UE Conflict Resolution Between ANDSF and RAN Commands

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current systems face conflicts between Access Network Discovery and Selection Function (ANDSF) policies and Radio Access Network (RAN) control commands, leading to potential network control decisions that may contradict ANDSF policies, causing confusion for user equipment (UE) and impacting network and UE performance.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a method where the UE detects conflicts between ANDSF policies and RAN control commands, resolves them by withdrawing conflicting commands based on priority relations, and reports the conflict to the eNB, ensuring that only validated commands are executed, thereby preventing inadequate network actions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If the UE executes both ANDSF policies and RAN control commands independently, then each system can operate autonomously according to its own rules, but conflicts arise between the two command sets causing confusion and performance degradation

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveautonomous operation capabilityVSAvoidnetwork control consistency
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces a conflict detection and resolution mechanism as an intermediary between ANDSF policies and RAN control commands. The UE detects conflicts between the two command sets and reports them to the RAN, which then resolves the conflicts by determining priority relations. This intermediary mechanism prevents direct conflict execution while maintaining autonomous operation capabilities of both systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a feedback loop where the UE monitors and detects conflicts between ANDSF and RAN commands, then feeds this conflict information back to the RAN. The RAN processes this feedback and responds with priority relation information, creating a closed-loop control system that ensures consistent network control decisions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If the UE reports all conflicts to the network, then network control consistency is maintained, but signaling overhead increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenetwork control consistencyVSAvoidsignaling efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by having the UE perform local conflict detection and analysis before reporting to the network. Instead of reporting all possible conflicts, the UE identifies and reports only genuine conflicts that require network intervention. This local processing reduces unnecessary signaling while maintaining network control consistency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Ease of operation

If the network provides priority relation information for all command scenarios, then conflict resolution is simplified, but device complexity and processing overhead increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveconflict resolution simplicityVSAvoidpriority management complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements preliminary action by having the network pre-configure priority relation information for different command types and scenarios. This priority information is provided in advance through RRC signaling, so when conflicts occur, the UE can quickly resolve them using the pre-established priority relations without complex real-time decision-making processes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS9843997B2Apparatuses, methods and computer program products allowing communication via multiple access systems
Publication Date: 2017.12.12 AVAGO TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL SALES PTE LTD
  • US9843997B2 patent drawing
  • US9843997B2 patent drawing
  • US9843997B2 patent drawing

AI summary

In terms of enhancements in relation to, scenarios allowing communication via multiple access systems an example aspect of the present invention encompasses an apparatus, comprising a controller, configured to cause control of a transceiver which is configured to communicate via at least two access systems, receive at least two access control commands from distinct sources, each access control command commanding access to at least one of the at least two access systems, detect a conflict between at least part of the at least two commands, and in case of a detected conflict, resolve the conflict by causing to withdraw at least part of one of the at least two access control commands based on a priority relation between the at least two conflicting access control commands. Further, an apparatus is encompassed which comprises a controller, configured to cause control of a transceiver which is configured to communicate via an access system with a terminal, cause to transmit an access control command to said terminal, said access control command commanding access to at least one of at least two access systems available for said terminal, cause to receive a report from the terminal regarding a detected conflict relating to said access control command. Likewise, corresponding methods and computer program products are addressed.