Protection Group Switching Using Class Markers
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current network elements face resource-intensive and time-consuming processes in identifying and dropping inactive flows during protection switching, as they require a large number of rules to manage unique flow identifiers, consuming device resources and CPU cycles.
Innovation Solution
The method involves marking working and protection flows with unique class markers, allowing for efficient identification and dropping of inactive flows using a reduced number of rules, thereby conserving device resources and reducing the time required for protection switching.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If a large number of rules are used to manage unique flow identifiers, then flow identification accuracy is improved, but device resource consumption and processing time increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent merges multiple flow identification rules into a single rule by utilizing the existing class of service (CoS) marker field. Instead of creating separate rules for each flow identifier, the system combines flow identification with the existing CoS marking mechanism, allowing a single rule to handle multiple flows by matching on the CoS marker value that indicates protection group status.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent makes the CoS marker field serve multiple functions: its traditional function for quality of service classification and an additional function for indicating protection group status. By encoding protection group information in the CoS marker, the system eliminates the need for dedicated flow identification rules, as the same field now performs both traffic classification and protection state indication.
2Measurement precision
If a large number of rules are used to manage unique flow identifiers, then flow identification accuracy is improved, but protection switching time increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent merges flow identification with protection state indication into a single rule evaluation process. By encoding protection group status in the CoS marker field, the system evaluates only one rule instead of multiple rules during protection switching, dramatically reducing the time required to identify and switch protection flows.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs preliminary marking of protection flows with specific CoS marker values before switching events occur. This pre-marking allows the network element to immediately identify protection flows during switching events without requiring complex real-time analysis, enabling rapid protection switching by leveraging pre-configured markers.
3Manufacturing precision
If unique flow identifiers are used for each flow, then flow management precision is improved, but the number of rules and resource requirements increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent makes the CoS marker field universal by having it serve both traditional QoS classification purposes and protection group identification purposes. This multi-functionality eliminates the need for separate unique flow identifiers and multiple rules, as the same CoS marker field now provides both service classification and protection state information.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent combines flow identification functionality with the existing CoS marking infrastructure. Instead of adding separate identification mechanisms that would require additional rules, the system merges protection group identification into the existing CoS marker field, allowing a single rule set to handle both QoS and protection switching requirements.
Data Source
AI summary
According to one embodiment, a method may include receiving a plurality of flows, the plurality of flows comprising a working group of flows received via a working path and a protection group of flows received via a protection path, marking each flow in the working group with a first class marker, marking each flow in the protection group with a second class marker, determining whether each of the working group and the protection group is an active group or an inactive group, determining whether each of the plurality of flows is in the active group or in the inactive group based on whether each of the plurality of flows is marked with the first class marker or the second class marker, dropping each flow in the inactive group, and passing each flow in the active group.