KR100312015B1 - Fault-posit ion Decision Method in the Plesiochronous Optical Transmission Equipments Net work - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention is a method for determining a fault location in a communication network composed of an asynchronous optical transmission device, and more specifically, the various alarms generated in the asynchronous optical transmission device are classified into device alarms, circuit alarms, and power alarms. The present invention relates to a method of defining a top and bottom relationship to limit a main cause alarm so that it is possible to easily find a main alarm even when several alarms occur at one time.

According to the present invention, it is possible to easily identify the fault alarm causing the main cause for the multiple fault alarms occurring in the device by setting the order between the fault alarms for the alarms generated in the optical transmission device. It is therefore possible to estimate the exact fault zone by receiving and analyzing all alerts of the affected devices.

In addition, it is easy to automate the process of determining the fault location by using various status information generated by the equipment in case of a fault, and the network manager can quickly identify the cause of the fault in operating the network, thus preventing accidents and follow-up measures. There is an advantage to cope more effectively.

Description

Fault-positive ion decision method in the Plesiochronous Optical Transmission Equipments Net work

The present invention is a method for determining a fault location in a communication network composed of an asynchronous optical transmission device, and more specifically, the various alarms generated in the asynchronous optical transmission device are classified into device alarms, circuit alarms, and power alarms. The present invention relates to a method of defining a top and bottom relationship to limit a main cause alarm so that it is possible to easily find a main alarm even when several alarms occur at one time.

The communication network composed of asynchronous optical transmission device is a situation where the operator directly manages the operation status of the equipment in the field by visual or auditory.In the conventional judgment method, when the equipment breaks down or the line is disconnected, The fault location can be inferred through the accident report or the loop back test is used to investigate the accident section.

The conventional determination method exhibits the following problems.

First, the asynchronous optical transmission device may cause confusion in determining the direct cause from the operator's point of view because a number of failures are associated with the asynchronous optical transmission device.

Second, in a communication network composed of asynchronous optical transmission devices, fault alarms are generated for each device, and there is no function of monitoring the entire communication network by exchanging information between devices. Therefore, even if a specific device fails, it is not easy to find a device that causes the main cause among the failed devices because it affects peripheral devices to generate a fault alarm.

Third, in a communication network composed of an asynchronous optical transmission device, it is not possible to provide an accurate judgment criterion when the cause of the failure alarm is a circuit rather than a device.

Fourth, in managing a communication network composed of asynchronous optical transmission devices, the network manager in case of failure due to the absence of a method for systematically managing fault alarms inside a device, fault alarms between devices and circuits, and circuit problems in the network. In many cases, it is difficult to identify the cause of disability due to a number of disability alerts, which makes it difficult to effectively prevent accidents and take effective follow-up.

The present invention addresses the problems of the prior art described above.

By categorizing the fault alarms and ranking the alarms, it is easy to identify the direct cause, and the alarms caused by the cause can be regarded as the impact alarms in the situation judgment and ignored.

If the cause of the fault alarm is a line other than a device, the database related to the line is collected so that all alarms of the devices affected by the line failure can be received and analyzed, and the fault alert for each device is comprehensively analyzed to determine the correct fault section. To estimate,

Furthermore, it is intended to provide a method of systematically managing the overall monitoring function of the communication network and fault alarms.

Accordingly, it is an object of the present invention to accurately estimate the failure interval by analyzing the alarms generated in each device with respect to the various alarms generated in the asynchronous optical transmission device.

1 is an explanatory diagram showing a failure estimation section in the device failure alarm, reception failure alarm, power failure alarm.

Figure 2 is a 90Mbps optical end station apparatus optical transmission and reception unit failure determination table of the present invention.

3 is a flowchart of a fault location determination algorithm of the present invention.

Figure 4 is a communication network showing a failure estimation interval represented by the reception failure alarm.

5 is a communication network diagram showing a failure estimation section from a plurality of reception failure alarms.

Figure 6 is a communication network showing a failure estimation interval using the reception failure alarm and power failure alarm.

7 is a communication network diagram showing a fault estimation section when there is an alarm leak.

8 is a network diagram showing a fault estimation section in the case of an error in an alarm.

9 is a network diagram showing a failure estimation section when there is an error in the database.

10 is a communication network diagram showing a fault estimation section in the case of misreport, misreport, and multiple faults.

Asynchronous optical transmitter is a device that multiplexes DS1 transmission signal to perform DS3 or DS3 X multiplexing. When one is accommodated in MX13, it is 45Mbps when two are accommodated and 90Mbps is asynchronous when two are accommodated. It becomes a device. Therefore, these devices include a 90Mbps wide end station, a 45Mbps wide end station, and an MX13 line multiplexing unit. Since these devices have similar alarm systems, the present invention will be described for the 90Mbps optical end station device.

90Mbps optical station equipment displays alarm status by dividing into general alarm, main alarm and emergency information according to the degree of failure. In order to use this information for fault location determination, an alarm (device failure alarm, device alarm) that occurs when the cause of the failure is a device problem, and an alarm that occurs when the cause of the failure is a line (line failure alarm, line) Alarm), alarm that occurs to inform that a fault has occurred in a large country (national alarm, large alarm), and alarm that occurs when a threshold value is exceeded or falls short of the communication quality (performance alarm, performance alarm). Classify

The device alarm is due to power failure, optical output failure, optical transmitter internal failure, MUX and DEMUX clock loss, and the like.

The line alarm is due to optical input loss, biopolar vibration, path failure, and the like.

The power alarm is due to power device alarm, power loopback test, alarm recognition in power, etc.

The performance alarm is an alarm that is caused by exceeding a line failure threshold or exceeding a path failure threshold.

1 shows a range of possible failures, that is, a failure estimation section, when a device failure alarm, a reception failure alarm, or a power failure alarm occurs. The device fault alarm indicates that there is a specific fault in the device on which the alert is occurring. A failure due to input loss during line alarm indicates that there is a fault in the line on which the alert was received. Therefore, such an alarm can be called a reception failure alarm. Power failure alarm can be considered as a fault in the equipment of a power station or a line fault in the receiving direction.

The 90Mbps optical end station apparatus has a power supply unit, an optical transmission / reception unit, a high speed unit, and a low speed unit, and corresponding units and fault information are shown in Table 1 below.

<Table 1> Failure Alarm and Priority of 90Mbps Broadband Station

Priority Construction Disability alarm Alarm classification The unit One Power supply Power supply error Device alarm PSAPSB 2 Optical Transmitter and Receiver Light output abnormal Device alarm OTRX-AOTRX-B Optical input loss Line alarm (reception disorder) Internal disorder Device alarm 3 High speed part DS3 input loss Line alarm (reception disorder) T3AT3B BV3, BV6 ' parity error ' remote alarm Power alarm DS3 AIS ' DS3 frame loss Device alarm oscillator failure ' MUX part clock loss ' DEMUX part clock loss ' MUX soft failure ' DEMUX soft failure ' DS3 line BV / hour threshold over-alarm Performance alarm DS3 line BV / day threshold over-alarm ' DS3 track PE / hour threshold over-alarm ' DS3 track PE / day threshold over-alarm ' DS3 line ES / hour threshold over-alarm ' DS3 line ES / day threshold over-alarm ' DS3 line DM / hour threshold over-alarm ' DS3 track DM / day threshold over-alarm ' 4 Low speed remote alarm Power alarm GP1GP2GP3GP4GP5GP6GP7T1PE1PT2P DS2 AIS Device / Power Alarm DS2 frame loss Line / power / device alarm DM12 clock loss Device alarm BV3, BV6 Line alarm DS1 input loss '(Receiving disorder) DS1 line BV / hour threshold over-alarm Performance alarm DS1 track BV / day threshold over-alarm ' TX memory overflow Device alarm TX memory overflow ' test pattern error Device / Power Alarm Track DS1 AIS Power alarm Path DS1 AIS '

Fault determination is defined as a function that defines a faulty device or a fault section, and is processed in two forms as follows.

First, the collected information is classified into 'main cause alarm, which is an alarm output from an actual malfunctioning device or failure site', and 'impact information, which is information that is output by the influence of a device or part that is not a failure itself but is actually a failure'. Do not print information,

Second, when the collected information, such as a transmission path, is caused by a failure of a part that cannot be output, the failure area is estimated and processed.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the device failure and transmission path failure.

Fig. 2 is an optical transmission / reception part (OTRX) fault determination table of a 90Mbps optical end station apparatus, where an OTX alert indicates a transmitter fault alert, an ORX alert indicates a receiver fault alert, and PWR indicates a power failure alert. The failure determination table as shown in FIG. 2 is prepared by analyzing the opposing relationship and the vertical relationship between the alarms output from each part based on the connection relationship between the devices.

Typical examples of the opposing relationship are a transmitting transmitting station and a receiving transmitting station facing the terminal. If the transmitter fault alarm and the receiver fault alarm are collected at the same time, the cause of the fault is the sender. This is because the alert at the receiver is assumed to have not received the received signal as a result of the transmitter fault.

An example of a vertical relationship is a power failure alarm and a transmission facility operated by the power supply. In this case, when alarms are collected at the same time, the cause of failure is assumed to be a power failure. This logic can be applied to the 90Mbps optical station equipment, and the upper and lower relations of the classified alarms can be identified as the priority items in Table 1.

If the alarms are collected at the same time as in the above example, if the upper and lower relationships of the alarms are clearly defined, the upper alarm is the priority alarm, and the lower alarm is assumed to be the main cause of the alarm. We are specific. If the main cause of the transmission path failure is that the main cause alarm is not output, the reasoning logic such as 'If the reception failure occurs at both ends at the same time, it is the transmission path failure' is used.

2 is a table that accommodates the above fault determination logic. In the case of a transmitter fault alarm (O TX alarm) and a receiver fault alarm (ORX alarm), when a cause of an alarm is identified as an input loss in an OTRX alarm of an optical transmitter / receiver, a receiver error is detected. If it is caused by an alarm of light output abnormality or internal failure, it can be detected by treating it as a transmission error.

In case of single failure of the station A ORX and the station B ORX, it is possible to determine the failure of each part. In this case, however, the transmission fault detection algorithm should be applied using the alarms of other devices connected to the power device. However, in the case of a single ORX alarm in all transmission network networks, a single device failure is assumed.

3 is an algorithm for determining a fault location, the information collecting step of collecting various alarm information (S101), and the receiving fault alarm determining step of determining whether there is a receiving fault alarm in the information collected in the information collecting step (S102). And, if there is no reception failure alarm, determine as a device failure, and if there is a reception failure alarm, a common section determination step of determining whether a common section exists in the failure estimation section by creating a transmission path failure section table in the line alarm (S103). In the common section determination step, if there is one common section, the section is determined as a single obstacle section, and if there are a plurality of common sections, the common section is determined as a plurality of obstacle sections, and if none of the common sections exist, It is impossible to determine the obstacle section.

In case of transmission path failure, information indicating the location of failure is not collected. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the section using the alarm output from the impact of the failure. In this case, the reception failure alarm and the power failure alarm are used.

Once a reception alarm is collected, the following information can be obtained.

In other words, there is an obstacle in the transmission path in which the alarm is generated. And 'there are obstacles in the group beyond the line of the path generating the alarm.' From the above information, it is possible to limit the failure estimation section as shown in FIG. 4 in one reception failure alarm. When multiple reception failure alarms are generated from one failure, it can be inferred that the failure estimation interval indicated by each alarm includes a failure location. Therefore, in such a case, it is possible to obtain the following information.

'In the case of a single disability, the disability estimation intervals obtained from multiple reception disability alerts have the same common part, and the common part has a disability.'

Therefore, when an alarm indicating a reception failure is opposed, it may be determined that there is a failure in the corresponding section if there is a reception failure in a device on the opposite end of the circuit. If a plurality of such sections are obtained, it may be determined that there are obstacles in common parts of these sections.

5 is an embodiment of the present invention for determining a failure estimation interval from a plurality of reception failure alarms as described above, according to the devices 1, 3, 6, 7 because the reception failure occurs in the device that is their common interval It can be seen that the failure occurred in sections A1 to A3.

As another case, it can be considered that only one circuit has failed. In this case, only the device that is in front of the faulted line will generate a reception alarm. In this case, since the reception failure alarm is not obtained from both of the opposing devices, the minimum section may not be determined by the reception failure alarm alone. However, the section may be limited by using the reception failure alarm.

Figure 6 is another embodiment of the present invention to determine the failure estimation interval using the reception failure alarm and the power failure alarm as described above in the B3, B6, B7, A1 device reception failure occurs in the A3, A6, A7 devices No reception disturbances occurred. In this case, if you use the power failure alarm generated in the A3 device, it can be limited to the fault between the sections from the A3 device to the A1 device.

In the case of determining a device failure or a transmission path failure, the following conditions must be satisfied to exclude errors in the judgment.

First, information should be collected and error free from all devices within the scope of the object of the obstacle section.

Second, device properties and connection data should be available and error free. That is, a network configuration database must be available.

Third, there should be a single failure.

However, these conditions are not necessarily satisfied in an actual communication network. That is, in an actual communication network, alarm information missing, alarm information error, multiple failures, and database error may occur individually or simultaneously.

In this situation, finding a single common section is not easy. Therefore, if the common section is minimized and a plurality of common sections are generated, all of them are designated as candidate failure sections. If the alarm information is missing, there is a device that does not collect the alarm device, there may be no information necessary to minimize the fault zone. In this case, when an alarm occurs, the failure candidate section is more comprehensive than the actual one, and the failure section cannot be precisely defined. Therefore, the device that collects the alarm information should be selected in consideration of the minimum unit required to determine the fault section. When the alarm information is not collected by the A1 device as shown in FIG. 7, the fault estimation section is a comprehensive section including the fault section.

If there is an error in the alarm information, there may be a failure estimation section that does not have a common part. When there are few error alarms, each alarm having a common part of contradictory alarms is grouped to set a plurality of common parts as a failure estimation section.

FIG. 8 is an embodiment of the present invention in the case where there is an error in the alarm as described above, and the fault obtained from the fault estimation section A1 to A3 obtained from the fault detection alarm of the device A1 and the fault detection (error) of the device B1. There are no common parts in the estimation sections B1 to B3. In this case, the assumption and contradiction occurs that a single failure must have the same common part. However, a plurality of disability estimation sections include disability sections.

Even in the event of multiple failures, the assumption of a single failure cannot be met, as in the case of an alarm failure. In particular, since a plurality of alarms are likely to contradict, it is not easy to group by the same method as in the case where there is an error in the alarm information. Therefore, use the following method.

(1) Select any reception fault alarm and set the alarm as a group element.

(2) Select reception error information which is not yet selected and check whether it is inconsistent with all elements of the whole group.

(3) If there is no contradiction, the information is included in the group (possible to add to more than one group) and returns to (2).

(4) If there is a contradiction, return the alarm to (2) with the new group element.

(5) Repeat steps (2) to (4) until all reception failure alarms are selected.

(6) Find common parts for each group found.

(7) The common part obtained is the fault estimation section.

9 shows a situation in which multiple disorders have occurred, and the method is as follows. First, if you create a fault estimation section for each alarm,

a. Device A1: A1-A3

b. Device A3: A3-A1-C-B1-B3

c. Device A4: A4-A2-A1-C-B1-B2-B4

d. Device A6: A6-A3-A1-C-B1-B3-B6

e. Device A7: A7-A3-A1-C-B1-B3-B7

f. Device B2: B2-B4

g. Device B3: B3-B1-C-A1-A3

h. Device B4: B4-B2-B1-C-A1-A2-A4

i. Device B6: B6-B3-B1-C-A1-A3-A6

j. Device B7: B7-B3-B1-C-A1-A3-A7

If you make a subset of the failure estimation intervals in these devices by collecting the ones that do not contradict each other by (1) to (5),

Group 1: {a, b, d, e, g, i, j}

Group 2: {b, c, d, e, g, h, i, j}

Group 3: {c, f, h}

Three groups are created as follows. If we find the common part for each group here,

Group 1: A1 to A3

Group 2: A1-C-B1

Group 3: B2 to B4

Becomes In addition to the actual obstacles A1 to A3 and B2 to B4, the section A1 to C1 and B1 appeared as a result of the judgment.If the alarm information is correct and there is no error, the alarms facing the devices A1, C and B1 Considering that this does not occur, this section is excluded from the fault estimation section. In this way, it is possible to estimate the fault interval even if multiple alarms occur.

If the database is incomplete, the fault estimation section cannot be created correctly because there is an error in the device's connection data such as line history or no information has been entered. Therefore, there is a situation in which there is no common part in the section indicated by the plurality of alarms, and it is impossible to accurately find a line in which an error has occurred in an alarm indicating a reception failure, and a determination is impossible such that the opposing device is not interpreted. In FIG. 9, there is no information on a device opposite to the device A3, and a failure alarm occurs when the wrong information is stored in the database in A1 and A6. In FIG. 9, it can be seen that the common section does not exist and it is impossible to estimate the fault section due to an incorrect fault estimation section.

If there is any possibility except database error, there is a situation where alarm information is missing or error and multiple faults occur simultaneously in actual network. In reality, there is little probability of occurrence, but when these situations occur in combination, the failure estimation interval is obtained by applying the algorithm used in case of multiple failures. However, in the case of simultaneous occurrence, it may not be possible to judge.

The present invention can easily identify the fault alarm that caused the main cause for the multiple fault alarms generated in the device by setting the order between the fault alarms for the alarms generated in the optical transmission device, and also because of the line failure By receiving and analyzing all alerts of the affected devices, it is possible to estimate the correct fault zone.

In addition, it is easy to automate the process of determining the fault location by using various status information generated by the equipment in the event of a failure, and the network manager can quickly identify the cause of the failure in operating the network, thus preventing accidents and follow-up measures. There is an advantage to cope more effectively.

Claims (9)

A method of determining a fault location in a communication network composed of an asynchronous optical transmission device, comprising: an information collecting step (S101) for collecting various alarm information; A reception failure alarm determination step (S102) of determining whether there is a reception failure alarm in the information collected in the information collection step; If there is no reception failure alarm, it is determined to be a device failure, and if there is a reception failure alarm, a common section determination step (S103) is made to determine whether a common section exists in the failure estimation section by creating a transmission path failure section table in the line alarm. Became, In the common section determination step, if there is one common section, the section is determined as a single obstacle section, and if there are a plurality of common sections, the common section is determined as a plurality of obstacle sections. A failure location determination method in a communication network comprising an asynchronous optical transmission device, characterized in that it is determined to be incapable of processing. The alarm of claim 1, wherein the various alarms generated by the asynchronous optical transmission device are classified into device alarms, line alarms, power alarms, and performance alarms for each alarm, and the upper alarms are assigned to the main causes by giving priority to the classified alarms. And classifying lower alarms into effect alarms so as not to output the impact alarms, thereby limiting the main cause alarms. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein when the reception failure alarm is opposed, it is determined that there is a failure in the corresponding section if there is a reception failure in the device on both sides of the disabled line, and when the plurality of sections are obtained, it is determined that there is a failure in the common section of the plurality of sections. A failure location determination method in a communication network comprising an asynchronous optical transmission device, characterized in that. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein if the reception failure alarm occurs only on one line of the opposing device, the failure zone is further determined by using an additional failure alarm. . The method of claim 1, wherein a common section is minimized in case of missing alarm information, errors, and multiple faults, and designates all of the common sections as fault candidate sections when a plurality of common sections occur. A failure location determination method in a communication network composed of an asynchronous optical transmission device. 6. A communication network comprising an asynchronous optical transmission apparatus according to claim 1 or 5, wherein in the case where there is a lack of alarm information, an apparatus for collecting alarm information is selected in consideration of the minimum unit required for determining a fault section. How to determine the fault location. 6. The asynchronous optical transmission as claimed in claim 1 or 5, wherein when there is an error in the alarm information, each alarm having a common part of contradictory alarms is grouped and a plurality of common parts are set as a fault estimation section. Method for determining fault location in a communication network composed of devices. The method according to claim 1 or 5, wherein if multiple disorders occur (1) select an arbitrary reception failure alarm as a group element, and (2) select an unselected reception failure alarm to check whether or not there is mutual contradiction with all elements of the entire group, (3) if there is no contradiction, include the alarm in a group and return to the step of posting (2); (4) If there is a contradiction, return the alarm (2) with the alarm as a new group element; (5) Repeat the process of (2) ~ (4) until the entire reception failure alarm is selected, (6) A fault location determining method in a communication network comprising an asynchronous optical transmission device, characterized in that the common part is a fault estimation section by obtaining a common part for each group obtained through the electrical processes. The fault location determination method according to claim 1, wherein the fault section table is prepared by dividing the ORX and the OTX between the two stations.