Coverage Modeling for the Design of Network Management Procedures

  • M. Veeraraghavan

Abstract

Fault-tolerant networks used in applications with high availability requirements need built-in automatic network management schemes to handle faults and congestion. Different timers and threshold parameters need to be specified for these network management procedures. Besides high availability requirements, fault-tolerant networks often have stringent performance requirements as well. Hence a design of network management procedures should simultaneously consider both availability and performance metrics.

In this paper, we define coverage of network management procedures for a given set of performance measures. We outline a coverage modeling technique using Generalized Stochastic Petri Nets (GSPN) to obtain coverage measures. These measures are then combined with a fault-occurrence and repair model to obtain combined performance and availability measures. A GSPN model of a network management procedure called changeover used in Signaling System No. 7 (SS7) protocol based networks, is used to illustrate the coverage and performability modeling techniques.

Keywords

Posit Lost 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    F. Meyer, “On Evaluating the Performability of Degradable Computer Systems”, IEEE Transactions on Computers, Vol. 29, No. 8, pp. 720–731, 1980.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    T. C. Arnold, “The Concept of Coverage and Its Effect on the Reliability Model of a Repairable System”, IEEE Transactions on Computers, Vol. C-22, No. 3, March 1973.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    K. S. Trivedi, J. Bechta Dugan, R. Geist, M. Smotherman, “Modeling Imperfect Coverage in Fault-Tolerant Systems”, Proc. of the Fourteenth International Conference on Fault-Tolerant Computing, 1984.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. Reibman and H. Zaretsky, “Modeling Fault Coverage and Reliability in a Fault-Tolerant Network”, Globecom, pp. 689-692, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    CCITT Specifications of Signalling System No. 7 Recommendations Q.700-Q.716, Blue Book, Volume VI-Fascicle VI.7, Geneva 1989.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    M. Hamilton and N. A. Mariow, “Analyzing Telecommunication Network Availability Performance Using the Downtime Probability Distribution”, Globecom, pp. 590-596, 1991.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    G. Willman and P. J. Kuehn, “Performance Modeling of Signaling System No. 7,” IEEE Communication Magazine, Vol. 28, No. 7, pp. 44–56, July 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    M. Ajmone Marsan, G. Balbo and G. Conte, “Performance Models of Multiprocessor Systems”, The MIT Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    P. M. Merlin, “Specification and Validation of Protocols”, IEEE Transaction on Communications, Vol. COM-27, No. 11, November 1979.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    R. A. Sahner and K. S. Trivedi, “SHARPE-Symbolic Hierarchical Automated Reliability and Performance Evaluator Introduction and Guide for Users”, Duke University, Sept. 1986.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    K. Muppala and K. S. Trivedi, “Composite Performance and Availability Analysis Using a Hierarchy of Stochastic Reward Nets”, in Proc. of the Fifth Intl. Conf. on Modeling Techniques and Tools for Computer Performance Evaluation, Torino, Italy, 1991, Editor G. Balbo.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    K. S. Trivedi, J. K. Muppala, S. P. Woolet, B. R. Haverkort, “Composite Performance and Dependability Analysis”, Performance Evaluation, Vol. 14, 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Veeraraghavan
    • 1
  1. 1.AT&T Bell LaboratoriesHolmdelUSA

Personalised recommendations