SS7 Protocol Identification Using Service Indicator and Fallback Logic
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing methods for determining the application-level protocol of signaling messages in SS7 networks are inadequate due to the reuse of subsystem numbers (SSN) and translation types (TT), making it cumbersome to identify protocols as the number of nodes increases, especially when a node supports multiple protocols.
Innovation Solution
A method that examines the service indicator (SI) of SS7 message signaling units and additional attributes to identify the application-level protocol, falling back to point codes, TT, and SSN when necessary, to ensure accurate identification.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If subsystem numbers (SSN) and translation types (TT) are used to identify application-level protocols, then the identification process is simple, but the accuracy deteriorates due to protocol reuse of these identifiers
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the protocol identification process into multiple stages: first examining the service indicator (SI) for quick identification, then falling back to examining SSN and TT combinations, and finally using point code mappings as a backup. This segmented approach allows the system to use simple identifiers when available and progressively more complex identifiers only when necessary, resolving the contradiction between simplicity and accuracy.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent adds a new dimension to protocol identification by introducing the service indicator (SI) as a primary identifier, separate from the traditional SSN and TT dimensions. This additional dimension enables more accurate protocol differentiation without requiring more complex analysis of existing fields, thereby improving accuracy while maintaining operational simplicity.
2Measurement precision
If point codes are used to identify application-level protocols, then identification accuracy improves, but device complexity and provisioning difficulty increase as the number of nodes increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies partial action by using point code mappings only as a fallback mechanism when SI and SSN/TT combinations are insufficient for identification. The system does not rely exclusively on complex point code analysis but rather uses it selectively when simpler methods fail, thereby avoiding the full complexity of point code-based identification in most cases while maintaining accuracy when needed.
3Device complexity
If a single identifier method is used for protocol identification, then the system is simple, but reliability deteriorates when nodes support multiple protocols
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements a dynamic identification process that adapts its complexity based on the situation. The system dynamically switches between examining SI alone, SI combined with SSN/TT, and finally point code mappings, depending on what information is available and sufficient. This dynamic approach maintains simplicity in common cases while ensuring reliability in complex scenarios where nodes support multiple protocols.
Data Source
AI summary
Method, systems, and computer program products for identifying the application-level protocol of a signaling message are disclosed. According to one method, a message copied by a network monitoring system is received. The service indicator in the message is examined to determine whether more than one application-level protocol is possible. If more than one application-level protocol is not possible, the application-level protocol is identified based on the service indicator. If more than one application-level protocol is possible, additional message attributes are individually examined to determine whether identification of the application-level protocol is possible based on each attribute. The application-level protocol is identified based on the first attribute for which identification is determined to be possible.