Conflict Rule Identification in Network Intent Models
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Complex computer networks face challenges in identifying conflict rules between software-defined logical intents and hardware-defined intents, leading to formal equivalence failures, which are difficult to detect due to the lack of congruent forms between these models.
Innovation Solution
The development of systems and methods that receive models of network intents, generate conflict rules, and use Reduced Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams (ROBDDs) to identify paired conflict rules causing equivalency failures, enabling network assurance by modeling network behavior and performing consistency checks without packet data monitoring.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If network operators use a wide array of configuration options to tailor the network to user needs, then network flexibility and control are improved, but network complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces an intermediary system that acts as a mediator between network operators and the complex network configuration. This system automatically generates, validates, and manages network intent models, translating high-level operator requirements into detailed configuration parameters without requiring operators to directly manage the complexity of individual configuration options across multiple network devices.
2Ease of operation
If the network configuration process becomes highly complex to provide flexibility, then network control is improved, but error-proneness increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements preliminary action by automatically generating network intent models and validating configurations before they are deployed to the network. The system performs equivalence checks and conflict detection in advance, identifying and resolving potential errors before they affect network operation, thereby preventing configuration mistakes rather than merely detecting them after deployment.
Solution Approach 2:
The system incorporates feedback mechanisms that continuously monitor network configuration states and compare them against intended behavior models. When discrepancies or conflicts are detected, the system provides feedback to operators about the nature of the conflict and suggests resolutions, creating a closed-loop control system that improves configuration accuracy through iterative validation.
3Reliability
If formal equivalence checks are performed between logical and hardware models to ensure consistency, then network reliability is improved, but the difficulty of detecting and measuring conflicts increases due to non-congruent forms
Solution Approach 1:
The patent transforms the comparison problem by changing the parameters used for equivalence checking. Instead of comparing the raw, non-congruent forms of logical and hardware models directly, the system translates both models into a common intermediate representation with standardized parameters. This parameter transformation enables systematic comparison and conflict detection despite the inherent structural differences between logical intent models and hardware implementation models.
Data Source
AI summary
Systems, methods, and computer-readable media for identifying conflict rules between models of network intents. A first and second model of network intents are obtained, the models describing the operation and communication between one or more network devices in a network. A logical exclusive disjunction between the first and second models is calculated over the space of possible packet conditions and network actions defined by models, without enumerating all possible packet conditions and network actions. It is detected whether the models are in conflict with respect to at least a first network device. If the models are in conflict, it is determined whether a given rule of a plurality of rules associated with the first model is a conflict rule. The determining comprises calculating the intersection between the given rule and the logical exclusive disjunction, wherein the given rule is a conflict rule if the calculated intersection is non-zero.