received within the first preset time period for a first preset number of times in a row, or the feedback is a result of a management failure, a target satellite is re-determined according to the neighboring satellite management priority set.

8. The method according to claim 6 or 7, wherein: After obtaining the target satellite re-determined according to the neighboring satellite priority set, it also includes: When the second satellite is the re-determined target satellite and meets the management condition, updating the second satellite to a third satellite; When the second satellite is not the re-determined target satellite, a management status query request is sent to the onboard network management node of the re-determined target satellite.

9. A computer device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein: When the processor executes the computer program, the method according to any one of claims 1 to 8 is implemented.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that The computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the method according to any one of claims 1 to 8 is implemented.

11. A computer program product, characterized in that The computer program product comprises a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the method according to any one of claims 1 to 8 is implemented.

Images