Network Data Reconciliation via Layered Difference Detection
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Network planners face challenges in reconciling planned network data with deployed network data due to differences in the actual configuration of fiber optic networks, leading to inconsistencies that can affect further changes and modifications.
Innovation Solution
A method and system for reconciling planned network data with deployed network data by detecting differences and automatically or manually updating the planned data based on the type of difference, using a three-layer approach (link, digital, and service layers) to ensure accurate representation of the network state.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If automatic updating of planned network data is implemented, then productivity is improved, but reliability deteriorates due to potential inaccurate changes
Solution Approach 1:
The system changes the parameter of update behavior based on the type of difference detected. For configuration differences (first type), automatic updating is applied to improve productivity. For topological differences (second type), manual review is required to maintain reliability. This parameter change in update behavior resolves the contradiction by adapting the automation level to the risk level of each change type.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback by detecting differences between planned and deployed network data and using this information to trigger appropriate update actions. The feedback loop ensures that only verified differences are automatically applied, while requiring human review for potentially problematic differences, thus maintaining reliability while improving overall productivity.
2Reliability
If manual review of all differences is required, then reliability is improved, but productivity deteriorates due to increased time consumption
Solution Approach 1:
The system applies local quality by treating different types of differences differently. Configuration differences are automatically applied without manual review, while topological differences require manual review. This localized differentiation of handling procedures resolves the contradiction by applying manual review only where necessary to maintain reliability, while automatically processing routine changes to improve productivity.
3Reliability
If the system prompts for input on all differences, then reliability is improved, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the reconciliation process into two distinct paths based on difference type: automatic updating for configuration differences and manual review for topological differences. This segmentation simplifies the overall system logic by handling different scenarios through dedicated, well-defined processes rather than a single complex decision-making mechanism.
Data Source
AI summary
Techniques are disclosed herein for reconciling planned data for a network (such as a fiber optic network) with data describing the deployed network. Network probing and planning components obtain a snapshot of the deployed network and organize the snapshot into three “layers”: the “link layer,” which represents the physical links that underlie the network, the “digital layer,” which includes optical channel groups that divide the total capacity of the physical links, and the “service layer,” which includes the services delivered over the network. The techniques involve comparing the planned data to the deployed data in the order of link layer, digital layer, and service layer. Differences considered to be “minor” are reconciled automatically. Differences that are “major” are reconciled after receiving instructions from a planner or administrator regarding whether to update the planned data based on what was originally in the planned data or what is in the deployed network.