Failure countermeasure proposal device, control circuit, and program storage medium

Abstract

A failure countermeasure proposal device (1) has: a parameter management function (12) for managing a plurality of parameter groups that respectively correspond to a plurality of failures in a wireless network system (2) and that serve as countermeasures against the failures in the wireless network system (2); and an association degree calculation function (11) for proposing, to a manager or a maintenance person of the wireless network system (2), application of a parameter group that serves as a countermeasure for an occurred failure, on the basis of the association degree between the plurality of parameter groups managed by the parameter management function (12), and a failure factor and a failure site inferred in the wireless network system (2).

Description

Fault countermeasure proposal device, control circuit, and program storage medium

[0001] The present disclosure relates to a fault countermeasure proposal device, a control circuit, and a program storage medium for dealing with faults in communication.

[0002] Wireless network systems, which are essential for various application solutions, are becoming more diverse, larger in scale, and more complex as the scope of application solutions expands. For example, local 5G, which allows for the use of 5G (5th Generation) mobile phone systems as private networks, was institutionalized in December 2019, and various companies have been conducting demonstration experiments, but it is difficult to say that it has been widely adopted in terms of social implementation. One reason for this is the complexity of local 5G systems.

[0003] Local 5G systems are comprised of many devices. One of these devices, a base station, is composed of three devices: a central unit (CU), a distributed unit (DU), and a radio unit (RU), each of which has numerous parameters. Determining all of these parameters requires a high level of expertise, making the construction and operation of local 5G systems extremely challenging. In particular, in wireless network systems with complex component devices, isolating the problem and identifying the cause and root cause of a failure is complex. When a failure occurs in a wireless network system, it is expected to take a relatively long time to recover from the failure after taking measures such as changing the parameters of each device and relocating the radio equipment. Furthermore, if the administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system lacks knowledge of wireless network systems, recovery may not be possible.

[0004] Furthermore, private wireless network systems have traditionally been designed and constructed as dedicated systems specialized for specific applications. Therefore, if the intended use and environment remain unchanged, users can continue to use the parameters tuned by the designer before operation begins. However, in future private wireless network systems, such as local 5G, it is conceivable that new applications will be added to existing systems or the environment will change. In such cases, it will be necessary to change and optimize the parameters tuned by the designer before operation begins, but it is difficult to appropriately select parameters for a large number of devices.

[0005] For these reasons, a method is needed to appropriately select parameters for devices that construct a wireless network system when a failure occurs or when an application is added.

[0006] The following technologies are known as countermeasures for when a failure occurs in a wireless network system. Patent Document 1 discloses a method for automatically selecting an appropriate channel in a wireless LAN (Local Area Network) depending on surrounding radio interference. Patent Document 2 discloses a power control method for estimating reception interference based on information collected from a terminal and notifying the terminal of the transmission power to be used in future uplink transmissions. Patent Document 3 discloses a method for deriving the degree of contribution of factors related to radio wave strength to communication degradation or communication failure.

[0007] Japanese Patent No. 5167509 Japanese Patent No. 7334300 International Publication No. 2023 / 175673

[0008] Conventional techniques are designed to address specific faults or issues in specific devices, and therefore have the problem that they are unable to address issues related to multiple devices in a wireless network system.

[0009] The present disclosure has been made in consideration of the above, and aims to provide a fault countermeasure proposal device that can help administrators or maintenance personnel who lack knowledge or experience regarding wireless communication or wireless networks take measures against communication faults.

[0010] In order to solve the above-mentioned problems and achieve the objectives, the fault countermeasure proposal device of the present disclosure has a parameter management function that manages multiple parameter groups that correspond to each of multiple faults in a wireless network system and serve as countermeasures against faults in the wireless network system, and a relevance calculation function that suggests to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system the application of a parameter group that serves as a countermeasure against an occurred fault, based on the relevance of each of the multiple parameter groups managed by the parameter management function to an estimated fault location and fault cause in the wireless network system.

[0011] The failure countermeasure proposal device according to the present disclosure has the effect of being able to contribute to the taking of countermeasures against communication failures by managers or maintenance personnel who lack knowledge or experience regarding wireless communication or wireless networks.

[0012] FIG. 1 is a diagram showing the configuration of a fault countermeasure proposal device according to a first embodiment; FIG. 2 is a diagram for explaining a parameter management method performed by the fault countermeasure proposal device according to the first embodiment using a parameter management function; FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing the operation procedure when the fault countermeasure proposal device according to the first embodiment proposes to an administrator or maintainer a group of candidate parameters for resolving a fault when the fault occurs; FIG. 1 is a diagram showing the configuration of a fault countermeasure proposal device according to the first embodiment for performing ex-post evaluation of an applied group of candidate parameters;

[0013] Hereinafter, a fault countermeasure proposal device, a control circuit, and a program storage medium according to an embodiment will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0014] Embodiment 1. Fig. 1 is a diagram showing the configuration of a failure countermeasure proposal device 1 according to embodiment 1. The failure countermeasure proposal device 1 is a device for dealing with failures in communications. Fig. 1 also shows a wireless network system 2, a failure location factor estimation device 3, an administrator, a maintenance technician, and a designer. The failure countermeasure proposal device 1 is applied to a wireless network system 2 made up of multiple devices. In embodiment 1, the wireless network system 2 is made up of a base station 21, a terminal 22, an L2 switch 23, an L3 switch 24, and a control server 25.

[0015] The wireless network system 2 sends the logs of all devices constituting the wireless network system 2 and the communication logs to the failure location and cause estimation device 3. The failure location and cause estimation device 3 estimates the failure location and cause for a failure that has occurred in communication, and notifies the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 of the estimated failure location and cause. The method used by the failure location and cause estimation device 3 to estimate the failure location and cause is not limited by the present disclosure. The failure location is the device where the failure occurred or an internal function of that device. The failure cause is a failure cause in the device or function that has become the failure location, and examples of the failure causes include the following (A) to (D): (A) The transmission power of the base station 21 decreased. (B) Traffic at a specific port of the L3 switch 24 increased, causing congestion. (C) The error rate in communication between the terminal 22 and the base station 21 increased. (D) Radio wave interference in the same frequency band in the vicinity increased.

[0016] The failure countermeasure proposal device 1 handles only the failure causes that were set before the start of operation. It is assumed that the failure point cause estimation device 3 notifies the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 of the failure point estimation result and the failure cause estimation result one by one, but that the failure point cause estimation device 3 notifies the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 of multiple pieces of information.

[0017] The failure countermeasure proposal device 1 has a relevance calculation function 11, a parameter management function 12, a parameter relevance update function 13, and a requirement performance measurement function 14.

[0018] 2 is a diagram illustrating a parameter management method performed by the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the first embodiment using the parameter management function 12. The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 manages parameters for each device. Each device constitutes the wireless network system 2. The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 may manage parameters for each device according to its function or classification.

[0019] FIG. 2 illustrates a case in which the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 manages parameters for each layer of the base station 21. The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 manages parameters using parameter groups each consisting of multiple parameters. The designer of the wireless network system 2 considers multiple parameter groups, each with partially different parameters, before starting operation and registers the multiple parameter groups as multiple candidate parameter groups in the fault countermeasure proposal device 1. The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 manages the registered candidate parameter groups and a relevance index indicating the degree of relevance between each candidate parameter group and the fault factor set before starting operation. The relevance index quantifies the necessity and effectiveness of applying a parameter group to an estimated fault factor. FIG. 2 represents the relevance index using numbers ranging from 0 to 1. The closer the relevance index is to 1, the greater the effectiveness of applying the parameter group corresponding to that relevance index. The relevance index between each parameter group and the fault factor managed by the parameter management function 12 of the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 is registered and updated as needed by the designer of the wireless network system 2.

[0020] FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing the procedure of the operation of the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the first embodiment when proposing to an administrator or maintainer a set of candidate parameters for resolving a fault when the fault occurs. This flowchart illustrates a fault countermeasure proposal flow. The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 receives a notification of the estimated fault location and fault cause from the fault location and fault cause estimation device 3. Based on the estimated fault location and fault cause, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 selects a target device estimated to be related to the fault (S1). In FIG. 3, the operation of step S1 is indicated by the phrase "select a corresponding device based on the estimated fault location and fault cause." The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 calculates the relevance of the selected target device using the relevance calculation function 11 based on information from the parameter management function 12. When multiple fault causes are notified as the estimated results, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 calculates the relevance corresponding to the multiple faults that have occurred, taking into account the relevance of each fault cause set in the parameter set. For example, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 calculates the sum of the relevance of each notified fault cause set in the parameter set (S2).

[0021] The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 uses the relevance calculation function 11 to select a parameter group corresponding to the highest relevance calculated in step S2 from among multiple parameter groups corresponding to the device or function corresponding to the fault location (S3). In FIG. 3, the operation of step S3 is indicated by the phrase "select the parameter group with the highest relevance." As shown in FIG. 1, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 notifies the administrator or maintenance person operating the wireless network system 2 of the selected parameter group as a candidate parameter group (S4). That is, in step S4, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 proposes the selected parameter group to the administrator or maintenance person as candidate parameters for a countermeasure to resolve the fault. In FIG. 3, the operation of step S4 is indicated by the phrase "notify the administrator or maintenance person of the selected parameter group as a candidate parameter group."

[0022] When the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 receives multiple estimation results from the failure location factor estimation device 3, it calculates the sum of the degrees of association, selects the candidate parameter group with the largest sum of the degrees of association, and notifies the administrator or maintainer of the selected candidate parameter group.

[0023] The administrator or maintenance person who is notified of the candidate parameter group reflects the candidate parameter group in each device that constitutes the wireless network system 2. When the administrator or maintenance person is notified of multiple candidate parameter groups, the administrator or maintenance person selects a candidate parameter group to be applied to the wireless network system 2 from the notified multiple candidate parameter groups, and reflects the selected candidate parameter group in each device that constitutes the wireless network system 2. Alternatively, the candidate parameter group selected by the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 is automatically reflected in the wireless network system 2. For example, the candidate parameter group is reflected using a communication interface (I / F) that the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 has for each device in the wireless network system 2.

[0024] By following the above procedure, an administrator or maintenance person who does not have knowledge of the wireless network system 2 can apply parameters that could be potential countermeasures to the devices that make up the wireless network system 2 when a failure occurs.

[0025] After the candidate parameter group is applied, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 performs a post-evaluation of the effect of the applied candidate parameter group on the fault that has occurred. Fig. 4 is a diagram showing the configuration of the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the first embodiment, which performs a post-evaluation of the applied candidate parameter group. Fig. 5 is a flowchart showing the procedure of the operation when the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the first embodiment performs a post-evaluation of the applied candidate parameter group. Fig. 5 also shows part of the operation of the wireless network system 2.

[0026] The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 instructs the wireless network system 2 to carry out performance measurement. The requirements for performance measurement are set in the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 by an administrator, maintenance person, or designer before or after the fact, and the following items (P)-(R) are assumed: (P) Communication capacity of the uplink or downlink (Q) Delay amount of the uplink or downlink (R) Application quality

[0027] The wireless network system 2 measures the performance of the wireless network system 2 in accordance with the set performance requirements (S11) and notifies the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 of the results of the performance measurement. The failure countermeasure proposal device 1 compares the results of the performance measurement with the set performance requirements and determines whether the results of the performance measurement satisfy the performance requirements (S12). The failure countermeasure proposal device 1 evaluates the application effects of the applied candidate parameters by performing the operation of step S12. The evaluation index is set on the condition that the performance requirements are satisfied.

[0028] If the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 determines that the performance measurement results satisfy the performance requirements (Yes in S12), it maintains or increases the relevance of the applied candidate parameter group using the parameter relevance update function 13 (S13). If the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 determines that the performance measurement results do not satisfy the performance requirements (No in S12), it decreases the relevance of the applied candidate parameter group using the parameter relevance update function 13 (S14). In other words, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 increases or decreases the relevance of the applied candidate parameter group depending on whether the performance measurement results satisfy the performance requirements, thereby updating the relevance. By updating the relevance using the parameter relevance update function 13, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 can change the probability that the selected candidate parameter group will be selected again if a similar fault occurs in the future, according to the application effect. After performing the operation of step S13 or step S14, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 notifies the administrator or maintainer of the performance measurement results (S15).

[0029] If the performance requirements cannot be met using the applied candidate parameter set, the failure location factor estimation device 3 re-estimates the failure, and based on the estimation result, the failure countermeasure proposal flow is executed in the failure countermeasure proposal device 1. By updating the parameters, measuring the performance, and updating the degree of association between the parameters and the failure multiple times, the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 can appropriately select a candidate parameter set that meets the requirements.

[0030] As described above, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the first embodiment includes an association degree calculation function 11 and a parameter management function 12. The parameter management function 12 includes a function for managing a plurality of parameter groups that correspond to a plurality of faults in the wireless network system 2 and that serve as countermeasures for the faults in the wireless network system 2. The association degree calculation function 11 includes a function for proposing to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system 2 the application of a parameter group that serves as a countermeasure for the fault that has occurred, based on the association degree between an estimated fault location and a fault cause in the wireless network system 2 and each of the plurality of parameter groups managed by the parameter management function 12. The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 can contribute, by the above-described functions included in the parameter management function 12 and the association degree calculation function 11, to an administrator or maintainer who lacks knowledge or experience regarding wireless communications or wireless networks in taking countermeasures for communication faults.

[0031] As described above, the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 instructs the wireless network system 2 to perform performance measurement based on preset performance requirements. The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 may compare the results of the performance measurement performed by the wireless network system 2 with the preset performance requirements for the wireless network system 2, or may compare the results of the performance measurement with the quality requirements of an application provided using the wireless network system 2. The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 notifies the administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system 2 of the measurement results and comparison results. The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 further has a parameter relevance update function 13 that updates the relevance of multiple parameter groups managed by the parameter management function 12 for each fault cause based on the measurement results.

[0032] Second Embodiment. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing the format of parameters managed by a fault countermeasure proposal device according to a second embodiment using a parameter management function. The configuration of the fault countermeasure proposal device according to the second embodiment is the same as that of the fault countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the first embodiment. Hereinafter, the fault countermeasure proposal device according to the second embodiment will be referred to as the "fault countermeasure proposal device 1." In a wireless network system 2, multiple devices may operate in cooperation with each other. Parameters may also be linked among multiple devices. Correlations are set in advance for parameter groups managed by the fault countermeasure proposal device 1. In FIG. 6, each of multiple parameter groups of a base station 21 is connected by a solid line to a related parameter group of a terminal 22, an L2 switch 23, or an L3 switch 24, and the solid lines in FIG. 6 represent the correlations. It is assumed that correlations are set based on the following two factors (X) and (Y): (X) physical or logical connection relationships between devices; and (Y) layer relationships in the OSI (Open Systems Interconnection) reference model between devices. The above physical or logical relationships include network topology.

[0033] For example, when changing a parameter group related to the physical layer L1 in the parameters of the base station 21 based on the estimation result of the failure location and the failure cause, it is also necessary to change a parameter group related to the physical layer L1 of the terminal 22, which is closely related to the parameters related to the physical layer L1 of the base station 21. Fig. 6 shows an example showing the relationship between the base station 21 and the terminal 22.

[0034] 3 in the first embodiment, the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the second embodiment can propose to an administrator or a maintenance person, based on the estimation results of the failure location and the failure cause, parameters to be updated in the wireless network system 2 for devices other than the device in which the failure was detected, while managing the parameter group. This makes it possible to optimize the entire wireless network system 2.

[0035] The fault countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the second embodiment has a parameter management function 12. The parameter management function 12 manages parameters as parameter groups for each device constituting the wireless network system 2 and for each layer based on the Open Systems Interconnection reference model or for each function of each device, and includes a function for managing the degree of association with a fault cause for a plurality of parameter groups.

[0036] The parameter management function 12 manages a plurality of parameter groups for each of the devices constituting the wireless network system 2, and further includes a function of setting, in the plurality of parameter groups, an association between at least some of the devices constituting the wireless network system 2 and at least some of the other devices constituting the wireless network system 2, based on a layer based on the Open System Interconnection Reference Model, or a function or a physical connection or a logical connection including a network topology in the wireless network system 2. When proposing application of a parameter group to the at least some of the devices, the association degree calculation function 11 further includes a function of proposing, to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system 2, application of a parameter group as a countermeasure for an occurred failure, for the at least some of the other devices for which an association with the at least some of the devices has been set by the parameter management function 12, based on the association degree.

[0037] Next, we will explain the hardware configuration of the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 according to embodiments 1 and 2. Fig. 7 is a diagram showing the hardware configuration of the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 according to embodiments 1 and 2. As shown in Fig. 7, the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 includes a processor 71, a memory 72, a storage 73, a communication interface 74, an application interface 75, an input device 76, and a display device 77.

[0038] The processor 71 is, for example, a central processing unit (CPU), the memory 72 is, for example, a random access memory (RAM), and the storage 73 is, for example, a storage device such as a hard disk drive (HDD), a solid state drive (SSD), or a memory card.

[0039] The processor 71 and memory 72 execute programs stored in the storage 73 for realizing functions related to the present disclosure, and provide output information based on input information.

[0040] The storage 73 stores a plurality of parameter groups for the devices that make up the wireless network system 2, the degree of association between each of the plurality of parameter groups and a failure, and a program that defines the operations related to the present disclosure.

[0041] The communication interface 74 transmits and receives fault information, status information, and parameters between the fault location and factor estimation device 3 shown in Fig. 1 and each of the devices constituting the wireless network system 2. The communication path may be either wired communication or wireless communication.

[0042] The application interface 75 provides an input device 76 and a display device 77 to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system 2. The input device 76 is a device that accepts input operations from the administrator or maintainer and is composed of, for example, a keyboard and a mouse. The display device 77 presents the administrator or maintainer with proposed candidate parameters for countermeasures when a failure occurs and the parameters to be managed.

[0043] The hardware configuration of the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the first and second embodiments may be the configuration shown in Fig. 8. Fig. 8 is a diagram showing a processing circuit 81 in a case where the functions of the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 according to the first and second embodiments are realized by the processing circuit 81. In other words, the functions of the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 may be realized by the processing circuit 81.

[0044] The processing circuit 81 is dedicated hardware, and may be, for example, a single circuit, a composite circuit, a programmed processor, a parallel programmed processor, an ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit), an FPGA (Field-Programmable Gate Array), or a combination thereof.

[0045] Some of the functions of the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 may be realized by hardware that is different from the hardware that realizes the remaining functions.

[0046] 9 is a diagram showing a control circuit 91 that controls the operations executed by the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 according to embodiments 1 and 2. The control circuit 91 causes the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 to manage a plurality of parameter groups that correspond to each of a plurality of failures in the wireless network system 2 and serve as countermeasures for the failures in the wireless network system 2, and to propose to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system 2 the application of a parameter group that serves as a countermeasure for the failure that has occurred, based on the degree of association between each of the managed parameter groups and an estimated failure location and cause in the wireless network system 2.

[0047] 10 is a diagram showing a program storage medium 101 that stores a program for controlling the operations executed by the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 according to embodiments 1 and 2. The program storage medium 101 stores a program that causes the failure countermeasure proposal device 1 to manage a plurality of parameter groups that correspond to each of a plurality of failures in the wireless network system 2 and serve as countermeasures for the failures in the wireless network system 2, and to propose to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system 2 the application of a parameter group that serves as a countermeasure for the failure that has occurred, based on the degree of association between each of the managed parameter groups and an estimated failure location and cause in the wireless network system 2.

[0048] The configurations shown in the above embodiments are merely examples, and may be combined with other known technologies, or different embodiments may be combined with each other, or part of the configuration may be omitted or modified within the scope of the gist of the invention.

[0049] 1 Failure countermeasure proposal device, 2 Wireless network system, 3 Failure location cause estimation device, 11 Relevance calculation function, 12 Parameter management function, 13 Parameter relevance update function, 14 Requirement performance measurement function, 21 Base station, 22 Terminal, 23 L2 switch, 24 L3 switch, 25 Control server, 71 Processor, 72 Memory, 73 Storage, 74 Communication interface, 75 Application interface, 76 Input device, 77 Display device, 81 Processing circuit, 91 Control circuit, 101 Program storage medium.

Claims

1. A fault countermeasure suggestion device comprising: a parameter management function that manages a plurality of parameter groups that correspond to each of a plurality of faults in a wireless network system and that serve as countermeasures against the faults in the wireless network system; and a relevance calculation function that suggests to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system the application of a parameter group that serves as a countermeasure against a fault that has occurred, based on the relevance of each of the plurality of parameter groups managed by the parameter management function to an estimated fault location and cause in the wireless network system.

2. The fault countermeasure proposal device according to claim 1, characterized in that the parameter management function includes a function for managing parameters as parameter groups for each device constituting the wireless network system and for each layer based on the Open System Interconnection Reference Model or for each function of each device, and for managing the degree of association with fault causes for the multiple parameter groups.

3. The fault countermeasure proposal device according to claim 1, characterized in that the correlation calculation function includes a function for selecting a parameter group to be applied as a countermeasure for a fault that has occurred, using the results of an estimation of the fault location and cause of the fault, based on the correlation between each of the plurality of parameter groups managed by the parameter management function and the fault cause.

4. The fault countermeasure proposal device according to claim 1, characterized in that it instructs the wireless network system to perform performance measurements based on pre-set performance requirements, compares the results of the performance measurements performed by the wireless network system with the pre-set performance requirements of the wireless network system or the quality requirements of applications provided using the wireless network system, and notifies the administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system of the measurement results and comparison results.

5. The fault countermeasure proposal device according to claim 4, further comprising a parameter relevance update function that updates the relevance of each of the plurality of parameter groups managed by the parameter management function for each fault cause based on the measurement results.

6. The fault countermeasure proposal device according to claim 2, characterized in that the parameter management function manages the plurality of parameter groups for each device that constitutes the wireless network system, and further includes a function for setting, in the plurality of parameter groups, the relationship between at least some of the devices that constitute the wireless network system and at least some of the other devices that constitute the wireless network system based on a layer based on the Open Systems Interconnection Reference Model, or a function or physical connection in the wireless network system or a logical connection including a network topology.

7. The fault countermeasure proposal device according to claim 6, characterized in that the relevance calculation function, when proposing the application of the parameter group to the at least some of the devices, further includes a function to propose to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system the application of a parameter group that will serve as a countermeasure to the fault that has occurred to at least some of the other devices that have been set up to be relevant to the at least some of the devices by the parameter management function, based on the relevance.

8. A control circuit that causes a fault countermeasure proposal device to perform the following operations: managing a plurality of parameter groups that correspond to each of a plurality of faults in a wireless network system and serve as countermeasures for the faults in the wireless network system; and proposing to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system the application of a parameter group that serves as a countermeasure for the fault that has occurred, based on the degree of association between each of the plurality of parameter groups that are managed and the estimated fault location and cause in the wireless network system.

9. A program storage medium storing a program for causing a fault countermeasure suggestion device to execute the following operations: managing a plurality of parameter groups that correspond to each of a plurality of faults in a wireless network system and serve as countermeasures against the faults in the wireless network system; and proposing to an administrator or maintainer of the wireless network system the application of a parameter group that serves as a countermeasure against the fault that has occurred, based on the degree of association between each of the plurality of parameter groups being managed and the estimated fault location and cause in the wireless network system.

Images