Keep-Alive Protocol Processor Isolation for Sparing System Downtime
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing sparing systems face challenges in minimizing transition time during failures, leading to service interruptions and increased costs due to the need for redundant hardware, especially in distributed architectures where the number of active subsystems sharing resources is small.
Innovation Solution
Separating keep-alive protocol processing from normal traffic processing, either by using separate processors or processes, to maintain connectivity and reduce downtime by ensuring keep-alive connections remain operational during transitions and reboots.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If redundant hardware is used for sparing, then system reliability is improved, but device complexity and cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The spare subsystem is designed to perform multiple functions: it can back up any of the N active subsystems and also maintain keep-alive connections for all subsystems. This multi-functional design reduces the need for dedicated redundant hardware for each specific function, thereby reducing overall device complexity while maintaining reliability.
Solution Approach 2:
The keep-alive connections are established and maintained in advance before actual failures occur. By proactively maintaining these connections through the spare subsystem, the system prepares for potential failures ahead of time, reducing the impact when failures do occur without requiring extensive redundant hardware for each scenario.
2Reliability
If switching to spare subsystem is implemented, then system reliability is improved, but transition time increases
Solution Approach 1:
The spare subsystem performs preliminary actions by establishing and maintaining keep-alive connections with all N active subsystems before failures occur. This advance preparation ensures that when a failure happens, the transition is minimal because the spare is already engaged and ready, significantly reducing transition time.
Solution Approach 2:
The keep-alive connections maintain continuous useful action between the spare subsystem and active subsystems. This continuity ensures that during failure transitions, the keep-alive connections remain active, preventing service interruptions and minimizing the effective transition time perceived by users.
3Loss of time
If separate processors for keep-alive and normal traffic are used, then downtime is reduced, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The processing functions are segmented into separate processors: one for keep-alive activities and another for normal traffic. This segmentation allows independent operation of each function, so that normal traffic processing can be restarted or switched without affecting keep-alive connections, thereby reducing downtime. The segmentation is applied selectively only to the necessary processing functions rather than the entire system.
Solution Approach 2:
The keep-alive processing function is extracted from the normal traffic processing path and placed in a separate processor. This extraction allows the keep-alive function to be isolated and maintained independently, so that failures in normal traffic processing do not necessarily disrupt keep-alive connections, reducing overall system downtime while adding minimal complexity.
Data Source
AI summary
Systems and methods for maintaining keep-alive processes operational during a hardware and/or software fault condition that interrupts normal traffic exchanged with a subscriber. Preferred systems and methods include at least one processor that isolates keep-alive processes from the normal traffic processes.