Detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts

Abstract

There are provided measures for detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts Such measures exemplarily comprise receiving distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, determining whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators, and enabling, upon determining that there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

Description

[0001] DETECTION AND HANDLING OF RADIO ACCESS NETWORK CONTROL CONFLICTS

[0002] Field

[0003] Various example embodiments relate to detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts. More specifically, various example embodiments exemplarily relate to measures (including methods, apparatuses and computer program products) for realizing detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts.

[0004] Background

[0005] The present specification generally relates to automated control of network aspects and conflicts involved.

[0006] With the advent of network automation ever since the self-organizing networks (SON) paradigm, with respect to various wireless standards including 3rdGeneration Partnership Project (3GPP) and Open Radio Access Network (O-RAN), optimization and configuration of the radio access networks (RAN) at different time scales (either implicitly or explicitly) has been discussed.

[0007] An example of such optimization and configuration at different time scales is an energy saving use-case, in which cell-switch-OFF mechanisms are performed at timescales of minutes to several hours, while cell sleep and energy saving radio frequency (RF) configuration is performed at smaller time scales usually reaching up to the millisecond range.

[0008] In relation to O-RAN, in recent years, "long-term" and "short-term" control loops for network optimization and configuration have been studied extensively. FIG. 6 shows a schematic diagram of an example of a system environment with interface variants, and in particular illustrates O-RAN network optimization and configuration at various timescales.

[0009] In the O-RAN context, for externally controlled (i.e., external to the RAN nodes, such as distributed units (DU), central units (CU), and radio units (RU) or gNodeBs (gNB)) network optimization and configuration, two control loops operating at two time-scales are defined: Near-Real Time (Near-RT) control loops and Non-Real Time (Non-RT) control loops. The Near-RT control is performed by Near-RT RIC (RIC: RAN intelligent controller) (via E2 interface), while the Non-RT control is performed by service management and orchestration (SMO) / Non-RT RIC (via 01 interfaces). Both interfaces may also be used for data collection, which enables RAN optimization, e.g., by using artificial intelligence (Al) / machine learning (ML) methods.

[0010] If not otherwise explicitly mentioned, in the present specification, variables (e.g. observations Y, states X, parameters p) represent sets / vectors / matrices. If a variable is to represent a scalar (e.g. one component of the mentioned sets / vectors / matrices), this is explicitly stated.

[0011] As an example, an objective may be represented by a set of key performance indicators (KPI) Y (which is a vector where each component Yn is a KPI of interest to the network operator). In the same way, a set of parameters p may include components pn.

[0012] Every network automation use-case has an objective (automation objective) Y which it tries to achieve in the RAN state (environment) X by controlling the parameters (control parameters) p, which can be seen as a part of the state X itself. The relationship M: (X, p) — >Y between X and Y is either modelled using existing expert knowledge or, as is quite common nowadays, using AI / ML. As FIG. 6 shows, the two control loops, i.e., the short-term Near-RT control loop and long-term Non-RT control loop, observe and change the state X.

[0013] To achieve a separation of concerns, one can think of the state X as having the corresponding Xshort and Xiongcomponents. In many cases, Xiongcan be seen as a time-averaged version of a subset of Xshort, i.e., Xiongc E[XShort] (with "E[...]" representing an averaging operator). This means that Xshort contains all the aspects of the RAN in Xiongplus some additional short-term aspects. For example, typically, states related to a specific user equipment (UE) (e.g., radio resources assigned) or a group of UEs are not part of Xiong. Note that Xshort and Xiongare in general not independent from each other, i.e., any changes to Xshort shall affect Xiong, and vice-versa.

[0014] The above also applies to the corresponding Yshort and Yiong, and pshort and piong.

[0015] All these variables may have common elements.

[0016] Due to overlaps and dependencies between Yshort and Yiong, short-term configuration changes made to the RAN by an automation loop affects the long-term performance and states observed by the long-term loop, and vice- versa.

[0017] For the explanations below, it is assumed that Y and p are standardized KPIs and parameters, respectively, whose values can be observed in the RAN . For example, Y can contain handover related parameters (e.g., as components of the mentioned set Y: Yl =radio link failures (RLF), Y2 = number of failed handovers (HO), Y3 = number of wrong cell HOs etc.) and p can contain radio resource control (RRC) parameters (e.g., as components of the mentioned set p: pl= cell individual offset (CIO), p2= time to trigger (TTT)). O-RAN defines its own parameters in E2 service model : key performance measurement (E2SM-KPM) and E2 service model : RAN control (E2SM-RC). However, in general, automation objectives can be further derived or computed from Y by e.g. the business-logic of e.g. an automation function (AF) or cognitive function (CF).

[0018] The task of conflict mitigation is to maintain good RAN performance at both timescales by avoiding harmful conflicts between short-term and long-term network automation.

[0019] "Outer loop" ("outer-loop") as mentioned below refers to, in particular in the context of O-RAN, a long-term control loop, while "inner loop" ("inner-loop") as mentioned below refers to, in particular in the context of O-RAN, a shortterm control loop (in relation to the long-term control loop). In the O-RAN context illustrated in FIG. 6, a Non-RT loop refers to an outer-loop, while a Near-RT loop refers to the inner-loop.

[0020] In 3GPP, network / slice performance assurance by management and orchestration (MNO), services may be performed via the so-called closed control loops (CCL), each targeting a particular performance goal / objective, which in turn is derived from service requirements (e.g., service level agreement (SI_A) or service profile for a particular slice). A CCL may comprise an AF or a CF. In contrast to O-RAN, the timescale of management and configuration loops, and their deployments, may not be specified in 3GPP.

[0021] It is known to detect conflicts between network automation cognitive functions using AI / ML data, where the conflicting functions reside in the same logical node (e.g., Near-RT RIC xApps).

[0022] In a two-tier system such as O-RAN as shown in FIG. 6, at least some of the configuration changes made by the inner-loop (Near-RT RIC) may be invisible from the perspective of the outer-loop (SMO / Non-RT RIC).

[0023] For example, the SMO may not be aware of all E2-related configuration changes made by Near-RT RIC. Thus, any changes in outer-loop observation Yiong or state Xiongdue to the actions on some elements pshort of the inner-loop may be seen as usual random fluctuations in Yiongand Xiong.

[0024] However, in case of a conflict, the outer-loop measurement of the KPI Yiongshall result in a value which may be significantly different (or degraded) from what the network optimization function can safely assume (denoted as Y*iong) as potentially being due to just random fluctuations. In other words, these changes are "deterministic" and caused by the inner-loop.

[0025] In the absence of the knowledge about an on-going conflict with an inner- loop, such errors may be treated as "model errors", i.e., network data / model M1: (Xiong, piong) - Yiong is not representative of the true RAN environment M‘: (Xiong, piong, Xshort, Pshort,) - Y, where Y contains both long-term, short-term, and common KPIs.

[0026] Of course, a network fault may also result in such deviations from normal behavior.

[0027] Irrespective of whether this conflict / error is identified or not, future network optimizations in the outer-loop may not achieve their goal unless the conflict is treated. This may result in harmful effects (i.e., both loops change parameters in a non-aligned way) on network stability and wastage of network resources.

[0028] The same holds true for a 3GPP scenario, where e.g. an inner CCL service provider provides short-term RAN performance assurance to an outer CCL service consumer that is responsible for long-term performance. The outer CCL may provide management-type services to the inner CCL.

[0029] In the following discussion, with respect to observables / variables, common variables (common to the outer-loop and the inner-loop) have the index "comm", while conflicting variables (conflicting among the outer-loop and the inner-loop) have the index "con". Further, variables within the realm of the outer-loop have the (subscript) index "long" or the (superscript) index "I", while variables within the realm of the inner-loop have the (subscript) index "short" or the (superscript) index "s".

[0030] The outer-loop and the inner-loop share some common parameters pComm, i.e., Pcomm :=Plong A Pshort. The Same applies to KPIs Ycomm :=Ylong A Yshort controlled by p comm .

[0031] However, there is a subset Y'con c Yiong that is in conflict (because of interdependence) with a subset YsCOn, c Yshort. These are not part of Ycomm but may be affected by pComm. An increase / improvement in YsCOn correlates with decrease / degradation / deterioration in Y'con .

[0032] However, these can be controlled by p'con c piongand psCOn c pShort, meaning that there may be conflicting but different / non-overlapping parameters (p'con A pscon is an empty set) controlling Y'con and YsCOn.

[0033] Hence, the problem arises that conflicts due to e.g. overlapping parameter control or parameter interdependencies or observations interdependencies are to be mitigated.

[0034] Hence, there is a need to provide for detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts.

[0035] Summary

[0036] Various example embodiments aim at addressing at least part of the above issues and / or problems and drawbacks.

[0037] Various aspects of example embodiments are set out in the appended claims.

[0038] According to an exemplary aspect, there is provided an apparatus comprising means for receiving distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, means for determining whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators, and means for enabling, upon determining that there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

[0039] According to an exemplary aspect, there is provided an apparatus comprising means for transmitting distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, and means for receiving conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict.

[0040] According to an exemplary aspect, there is provided an apparatus comprising at least one processor, and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform receiving distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, determining whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators, and enabling, upon determining that there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

[0041] According to an exemplary aspect, there is provided an apparatus comprising at least one processor, and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform transmitting distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, and receiving conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict.

[0042] According to an exemplary aspect, there is provided a method comprising receiving distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, determining whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators, and enabling, upon determining that there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

[0043] According to an exemplary aspect, there is provided a method comprising transmitting distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, and receiving conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict.

[0044] According to an exemplary aspect, there is provided a computer program product comprising computer-executable computer program code which, when the program is run on a computer (e.g. a computer of an apparatus according to any one of the aforementioned apparatus-related exemplary aspects of the present disclosure), is configured to cause the computer to carry out the method according to any one of the aforementioned method- related exemplary aspects of the present disclosure.

[0045] Such computer program product may comprise (or be embodied) a (tangible) computer-readable (storage) medium or the like on which the computerexecutable computer program code is stored, and / or the program may be directly loadable into an internal memory of the computer or a processor thereof.

[0046] Any one of the above aspects enables an efficient detection of potential conflicts and validation of the detected potential conflicts and the extent thereof to thereby solve at least part of the problems and drawbacks identified in relation to the prior art. By way of example embodiments, there is provided detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts. More specifically, by way of example embodiments, there are provided measures and mechanisms for realizing detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts.

[0047] Thus, improvement is achieved by methods, apparatuses and computer program products enabling / realizing detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts.

[0048] Brief description of the drawings

[0049] In the following, the present disclosure will be described in greater detail by way of non-limiting examples with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which

[0050] FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an apparatus according to example embodiments,

[0051] FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an apparatus according to example embodiments,

[0052] FIG. 3 is a block diagram illustrating an apparatus according to example embodiments,

[0053] FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of a procedure according to example embodiments,

[0054] FIG. 5 is a schematic diagram of a procedure according to example embodiments,

[0055] FIG. 6 shows a schematic diagram of an example of a system environment with interface variants, FIG. 7 shows a schematic diagram of an example of traffic steering processing modes,

[0056] FIG. 8 shows a schematic diagram of signaling sequences according to example embodiments,

[0057] FIG. 9 shows a schematic diagram of signaling sequences according to example embodiments,

[0058] FIG. 10 shows a schematic diagram of an example of a system environment with interface variants according to example embodiments,

[0059] FIG. 11 shows a schematic diagram of signaling sequences according to example embodiments, and

[0060] FIG. 12 is a block diagram alternatively illustrating apparatuses according to example embodiments.

[0061] Detailed description

[0062] The present disclosure is described herein with reference to particular nonlimiting examples and to what are presently considered to be conceivable embodiments. A person skilled in the art will appreciate that the disclosure is by no means limited to these examples, and may be more broadly applied.

[0063] It is to be noted that the following description of the present disclosure and its embodiments mainly refers to specifications being used as non-limiting examples for certain exemplary network configurations and deployments. Namely, the present disclosure and its embodiments are mainly described in relation to 3GPP specifications and O-RAN specifications being used as nonlimiting examples for certain exemplary network configurations and deployments. As such, the description of example embodiments given herein specifically refers to terminology which is directly related thereto. Such terminology is only used in the context of the presented non-limiting examples, and does naturally not limit the disclosure in any way. Rather, any other communication or communication related system deployment, etc. may also be utilized as long as compliant with the features described herein.

[0064] Hereinafter, various embodiments and implementations of the present disclosure and its aspects or embodiments are described using several variants and / or alternatives. It is generally noted that, according to certain needs and constraints, all of the described variants and / or alternatives may be provided alone or in any conceivable combination (also including combinations of individual features of the various variants and / or alternatives).

[0065] As used herein, "at least one of the following : " and "at least one of " and similar wording, where the list of two or more elements are joined by "and" or "or", mean at least any one of the elements, or at least any two or more of the elements, or at least all the elements.

[0066] According to example embodiments, in general terms, there are provided measures and mechanisms for (enabling / realizing) detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts.

[0067] Both loops (especially the inner-loop) may be deployed dynamically on- demand. This is specifically provisioned by both O-RAN and 3GPP SA5. In such cases, all the observables discussed above (i.e., p, Y, X, etc., for the realms of the inner-loop and the outer-loop) must be discovered / detected after deployment as part of conflict detection.

[0068] Conflict mitigation is necessary because of the following reasons:

[0069] 1. Direct conflict: Two loops may change the value of the same / common RAN control parameters pComm in a contradictory fashion to optimize certain different but inter-dependent objective KPIs Y'con and YsCOn. For example, the inner-loop may improve some common KPIs Ycomm in Yiongand Yshort, but degrade some Y'con in Yiongas it tries to improve YsCOn.

[0070] 2. Indirect conflict: Two loops may optimize different but inter-dependent network KPIs Y'con and Ysconto achieve their performance objectives by actions p'con and pscon. An improvement in Ysconmay lead to deterioration in Y'con.

[0071] 3. Counter-productiveness: The goal of the two-tier system is that, when combined, outer-loop and inner-loop should work together to enhance common KPIs Ycomm, since otherwise this combination is counterproductive. It is reasonable to assume that short-term improvements in Ycomm made by inner-loop through pComm should enhance also E[Ycomm], i.e., the corresponding long-term (e.g. averaged) values in Yiong. However, this may only be guaranteed if both loops are aligned and do not change pComm in a conflicting manner.

[0072] According to example embodiments, the problem of conflict mitigation between network automation functions (which include multi-vendor closed control loops) that operate at different timescales and that may reside in different logical nodes (as in O-RAN) are considered. In other words, according to example embodiments, the problem of conflict mitigation for the above three cases is addressed, assuming that potentially conflicting variables are not all known a-priori.

[0073] Concrete examples for the above conflict scenarios are given below. Of course, example embodiments are not limited to these exemplary concrete scenarios.

[0074] 1. Direct conflict: mobility robustness optimization (MRO) vs trafficsteering use-case: These use-cases have pComm, namely the handover parameters. Both of these can be deployed in outer or inner-loops. The traffic-steering actions to pComm may be changed by MRO, and vice versa.

[0075] 2. Indirect conflict: Energy Savings vs QoS / QOE Enhancement: The cell- switch-OFF performed by SMO / OAM is based on long-term traffic / load statistics, and the main KPI Ycon is energy savings of a gNB. For the short-term quality of service (QoS) / quality of experience (QoE), a conflicting KPI YsCOn is the QoS / QOE enhancement for a certain group of users which may require switching ON of a cell previously switched OFF cell by SMO / OAM. An increase / improvement in YsCOn generally correlates with an decrease / deterioration in Y’con.. Counter-productiveness: mobility robustness optimization (MRO) vs beam-based mobility robustness optimization (bMRO) use-case: MRO use-case objective is to improve the mobility performance KPIs (measured by radio link failures (RLF), various types of handover failure types etc.). Long term MRO outer-control loop configures the cell individual offset (CIO) parameter for neighboring target cells of a given source cell. The short-term bMRO control inner-loop configures individual offset (CIO) parameter for neighboring target cells / beams of a given source cell / beam . Both sub use-cases may operate at different timescales (KPI observations and CIO control). Obviously, in this case both control loops target the same control parameter pComm. The job of Near-RT RIC is to deal with short-term issues in RLFs (e.g., for a group of users in a particular beam). These issues are not observable or predictable at the outer-loop in Xiong.

[0076] In O-RAN, p comm i s defined as CIOcomm= CIO 'comm + ACIOscomm, i .e., the Near-RT RIC bMRO adds "offsets" after observing issues in Xshort and Yshort to the "default" value ClO'comm configured by SMO's MRO. However, the actual configured value in RRC is always CIO comm, SO if SMO resets ClO'comm, then ACIOscomm is no longer optimal. This is undesirable, and it must be made sure that when Near-RT RIC is dealing with short term issues in RLFs, the outer-loop MRO should either not make its own adjustments to ClOcomm or allow for certain deviation / tolerance in ClOcomm with a knowledge that there may be issues going on for certain user groups and beams that it is not aware of. In addition thereto, a traffic Steering use-case is explained with reference to FIG. 7. Traffic steering has three modes, and these modes are interchangeable. In baseline Mode 0, the Near-RT RIC is not used, as SMO uses 01 directly to configure RAN nodes. However, if SMO can also directly change the configuration, this could lead to conflicts in parameter configuration or to performance degradation in Mode 1 and Mode 2.

[0077] In view of the above, in brief, according to example embodiments, a conflict mitigation framework provides the following features and capabilities:

[0078] - According to example embodiments, an ongoing conflict between two configuration control loops operating at two different timescales can be detected. The detection is performed by the inner-loop based on some instructions by the outer-loop. The detection involves: o Detection of potential conflicts from knowledge of deployment of the two control loops and their control targets (nodes and (network) functions) in the RAN, o Discovery of the potentially conflicting variables in Yiong, piong, Yshort, a nd Pshort, o Observation of RAN data: After detection and discovery, a conflict scope / context has been created by the inner-loop, in which the inner-loop observes RAN data.

[0079] With respect to indirect conflicts and counter-productiveness, according to example embodiments, for any affected KPI Yiong, its short-term variations resulting from the inner-loop's actions pscon should aggregate / average to at least within a tolerance / range of the value Yiongexpected from the outer-loop optimization. This tolerance and the averaging time-window is part of the instructions above provided by the outer-loop. The tolerance is in terms of degradation, since otherwise there does not exist a conflict.

[0080] With respect to direct conflicts and counter-productiveness, according to example embodiments, for a control parameter in pComm, shared between the two loops, its short-term change pscomm must be at least within a tolerance / range of its outer-loop configuration p'comm. This tolerance may be set by the outer-loop automation function (refer for example to the bMRO / MRO example given above).

[0081] The detection of conflicts (direct conflicts, indirect conflicts, and counterproductiveness) according to example embodiments may represent a first step in the inner-loop leading to ultimately avoiding and resolving conflicts with the outer-loop.

[0082] With respect to 3GPP related scenarios, it is noted that conflicts can be detected if one CCL acts as an outer-loop for another inner-loop CCL. For example, the CLL with a longer-term execution cycle, e.g., energy saving CCL, can be an outer loop for another CLL with a shorter-term execution cycle, e.g., a load balancing CCL. Alternatively, conflicts may be detected by an entity managing the inner-loop CCLs. In both cases, the outer-loop is the consumer of certain control services of the inner-loop.

[0083] Example embodiments are specified below in more detail.

[0084] FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an apparatus according to example embodiments. The apparatus may be a network node or entity 10 such as an inner loop entity (or a network node or entity providing such functionality, i.e., providing an inner control loop functionality, i.e., functionality of a control loop which has a superior control loop) comprising a receiving circuitry 11, a determining circuitry 12, and an enabling circuitry 13. The receiving circuitry 1 receives distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators. The determining circuitry 12 determines whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators. The enabling circuitry 13 enables, upon determining that (i.e., if) there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

[0085] The first control loop entity may be a network node or entity providing an outer control loop functionality, i.e., functionality of a control loop which is superior to the inner control loop.

[0086] The network state indicators may be key performance indicators.

[0087] The second control loop entity may be the network node or entity providing the inner control loop functionality.

[0088] The distortion tolerance information and control target information may be denoted as conflict monitoring context (or conflict context).

[0089] The control target information may, in the context of 3GPP, a managed object which is being controlled.

[0090] The first network control efforts may further relate to control parameters.

[0091] The set of first network state indicators may be denoted as Yiong.

[0092] The set of second network state indicators may be denoted as Yshort.

[0093] FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of a procedure according to example embodiments. The apparatus according to FIG. 1 may perform the method of FIG. 4 but is not limited to this method. The method of FIG. 4 may be performed by the apparatus of FIG. 1 but is not limited to being performed by this apparatus.

[0094] As shown in FIG. 4, a procedure according to example embodiments comprises an operation of receiving (S41) distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, an operation of determining (S42) whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators, and an operation of enabling (S43), upon determining that there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

[0095] FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an apparatus according to example embodiments. In particular, FIG. 2 illustrates a variation of the apparatus shown in FIG. 1. The apparatus according to FIG. 2 may thus further comprise a monitoring circuitry 21, a deciding circuitry 22, a calculating circuitry 23, and / or a transmitting circuitry 24.

[0096] In an embodiment at least some of the functionalities of the apparatus shown in FIG. 1 (or 2) may be shared between two physically separate devices forming one operational entity. Therefore, the apparatus may be seen to depict the operational entity comprising one or more physically separate devices for executing at least some of the described processes. In addition, in an embodiment at least some of the functionalities of the apparatus shown in FIG. 1 (or 2) may be shared between two separate software entities operating on a same hardware and separated / connected via a logical interface. Therefore, the apparatus may be seen to depict the operational entity comprising one or more separate software entities for executing at least some of the described processes.

[0097] According to further example embodiments, said first control target includes at least one of the following: a first network entity targeted by said first network control efforts, or a network function of said first network entity targeted by said first network control efforts.

[0098] According to further example embodiments, said second control target includes at least one of the following: a second network entity targeted by said second network control efforts, or a network function of said second network entity targeted by said second network control efforts.

[0099] According to further example embodiments, said overlap between said second control target and said first control target is determined, if said second control target and said first control target are same.

[0100] Determining whether there is an overlap between said second control target and said first control target may be denoted as a potential-conflict detection.

[0101] According to further example embodiments, said distortion tolerance information includes at least one of the following: a set of control parameter value ranges for a set of first control parameters of said first control loop entity, said set of control parameter value ranges being tolerable by said first control loop entity, or a set of expected first network state indicators expected by said first control loop entity as a result of said first control efforts, a set of deviations of a set of determined period-representative first network state indicators from said set of expected first network state indicators, said set of deviations being tolerable by said first control loop entity, and a set of observation windows for determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators.

[0102] The set of control parameter value ranges may be denoted as prange.

[0103] The set of first control parameters may be denoted as piong.

[0104] The set of expected first network state indicators may be denoted as Y*iong.

[0105] The set of deviations may be denoted as ytoi.

[0106] The set of observation windows may be denoted as yaVg_w.

[0107] According to a variation of the procedure shown in FIG. 4, exemplary additional operations are given, which are inherently independent from each other as such. According to such variation, an exemplary method according to example embodiments may comprise an operation of receiving observation information including at least one of the following: a set of actual first network state indicators, said set of first control parameters.

[0108] The set of actual first network state indicators may be denoted as Yiong .

[0109] The observation information may further include a set of actual second network state indicators, which may be denoted as Yshort.

[0110] The observation information may further include a set of second control parameters of said second control loop entity, which may be denoted as pshort.

[0111] According to a variation of the procedure shown in FIG. 4, exemplary additional operations are given, which are inherently independent from each other as such. According to such variation, an exemplary method according to example embodiments may comprise an operation of determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators based on each of sets of actual first network state indicators received over periods corresponding to said set of observation windows, an operation of monitoring whether said set of period-representative first network state indicators exceed said set of expected first network state indicators by more than indicated by said set of deviations, and an operation of deciding, if said set of period-representative first network state indicators exceed said set of expected first network state indicators by more than indicated by said set of deviations, that said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

[0112] According to a variation of the procedure shown in FIG. 4, exemplary details of the determining operation (determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators) are given, which are inherently independent from each other as such. Such exemplary determining operation (determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators) according to example embodiments may comprise an operation of calculating said set of period-representative first network state indicators based on said sets of actual first network state indicators received over periods corresponding to said set of observation windows.

[0113] An observation window, in a way, is an instruction or guideline by the outer loop to the inner loop about how it can use the inner loop's observation of network state indicators (e.g. Yiong) and compute an equivalent outer loop observation of the network state indicators (e.g. Yiong).

[0114] In a simple case (averaging), the inner loop observes the network state indicators (e.g. Yiong) for a certain time and then calculates an average thereof. For example, the inner loop calculates an average energy consumption of the RAN node after observing this KPI = Yiong for a certain amount of time. In a more general case, this computation could be more elaborate than a simple average. For example, the outer loop may ask the inner loop to observe several KPIs (e.g. several types of energy consumptions) and then compute a function over them to compute the final value of the network state indicators (e.g. Yiong).

[0115] According to a variation of the procedure shown in FIG. 4, exemplary details of the calculating operation (calculating said set of period-representative first network state indicators) are given, which are inherently independent from each other as such. Such exemplary calculating operation (calculating said set of period-representative first network state indicators) according to example embodiments may comprise an operation of calculating averages of each of said sets of actual first network state indicators received over periods corresponding to said set of observation windows as said set of periodrepresentative first network state indicators.

[0116] According to a variation of the procedure shown in FIG. 4, exemplary additional operations are given, which are inherently independent from each other as such. According to such variation, an exemplary method according to example embodiments may comprise an operation of monitoring whether a set of second control parameters of said second control loop entity include at least one control parameter which is included in said set of first control parameters and exceeds said control parameter value range for said control parameter, and an operation of deciding, if said set of second control parameters include said at least one control parameter which is included in said set of first control parameters and exceeds said control parameter value range for said control parameter, that said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

[0117] The set of second control parameters may be denoted as pshort. According to a variation of the procedure shown in FIG. 4, exemplary additional operations are given, which are inherently independent from each other as such. According to such variation, an exemplary method according to example embodiments may comprise an operation of transmitting, if said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts, conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict, said conflict information including at least one of the following: information on said first control target, or information on exceedance of said set of control parameter value ranges for said set of first control parameters, or information on exceedance of said set of deviations from said set of expected first network state indicators.

[0118] The conflict information including at least one of information on said first control target, information on exceedance of said set of control parameter value ranges for said set of first control parameters, or information on exceedance of said set of deviations from said set of expected first network state indicators, may be denoted as a conflict report.

[0119] According to further example embodiments, said network node or entity 10 (and the corresponding method of FIG. 4) comprises a platform entity including said functionality for receiving said distortion tolerance information and said control target information (means for receiving said distortion tolerance information and said control target information; receiving circuitry), said functionality for determining whether there is an overlap between said second control target and said first control target (means for determining whether there is an overlap between said second control target and said first control target; determining circuitry), and said functionality for enabling said monitoring (means for enabling said monitoring; enabling circuitry), and a conflict monitoring entity, wherein said platform entity further comprises functionality for transmitting, if there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, towards said conflict monitoring entity, as conflict check request information, said distortion tolerance information, said control target information, and information on said second control target (means for transmitting, if there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, towards said conflict monitoring entity, as conflict check request information, said distortion tolerance information, said control target information, and information on said second control target; transmitting circuitry), and wherein said conflict monitoring entity comprises functionality for receiving, from said platform entity, as said conflict check request information, said distortion tolerance information, said control target information, and said information on said second control target (means for receiving, from said platform entity, as said conflict check request information, said distortion tolerance information, said control target information, and said information on said second control target; receiving circuitry), and functionality for deciding, if there is an overlap between said second control target and said first control target and if said second control loop entity is enabled to affect at least one control parameter with respect to said second control target, to monitor whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts (means for deciding, if there is an overlap between said second control target and said first control target and if said second control loop entity is enabled to affect at least one control parameter with respect to said second control target, to monitor whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts; deciding circuitry).

[0120] The platform entity may be denoted as Near- Rea I -Time RAN intelligent controller (RAN : radio access network; RIC: RAN intelligent controller) or Near-Real-Time platform entity. The conflict monitoring entity may be an application (xapplication: xApp) related to conflict mitigation (ConMit xApp).

[0121] According to further example embodiments, in said network node or entity 10 (and the corresponding method of FIG. 4), said conflict monitoring entity further comprises functionality for transmitting, if it is decided to monitor whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts, a subscription for reports in relation to said observation information (means for transmitting, if it is decided to monitor whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts, a subscription for reports in relation to said observation information; transmitting circuitry).

[0122] According to further example embodiments, in said network node or entity 10 (and the corresponding method of FIG. 4), said conflict monitoring entity further comprises said functionality for receiving said observation information (means for receiving said observation information; receiving circuitry).

[0123] According to further example embodiments, in said network node or entity 10 (and the corresponding method of FIG. 4), said conflict monitoring entity further comprises said functionality for determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators (means for determining said set of periodrepresentative first network state indicators; determining functionality), said functionality for monitoring whether said set of periodrepresentative first network state indicators exceed said set of expected first network state indicators by more than indicated by said set of deviations (means for monitoring whether said set of period-representative first network state indicators exceed said set of expected first network state indicators by more than indicated by said set of deviations; monitoring circuitry), and said functionality for deciding that said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts (means for deciding that said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts; deciding circuitry).

[0124] According to further example embodiments, first control cycle of said first control loop entity is longer than a second control cycle of said second control loop entity.

[0125] FIG. 3 is a block diagram illustrating an apparatus according to example embodiments. The apparatus may be a network node or entity 30 such as an outer loop entity (or a network node or entity providing such functionality, i.e., providing an outer control loop functionality, i.e., functionality of a control loop which is superior to an inner control loop) comprising a transmitting circuitry 31 and a receiving circuitry 32. The transmitting circuitry 31 transmits distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators. The receiving circuitry 32 receives conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict.

[0126] The first control loop entity may be a network node or entity providing an outer control loop functionality, i.e., functionality of a control loop which is superior to an inner control loop.

[0127] The network state indicators may be key performance indicators. The distortion tolerance information and control target information may be denoted as conflict monitoring context (or conflict context).

[0128] The control target information may, in the context of 3GPP, a managed object which is being controlled.

[0129] The first network control efforts may further relate to control parameters.

[0130] The set of first network state indicators may be denoted as Yiong.

[0131] FIG. 5 is a schematic diagram of a procedure according to example embodiments. The apparatus according to FIG. 3 may perform the method of FIG. 5 but is not limited to this method. The method of FIG. 5 may be performed by the apparatus of FIG. 3 but is not limited to being performed by this apparatus.

[0132] As shown in FIG. 5, a procedure according to example embodiments comprises an operation of transmitting (S51) distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, and an operation of receiving (S52) conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict.

[0133] In an embodiment at least some of the functionalities of the apparatus shown in FIG. 3 may be shared between two physically separate devices forming one operational entity. Therefore, the apparatus may be seen to depict the operational entity comprising one or more physically separate devices for executing at least some of the described processes. In addition, in an embodiment at least some of the functionalities of the apparatus shown in FIG. 3 may be shared between two separate software entities operating on a same hardware and separated / connected via a logical interface. Therefore, the apparatus may be seen to depict the operational entity comprising one or more separate software entities for executing at least some of the described processes.

[0134] According to further example embodiments, said distortion tolerance information includes at least one of the following: a set of control parameter value ranges for a set of first control parameters of said first control loop entity, said set of control parameter value ranges being tolerable by said first control loop entity, or a set of expected first network state indicators expected by said first control loop entity as a result of said first control efforts, a set of deviations of a set of determined period-representative first network state indicators from said set of expected first network state indicators, said set of deviations being tolerable by said first control loop entity, and a set of observation windows for determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators.

[0135] According to further example embodiments, said conflict information include at least one of the following: information on said first control target, or information on exceedance of said set of control parameter value ranges for said set of first control parameters, or information on exceedance of said set of deviations from said set of expected first network state indicators.

[0136] The set of control parameter value ranges may be denoted as prange.

[0137] The set of first control parameters may be denoted as piong.

[0138] The set of expected first network state indicators may be denoted as Y*iong.

[0139] The set of deviations may be denoted as ytoi. The set of observation windows may be denoted as yavg_w.

[0140] According to further example embodiments, said first control target includes at least one of the following: a first network entity targeted by said first network control efforts, or a network function of said first network entity targeted by said first network control efforts.

[0141] Example embodiments outlined and specified above are explained below in more specific terms.

[0142] Example embodiments are explained below for a general scenario, for a 3GPP related scenario, as well as for an O-RAN related scenario.

[0143] Here, the formulation "outer loop" ("outer-loop") is to be understood as being somehow superior to an inner loop while the formulation "inner loop" ("inner- loop") is to be understood as somehow having a superior outer loop.

[0144] As such, the outer loop is normally assumed to have a longer timing based, while the inner loop is normally assumed to have a shorter timing base (shorter than that of the outer loop). However, example embodiments are not limited to such timing relationships.

[0145] As mentioned above, in the context of 3GPP, inner-loops are located inside the RAN (both Near-RT and RT), while outer-loops are controlled by operations, administration and maintenance (OAM).

[0146] On the other hand, as mentioned above, in the context of O-RAN, a Non-RT loop may refer to an outer-loop, while a Near-RT loop may refer to the inner- loop. For O-RAN, these loops are executed by functions (e.g., xApps) inside logical nodes (e.g., Near-RT RIC) together with the Near-RT RIC platform. Furthermore, in O-RAN conflict mitigation by inner-loop is performed by the Near-RT RIC platform along with the xApps.

[0147] FIG. 8 shows a schematic diagram of signaling sequences according to example embodiments, in particular according to example embodiments related to a general scenario.

[0148] In a step 1 of FIG. 8, according to example embodiments, the outer-loop (after observing network state Xiongand KPIs Yiong) sends the new configuration piongto the RAN node. Yiong may be standardized KPIs obtained from RAN. These may be further processed by the outer-loop to derive its objectives.

[0149] In a step 2 of FIG. 8, according to example embodiments, the outer-loop sends conflict monitoring context to the inner-loop. This context may include acceptable / expected value Y*iongof Yiong, the tolerance ytoi, the range prange for piong, the observation / averaging window yaVg_w for Yiong, and information about the RAN node and RAN function (e.g., RRC functionality).

[0150] In a step 3 of FIG. 8, according to example embodiments, the inner-loop collects both relevant long-term and short-term KPIs and parameters from the RAN. The inner-loop initiates control / policy optimization loop toward the same RAN node(s) and starts monitoring (step 3(b) of FIG. 8) the conflict only if it detects (step 3(a) of FIG. 8) a potential conflict in the conflict monitoring context. This potential / possibility is detected by observing that the same RAN node and / or RAN function is being accessed by both loops, which may affect Yiongand / or piong. Any prior information regarding dependence (between Yiongand Yshort) or parameter overlaps (pComm) may be used. In a step 4 of FIG. 8, according to example embodiments, the inner-loop detects a conflict with the outer-loop for any of the overlapping / inter- dependent KPIs or parameters: Either its calculated / optimized value of some parameter pShort goes beyond prange (i.e., pshort belongs to pComm) or the averaged value of some objective KPI Yiongdegrades beyond the tolerance ytoi (possible KPI overlap in Ycomm or inter-dependence between any components of Yiong and Yshort) . It is noted that example embodiments are not limited to an averaged value of some objective KPI Yiong, but any function of the some objective KPI Yiong which may be representative of the indicated time window besides an average value may be used instead.

[0151] With respect to the detection in step 4 of FIG. 8, according to example embodiments, the inner-loop can know all of the conflicting variables in Yiong and Yshort, piong and pshort, because it can observe the changes in these variables and can perform simple correlation analysis to see any dependence in these variables. By this analysis, the inner loop can infer [Ycomm, Y1con, Pcomm, pscon, Yscon, and p’con] . This may be denoted as conflict information.

[0152] FIG. 9 shows a schematic diagram of signaling sequences according to example embodiments, in particular according to example embodiments related to a 3GPP scenario.

[0153] In a step 1 of FIG. 9, according to example embodiments, (after observing network state Xiong and KPIs Yiong), the management services (MnS) consumer (i.e., the outer loop) configures the new configuration piong to the managed object.

[0154] In a step 2 of FIG. 9, according to example embodiments, as a CCL control MnS consumer, the outer loop sends / configures conflict monitoring context to the inner loop / CCL. The conflict monitoring context may include the acceptable / expected value Y*iong of Yiong, the tolerance ytoi, the range prange for piong, the observation / averaging window yaVg_w for Yiong, and information about the managed object and RAN function (e.g., RRC for handover parameters). In a step 3 of FIG. 9, according to example embodiments, the inner loop / CCL evaluates (step 3(a) of FIG. 9) the potential / possibility of conflict, detected by observing that the same managed object and / or RAN function is being accessed by both loops, which may affect Yiongand / or piong. Any prior information regarding dependence (between Yiongand Yshort) or parameter overlaps (p comm ) may be used.

[0155] In step 3 of FIG. 9, further, the inner loop / CCL initiates control / policy optimization loop toward the same managed object(s) and the inner loop / CCL may (prior to configuration) collect the relevant long-term and shortterm KPIs and parameters from the managed object(s), and, if it has detected (step 3(a) of FIG. 9) a potential conflict in the conflict monitoring context, the inner loop / CCL monitors (step 3(b) of FIG. 9) to see if any conflicts are detected for any of the overlapping / interdependent KPIs or parameters.

[0156] In a step 4 of FIG. 9, according to example embodiments, the inner loop / CCL detects conflicts in that either its calculated / optimized value of some parameter pShort goes beyond prange (i.e., pshort belongs to pComm) or the averaged value of some objective KPI Yiongdegrades beyond the tolerance ytoi (possible KPI overlap in Ycomm or inter-dependence between any components of Yiong and Yshort) . It is noted that example embodiments are not limited to an averaged value of some objective KPI Yiong, but any function of the some objective KPI Yiongwhich may be representative of the indicated time window besides an average value may be used instead.

[0157] With respect to the detection in step 4 of FIG. 9, according to example embodiments, the inner-loop can know all of the conflicting variables in Yiongand Yshort, piong and pshort, because it can observe the changes in these variables and can perform simple correlation analysis to see any dependence in these variables. By this analysis, the inner loop can infer [Ycomm, Y1con, Pcomm, pscon, Yscon, and p’con] . This may be denoted as conflict information. In a step 5 of FIG. 9, according to example embodiments, the inner loop / CCL reports conflict information to the outer loop / CCL control MnS consumer. The conflict information may include information on the detected / discovered conflict(s) and related variables.

[0158] Various definitions and requirements (reflecting the principles laid out above in relation to example embodiments related to a 3GPP scenario) for example embodiments related to a 3GPP scenario and in particular an SA5 use case are provided:

[0159] Use case:

[0160] It is possible that conflicts may occur for the desired parameter or metric values of 2 CCLs or between a CCL and another entity. It is as such necessary to have means to detect any occurrence of such conflicts.

[0161] (Potential) requirements:

[0162] The 3GPP management system / the CCL control management service producer shall support a capability to detect conflicts on the desired parameter or (performance) metric values of two CCLs or the desired parameter or metric values between a CCL and another entity.

[0163] The 3GPP management system / the CCL control management service producer shall support a capability to send conflict monitoring context to the inner loop / CCL. The conflict monitoring context includes: acceptable / expected long-term value for some metric, e.g. "ExpectedMetricValues", the tolerance in the long-term value for the some metric, e.g. "MetricValueTolerances", the range the long-term value for some shared parameter, e.g. "ParameterValueRanges", the observation / averaging window for computing the long-term value for the some metric, e.g. "MetricValueAveragingWindows", and information about the managed objects (e.g., R.R.C for handover parameters). The 3GPP management system / the CCL control management service producer shall support a capability to report to the MnS consumer information about conflict detected by a CCL in a conflict report, e.g. "ConflictReport".

[0164] The 3GPP management system / the CCL control management service producer shall support a capability to report in e.g. "ConflictReport" to the MnS consumer information on possible overlap between or inter-dependence between metrics and parameters.

[0165] The 3GPP management system / the CCL control management service producer shall support a capability to report in e.g. "ConflictReport" to the MnS consumer information on degree to which the computed value for the shared parameter exceeds the pre-defined e.g. "ParameterValueRanges" in e.g. "ConflictReport".

[0166] The 3GPP management system / the CCL control management service producer shall support a capability to report in e.g. "ConflictReport" to the MnS consumer information on degree to which the computed value for an affected metric degrades beyond the predefined e.g. "MetricValueTolerances".

[0167] Solution:

[0168] In view thereof, data types for conflict monitoring context on the CCL are introduced, e.g. "conflictMonitoringContext" and "ConflictReport".

[0169] The conflictMonitoringContext may include: managed object (i.e., RAN node / function) identifications, e.g. "ManagedObjectIDs", acceptable / expected long-term values for the shared metrics, e.g. "ExpectedMetricValues", the tolerances in the long-term values for the shared metrics, e.g. "MetricValueTolerances", the ranges for the shared / conflicting parameters, e.g. "ParameterValueRanges", and the observation / averaging windows for computing the long-term values for the shared metrics, e.g. "MetricValueAveragingWindows", where at least the attributes "ExpectedMetricValues", "MetricValueTolerances", "ParameterValueRanges", and "MetricValueAveragingWindows" each includes a list of name-value tuples (e.g. a list of "metric name: metric value" pairs).

[0170] The "conflictReport" may include: identifications of conflicted RAN functions, e.g. "ManagedObjectIDs", the tolerance violations in the long-term values for the shared metrics, e.g. "MetricValueToleranceViolations", and the violations of ranges for the shared / conflicting parameters, e.g. "ParameterValueRangeViolations", where at least the attributes "MetricValueToleranceViolations" and "ParameterValueRangeViolations" each includes a list of namevalue tuples (e.g. a list of "metric name: metric value" pairs).

[0171] Various SA5 classes and data types for the example embodiments related to the SA5 use case in the 3GPP scenario are provided:

[0172] The information object class (IOC) "CCL or closed control loop" is defined as representing the properties of a closed control loop.

[0173] The IOC "CCL or closed control loop" includes the attributes given in the following table:

[0174]

[0175] The data type "conflictMonitoringContext" (conflict monitoring context) is defined as representing the properties of a context to be monitored for conflicts. It defines the scope of the CCL that should be monitored and provides information on how to detect conflicts. The conflict monitoring context includes: the acceptable / expected long-term values for the shared metrics, e.g. "ExpectedMetricValues", the tolerances in the long-term values for the shared metrics, e.g. "MetricValueTolerances", the ranges of the long-term values of parameters, e.g. "ParameterValueRanges", the observation / averaging windows for computing the long-term values for the shared metrics, e.g. "MetricValueAveragingWindows", and information about the managed objects (e.g., RRC for handover parameters). The data type "conflictMonitoringContext" includes the attributes given in the following table:

[0176]

[0177] The data type "conflictReport" (conflict report) is defined as representing the properties of the report on detected conflicts. It contains the ID of managed object in the conflict context if a conflict has been detected in this context between the two loops or entities.

[0178] The data type "conflictReport" includes the attributes given in the following table:

[0179] While there are no attribute constraints, notifications specified for IOCS using data type "conflictMonitoringContext" or data type "conflictReport" for its attribute(s) shall be applicable.

[0180] FIG. 10 shows a schematic diagram of an example of a system environment with interface variants according to example embodiments, and in particular illustrates an exemplary O-RAN system. FIG. 11 shows a schematic diagram of signaling sequences according to example embodiments, and in particular according to example embodiments related to an O-RAN scenario.

[0181] In O-RAN, as shown in FIG. 6 and 10, the interface between the outer-loop node (SMO) and the RAN is the 01 interface, and the interface between the inner-loop node (near-RT RIC) and the RAN is the E2 interface. The interface between SMO and the near-RT RIC is the 01 interface. However, as can be seen in FIG. 10, there is no direct interface between network automation functions in SMO (or inside Non-RT RIC) and the xApps inside near-RT RIC. The conflict detection, resolution, and avoidance between xApps and SMO is facilitated by the conflict mitigation functionality using 01-related and Near- RT RIC APIs. Therefore, to support the signaling presented in FIG. 8 (general scenario), according to example embodiments, Near-RT RIC APIs are also involved.

[0182] With respect to O-RAN scenarios, it is assumed that the platform only understands "access level" information (RAN nodes and RAN functions) but does not understand RAN KPIs and parameters. In O-RAN, an xApp subscribes to a RAN node and RAN functions offered by the RAN node (in E2 setup). Subscription to RAN functions allow the xApp to either receive reports on certain KPIs (defined by E2 service model : key performance measurement (E2SM-KPM) information) or to perform parameter changes (defined by E2 service model : RAN control (E2SM-RC) / E2 service model : cell configuration and control (E2SM-CCC) information) in the RAN node. The platform understands which RAN node and functions an xApp has subscribed to, but not E2 service model (E2SM) information.

[0183] In a step 1 of FIG. 11, according to example embodiments, the SMO (after observing network state Xiongand KPIs Yiong) sends the new configuration piongto the RAN node.

[0184] In a step 2 of FIG. 11, according to example embodiments, the SMO sends conflict monitoring context to the Near-RT RIC platform conflict mitigation. This context may include the acceptable / expected value Y*iongof Yiong, the tolerance ytoi, the range prange for piong, the observation / averaging window yavg_w for Yiong, and information about the RAN node and RAN function (e.g., RRC functionality) it has configured. The platform does not understand the meaning of Y and p variables (E2SM level information) in the conflict monitoring context.

[0185] In a step 3 of FIG. 11, according to example embodiments, the xApp subscribes to the RAN node via the platform. Similarly, the platform knows which RAN node and RAN functions the xApp wants to configure but does not understand the E2SM information inside RIC actions. This E2SM information contains Y and p relevant to the xApp.

[0186] In particular, in a step 3(a) of FIG. 11, according to example embodiments, the platform detects O1-E2 overlap: The Near-RT RIC platform (conflict mitigation) detects that SMO and xApp are controlling configuration of the same RAN node. The Near-RT RIC platform requests the ConMit ("conflict mitigation") xApp to check for possible conflicts and sends conflict monitoring information. This contains the 01 conflict monitoring context, xApp subscribed node and functions, and the cause of potential conflict.

[0187] Further, in a step 3(b) of FIG. 11, according to example embodiments, the ConMit xApp detects an 01-E2 potential conflict: The ConMit xApp detects a potential conflict after detecting that both SMO and xApp are accessing the same RAN node and both may change RAN parameters (0-RAN assumption: ConMit xApp understands the variables Y and p in conflict monitoring context). As a response, the ConMit xApp subscribes to the RAN node to monitor the potentially conflicting RAN parameters and KPIs (SMO relevant and Near-RT RIC relevant). This is done by triggering periodic reports so that the RAN node can report RAN parameters and KPIs information whenever there are changes made by Near-RT RIC (indirectly the xApp).

[0188] Further, in a step 3(c) of FIG. 11, according to example embodiments, the ConMit xApp monitors for conflicts: After receiving relevant data from the RAN node, the ConMit xApp monitors for 01-E2 conflicts. In a step 4 of FIG. 11, according to example embodiments, the ConMit xApp detects a conflict between xApp and SMO for any of the overlapping / inter- dependent KPIs or parameters: Either some parameter pShort changed by Near-RT RIC in the RAN Node (and reported to ConMit in step 3(c) of FIG. 11) goes beyond prange (i.e., pshort belongs to pComm) or the averaged value of some objective KPI Yiongdegrades beyond the tolerance ytoi (possible KPI overlap in Ycomm or inter-dependence between any components of Yiongand Yshort) . It is noted that example embodiments are not limited to an averaged value of some objective KPI Yiong, but any function of the some objective KPI Yiong which may be representative of the indicated time window besides an average value may be used instead.

[0189] With respect to steps 3(c) and 4 of FIG. 11, in relation to the detection, it is noted that the ConMit xApp knows all of the conflicting variables in Yiong and Yshort , piong a nd pshort, because it can observe the changes in these variables and can perform, e.g., simple correlation analysis to see any dependence in these variables. By this analysis, the ConMit xApp can infer [Ycomm, Y1con, Pcomm, pscon, Yscon, and p'con] , which may be denoted as conflict information.

[0190] A ConMit xApp may be part of conflict mitigation inside a Near-RT RIC platform in FIG. 01. The signaling between ConMit xApp and platform (conflict mitigation) would then be internal. Therefore, the conflict detection according to example embodiments may also be used in O-RAN products having SMO and Near-RT RIC.

[0191] The above-described procedures and functions may be implemented by respective functional elements, processors, or the like, as described below.

[0192] In the foregoing exemplary description of the network entity, only the units that are relevant for understanding the principles of the disclosure have been described using functional blocks. The network entity may comprise further units that are necessary for its respective operation. However, a description of these units is omitted in this specification. The arrangement of the functional blocks of the devices is not construed to limit the disclosure, and the functions may be performed by one block or further split into sub-blocks.

[0193] When in the foregoing description it is stated that the apparatus, i.e. network node or entity (or some other means) is configured to perform some function, this is to be construed to be equivalent to a description stating that a (i.e. at least one) processor or corresponding circuitry, potentially in cooperation with computer program code stored in the memory of the respective apparatus, is configured to cause the apparatus to perform at least the thus mentioned function. Also, such function is to be construed to be equivalently implementable by specifically configured circuitry or means for performing the respective function (i.e. the expression "unit configured to" is construed to be equivalent to an expression such as "means for").

[0194] In FIG. 12, an alternative illustration of apparatuses according to example embodiments is depicted. As indicated in FIG. 12, according to example embodiments, the apparatus (network node) 10' (corresponding to the network node 10) comprises a processor 121, a memory 122 and an interface 123, which are connected by a bus 124 or the like. Further, according to example embodiments, the apparatus (network node) 30' (corresponding to the network node 30) comprises a processor 125, a memory 126 and an interface 127, which are connected by a bus 128 or the like, and the apparatuses may be connected via link 129, respectively.

[0195] The processor 121 / 125 and / or the interface 123 / 127 may also include a modem or the like to facilitate communication over a (hardwire or wireless) link, respectively. The interface 123 / 127 may include a suitable transceiver coupled to one or more antennas or communication means for (hardwire or wireless) communications with the linked or connected device(s), respectively. The interface 123 / 127 is generally configured to communicate with at least one other apparatus, i.e. the interface thereof. The memory 122 / 126 may store respective programs assumed to include program instructions or computer program code that, when executed by the respective processor, enables the respective electronic device or apparatus to operate in accordance with the example embodiments.

[0196] In general terms, the respective devices / apparatuses (and / or parts thereof) may represent means for performing respective operations and / or exhibiting respective functionalities, and / or the respective devices (and / or parts thereof) may have functions for performing respective operations and / or exhibiting respective functionalities.

[0197] When in the subsequent description it is stated that the processor (or some other means) is configured to perform some function, this is to be construed to be equivalent to a description stating that at least one processor, potentially in cooperation with computer program code stored in the memory of the respective apparatus, is configured to cause the apparatus to perform at least the thus mentioned function. Also, such function is to be construed to be equivalently implementable by specifically configured means for performing the respective function (i.e. the expression "processor configured to [cause the apparatus to] perform xxx-ing" is construed to be equivalent to an expression such as "means for xxx-ing").

[0198] According to example embodiments, an apparatus representing the network node 10 comprises at least one processor 121, at least one memory 122 including computer program code, and at least one interface 123 configured for communication with at least another apparatus. The processor (i.e. the at least one processor 121, with the at least one memory 122 and the computer program code) is configured to perform receiving distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators (thus the apparatus comprising corresponding means for receiving), to perform determining whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators (thus the apparatus comprising corresponding means for determining), and to perform enabling, upon determining that there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts (thus the apparatus comprising corresponding means for enabling).

[0199] According to example embodiments, an apparatus representing the network node 30 comprises at least one processor 125, at least one memory 126 including computer program code, and at least one interface 127 configured for communication with at least another apparatus. The processor (i.e. the at least one processor 125, with the at least one memory 126 and the computer program code) is configured to perform transmitting distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators (thus the apparatus comprising corresponding means for transmitting), and to perform receiving conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict (thus the apparatus comprising corresponding means for receiving).

[0200] For further details regarding the operability / functionality of the individual apparatuses, reference is made to the above description in connection with any one of FIGs. 1 to 11, respectively. For the purpose of the present disclosure as described herein above, it should be noted that

[0201] - method steps likely to be implemented as software code portions and being run using a processor at a network server or network entity (as examples of devices, apparatuses and / or modules thereof, or as examples of entities including apparatuses and / or modules therefore), are software code independent and can be specified using any known or future developed programming language as long as the functionality defined by the method steps is preserved;

[0202] - generally, any method step is suitable to be implemented as software or by hardware without changing the idea of the embodiments and its modification in terms of the functionality implemented;

[0203] - method steps and / or devices, units or means likely to be implemented as hardware components at the above-defined apparatuses, or any module(s) thereof, (e.g., devices carrying out the functions of the apparatuses according to the embodiments as described above) are hardware independent and can be implemented using any known or future developed hardware technology or any hybrids of these, such as MOS (Metal Oxide Semiconductor), CMOS (Complementary MOS), BiMOS (Bipolar MOS), BiCMOS (Bipolar CMOS), ECL (Emitter Coupled Logic), TTL (Transistor-Transistor Logic), etc., using for example ASIC (Application Specific IC (Integrated Circuit)) components, FPGA (Field-programmable Gate Arrays) components, CPLD (Complex Programmable Logic Device) components or DSP (Digital Signal Processor) components;

[0204] - devices, units or means (e.g. the above-defined network entity or network register, or any one of their respective units / means) can be implemented as individual devices, units or means, but this does not exclude that they are implemented in a distributed fashion throughout the system, as long as the functionality of the device, unit or means is preserved;

[0205] - an apparatus like the user equipment and the network entity / network register may be represented by a semiconductor chip, a chipset, or a (hardware) module comprising such chip or chipset; this, however, does not exclude the possibility that a functionality of an apparatus or module, instead of being hardware implemented, be implemented as software in a (software) module such as a computer program or a computer program product comprising executable software code portions for execution / being run on a processor;

[0206] - a device may be regarded as an apparatus or as an assembly of more than one apparatus, whether functionally in cooperation with each other or functionally independently of each other but in a same device housing, for example.

[0207] In general, it is to be noted that respective functional blocks or elements according to above-described aspects can be implemented by any known means, either in hardware and / or software, respectively, if it is only adapted to perform the described functions of the respective parts. The mentioned method steps can be realized in individual functional blocks or by individual devices, or one or more of the method steps can be realized in a single functional block or by a single device.

[0208] Generally, any method step is suitable to be implemented as software or by hardware without changing the idea of the present disclosure. Devices and means can be implemented as individual devices, but this does not exclude that they are implemented in a distributed fashion throughout the system, as long as the functionality of the device is preserved. Such and similar principles are to be considered as known to a skilled person.

[0209] Software in the sense of the present description comprises software code as such comprising code means or portions or a computer program or a computer program product for performing the respective functions, as well as software (or a computer program or a computer program product) embodied on a tangible medium such as a computer-readable (storage) medium having stored thereon a respective data structure or code means / portions or embodied in a signal or in a chip, potentially during processing thereof. The present disclosure also covers any conceivable combination of method steps and operations described above, and any conceivable combination of nodes, apparatuses, modules or elements described above, as long as the above-described concepts of methodology and structural arrangement are applicable.

[0210] In view of the above, there are provided measures for detection and handling of radio access network control conflicts. Such measures exemplarily comprise receiving distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, determining whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators, and enabling, upon determining that there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

[0211] Even though the disclosure is described above with reference to the examples according to the accompanying drawings, it is to be understood that the disclosure is not restricted thereto. Rather, it is apparent to those skilled in the art that the present disclosure can be modified in many ways without departing from the scope of the inventive idea as disclosed herein.

[0212] List of acronyms and abbreviations

[0213] 3GPP 3rd Generation Partnership Project

[0214] AF automation function Al artificial intelligence bMRO beam-based mobility robustness optimization

[0215] CCL closed control loop

[0216] CF cognitive function

[0217] CIO cell individual offset

[0218] CU central unit

[0219] DU distributed unit

[0220] E2SM E2 service model

[0221] E2SM-CCC E2 service model : cell configuration and control

[0222] E2SM-KPM E2 service model : key performance measurement

[0223] E2SM-RC E2 service model : RAN control gNB gNodeB

[0224] HO handover

[0225] IOC information object class

[0226] KPI key performance indicator

[0227] ML machine learning

[0228] MNO management and orchestration

[0229] MnS management services

[0230] MRO mobility robustness optimization

[0231] Near-RT Near-Real Time

[0232] Non-RT Non-Real Time

[0233] OAM operations, administration and maintenance

[0234] O-RAN Open Radio Access Network

[0235] QoE quality of experience

[0236] QoS quality of service

[0237] RAN radio access network

[0238] RF radio frequency

[0239] RIC RAN intelligent controller

[0240] RLF radio link failure

[0241] RRC radio resource control

[0242] RU radio unit

[0243] SLA service level agreement

[0244] SMO service management and orchestration SON self-organizing network time to trigger user equipment

Claims

CLAIMS:

1. An apparatus comprising means for receiving distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, means for determining whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators, and means for enabling, upon determining that there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

2. The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein said first control target includes at least one of the following: a first network entity targeted by said first network control efforts, or a network function of said first network entity targeted by said first network control efforts.

3. The apparatus according to claim 1 or 2, wherein said second control target includes at least one of the following: a second network entity targeted by said second network control efforts, or a network function of said second network entity targeted by said second network control efforts.

4. The apparatus according to any of claims 1 to 3, wherein said overlap between said second control target and said first control target is determined, if said second control target and said first control target are same.

5. The apparatus according to any of claims 1 to 4, wherein said distortion tolerance information includes at least one of the following: a set of control parameter value ranges for a set of first control parameters of said first control loop entity, said set of control parameter value ranges being tolerable by said first control loop entity, or a set of expected first network state indicators expected by said first control loop entity as a result of said first control efforts, a set of deviations of a set of determined period-representative first network state indicators from said set of expected first network state indicators, said set of deviations being tolerable by said first control loop entity, and a set of observation windows for determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators.

6. The apparatus according to claim 5, further comprising means for receiving observation information including at least one of the following: a set of actual first network state indicators, said set of first control parameters.

7. The apparatus according to claim 6, further comprising means for determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators based on each of sets of actual first network state indicators received over periods corresponding to said set of observation windows, means for monitoring whether said set of period-representative first network state indicators exceed said set of expected first network state indicators by more than indicated by said set of deviations, andmeans for deciding, if said set of period-representative first network state indicators exceed said set of expected first network state indicators by more than indicated by said set of deviations, that said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

8. The apparatus according to claim 7, wherein said means for determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators includes means for calculating said set of period-representative first network state indicators based on said sets of actual first network state indicators received over periods corresponding to said set of observation windows.

9. The apparatus according to claim 8, wherein said means for calculating said set of period-representative first network state indicators is means for calculating averages of each of said sets of actual first network state indicators received over periods corresponding to said set of observation windows as said set of period-representative first network state indicators.

10. The apparatus according to any of claims 6 to 9, further comprising means for monitoring whether a set of second control parameters of said second control loop entity include at least one control parameter which is included in said set of first control parameters and exceeds said control parameter value range for said control parameter, and means for deciding, if said set of second control parameters include said at least one control parameter which is included in said set of first control parameters and exceeds said control parameter value range for said control parameter, that said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

11. The apparatus according to any claim 7 to 10, further comprisingmeans for transmitting, if said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts, conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict, said conflict information including at least one of the following: information on said first control target, or information on exceedance of said set of control parameter value ranges for said set of first control parameters, or information on exceedance of said set of deviations from said set of expected first network state indicators.

12. The apparatus according to any of claims 1 to 11, further comprising a platform entity including said means for receiving said distortion tolerance information and said control target information, said means for determining whether there is an overlap between said second control target and said first control target, and said means for enabling said monitoring, and a conflict monitoring entity, wherein said platform entity further comprises means for transmitting, if there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, towards said conflict monitoring entity, as conflict check request information, said distortion tolerance information, said control target information, and information on said second control target, and wherein said conflict monitoring entity comprises means for receiving, from said platform entity, as said conflict check request information, said distortion tolerance information, said control target information, and said information on said second control target, and means for deciding, if there is an overlap between said second control target and said first control target and if said second control loop entity is enabled to affect at least one control parameter with respect to said second control target, to monitor whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

13. The apparatus according to claim 12, wherein said conflict monitoring entity further comprises means for transmitting, if it is decided to monitor whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts, a subscription for reports in relation to said observation information.

14. The apparatus according to claim 12 or 13, wherein said conflict monitoring entity further comprises said means for receiving said observation information.

15. The apparatus according to claim 14, wherein said conflict monitoring entity further comprises said means for determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators, said means for monitoring whether said set of periodrepresentative first network state indicators exceed said set of expected first network state indicators by more than indicated by said set of deviations, and said means for deciding that said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

16. The apparatus according to any of claims 1 to 15, wherein a first control cycle of said first control loop entity is longer than a second control cycle of said second control loop entity.

17. An apparatus comprising means for transmitting distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first networkcontrol efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, and means for receiving conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict.

18. The apparatus according to claim 17, wherein said distortion tolerance information includes at least one of the following: a set of control parameter value ranges for a set of first control parameters of said first control loop entity, said set of control parameter value ranges being tolerable by said first control loop entity, or a set of expected first network state indicators expected by said first control loop entity as a result of said first control efforts, a set of deviations of a set of determined period-representative first network state indicators from said set of expected first network state indicators, said set of deviations being tolerable by said first control loop entity, and a set of observation windows for determining said set of period-representative first network state indicators, and wherein said conflict information include at least one of the following: information on said first control target, or information on exceedance of said set of control parameter value ranges for said set of first control parameters, or information on exceedance of said set of deviations from said set of expected first network state indicators.

19. The apparatus according to claim 17 or 18, wherein said first control target includes at least one of the following: a first network entity targeted by said first network control efforts, or a network function of said first network entity targeted by said first network control efforts.

20. A method comprisingreceiving distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, determining whether there is an overlap between a second control target of second network control efforts of a second control loop entity and said first control target, wherein said second network control efforts relate to a set of second network state indicators, and enabling, upon determining that there is said overlap between said second control target and said first control target, monitoring whether said second network control efforts lead to exceedance of said amount of distortion of said first network control efforts.

21. A method comprising transmitting distortion tolerance information and control target information, wherein said distortion tolerance information is indicative of an amount of distortion of first network control efforts of a first control loop entity which is tolerable by said first control loop entity, wherein said control target information is indicative of a first control target of said first network control efforts, wherein said first network control efforts relate to a set of first network state indicators, and receiving conflict information indicative of presence of a network control conflict.

22. A computer program product comprising computer-executable computer program code which, when the program is run on a computer, is configured to cause the computer to carry out the method according to claim 20 or 21.

23. The computer program product according to claim 22, wherein the computer program product comprises a computer-readable medium on whichthe computer-executable computer program code is stored, and / or wherein the program is directly loadable into an internal memory of the computer or a processor thereof.

Images