Duplicate Packet Elimination Using Dynamic Flow Switchover
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional duplicate packet elimination systems are not designed for resilience and fail to handle significant delays between duplicate packets, leading to resource inefficiencies and out-of-order delivery, especially in diverse network environments.
Innovation Solution
A resilient approach that eliminates duplicate packets by dynamically swapping member flows and using a drop count mechanism to ensure only one packet is delivered, independent of delay differences, without requiring packet sequence numbers.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If conventional duplicate packet elimination systems use packet sequence numbers or statically configured member flows, then duplicate packets can be eliminated, but the systems cannot handle significant delay differences between duplicate packets and require substantial buffering resources
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies dynamics by making the member flow selection dynamic rather than static. The system dynamically switches between first and second member flows based on real-time packet arrival patterns and delay characteristics. This allows the system to adapt to varying network conditions and delay differences without requiring large buffers, as packets are routed through different flows based on current performance rather than being held in buffer memory.
Solution Approach 2:
The system changes the parameter of flow selection based on delay characteristics. By monitoring which member flow experiences smaller delays and dynamically switching between flows, the system adapts to changing network conditions. This parameter change approach allows the system to handle significant delay differences between duplicate packets without requiring substantial buffering resources.
2Reliability
If duplicate packets are sent through different network paths, then resilience against packet loss is improved, but the differential delay between packets becomes significant and prohibitive
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically selects between first and second member flows based on real-time delay measurements and packet arrival patterns. This dynamic adaptation allows the system to mitigate differential delay by switching to flows with better performance characteristics, while still maintaining the resilience benefits of having multiple diverse network paths available for packet transmission.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs preliminary actions by pre-configuring multiple member flows with different delay characteristics and establishing selection criteria before packets need to be transmitted. This allows the system to quickly switch between flows based on pre-established performance metrics, reducing the impact of differential delay while maintaining resilience through pre-configured alternative paths.
3Manufacturing precision
If a packet reordering function is used to deliver packets in transmission order, then delivery accuracy is improved, but buffering and processing resources increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The system applies dynamics by making real-time decisions about packet delivery based on arrival patterns and delay characteristics. Rather than using a static reordering function that requires buffering all packets, the system dynamically determines which packets to deliver based on current flow performance and delay measurements. This reduces buffering requirements while maintaining delivery accuracy through adaptive selection.
Solution Approach 2:
The system extracts the essential function of ensuring correct packet delivery order without requiring full reordering of all packets. By selectively delivering packets based on flow performance and delay characteristics, the system takes out only the necessary packets for delivery rather than buffering and reordering everything, thereby reducing buffering resources while maintaining delivery accuracy.
Data Source
AI summary
Systems, methods, and media for a packet elimination system for resilience is disclosed. Duplicate member flows are established and include first and second flows. A drop count of the duplicate member flows is set to null. A packet is detected at a packet elimination module. The packet is passed through to a destination end device and the drop count is set to null in response to determining that the packet is associated with the first flow. The packet is dropped and the drop count is incremented subsequent to determining that the packet is not associated with the first flow. The second flow is designated as the first flow, the first flow is reassigned, and the drop count is set to null in response to determining that the drop count is greater than a threshold drop count.