Validation of procedures

Details Validation of procedures Validation of procedures

1999-05-07

2002-11-26

Beausoleil, Robert (Department: 2184)

Error detection/correction and fault detection/recovery

Data processing system error or fault handling

Reliability and availability

C714S050000, C379S015050

Reexamination Certificate

active

06487676

ABSTRACT:

This invention relates to a method of validating a procedure in a network protocol. In particular, the invention relates to a network protocol such as the Intelligent Network Application Protocol (INAP) required for support of Capability Set 1 (CS1) defined in the European Telecommunication Standard ETS 300 374.
In a protocol such as INAP CS1, there exist a number of valid procedures, or sequences of operations, which can be carried out to perform specific tasks. However, since the number of possible procedures is large, the valid procedures are not defined directly, but rather are defined by means of a set of rules. Any procedure, or sequence of operations, which does not violate these rules, is then considered a valid procedure.
In the prior art, the rules can be described by defining a finite state machine (FSM) in respect of each entity, and each interface, an interface being a boundary between two entities. The FSM then acts as a model for the behaviour of a process. An FSM consists of states, which can be connected to each other. A process can only be one state at any one time, but can move from one state to a connected state as a result of an event. On the transistor from one state to another, actions can be performed. Such a system is described in KAKUDA et al, “A Dynamic Resolution Method for Feature Interactions and its Evolution”, Feature Interaction In Telecommunications Systems III, pages presented at the third Feature Interactions Workshop (FIW'9, KYOTO, JP, Oct. 11-13, 1995).
When using an FSM to validate a procedure in a network protocol, the events which control the FSM are then operations defined in the protocol, or other events coming from other processes, such as the call process. The rules, which define the valid procedures in a network protocol such as INAP CS1, are the Single Association Control Function (SACF) and the Multiple Association Control Function (MACF) rules. The SACF rules apply where there is a single association, and the MACF rules apply where there are several related associations, an association being a signalling channel, using a specific interface, which allows communication between two entities.
Unfortunately, describing all of the SACF rules and MACF rules formally with a single FSM requires an excessively complex FSM. The result is that many procedures, including all MACF procedures, are still defined in natural language. There are no mechanisms to validate rules for this type of procedure, namely procedures which cannot be specific in terms of a single FSM per association.
The present invention is concerned with a method of validating a procedure by allowing the rules to be specific by multiple FSMs. Specifically, several processes, each running a specific FSM, are allowed to be involved in the validation of a single event.
The validation of an event takes place in two phases. Firstly, the relevant processes are selected, by assessing whether they meet specific criteria. In the second processing phase, all of the selected processes process the event.
This has the advantage that all of the involved processes are in a stable state, before an event is processed by any of them.


REFERENCES:
patent: 4694422 (1987-09-01), Kakuda et al.
patent: 4754400 (1988-06-01), Wakahara et al.
patent: 5161115 (1992-11-01), Teshima et al.
patent: 5327544 (1994-07-01), Lee et al.
patent: 5394347 (1995-02-01), Kita et al.
patent: 5418793 (1995-05-01), Chang et al.
patent: 5483470 (1996-01-01), Alur et al.
patent: 5574919 (1996-11-01), Netravali et al.
patent: 5623499 (1997-04-01), Ko et al.
patent: 5632014 (1997-05-01), Ek et al.
patent: 5740236 (1998-04-01), Pruitt
patent: 5768498 (1998-06-01), Boigelot et al.
patent: 6324496 (2001-11-01), Alur et al.
patent: 0 505 092 (1992-09-01), None
patent: 0 555 997 (1993-08-01), None
patent: 0 559 339 (1993-09-01), None
patent: 0 579 302 (1994-01-01), None
patent: 0 690 395 (1996-01-01), None
patent: 0 705 012 (1996-04-01), None
patent: WO 94/06252 (1994-03-01), None
patent: WO 95/10912 (1995-04-01), None
patent: WO 95/32573 (1995-11-01), None
Cypher. Lee, Martin-Villalba, Prins and Su “Formal Specification, Verification, and Automatic Test Generation of ATM Routing Protocol: PNNI”.*
Dakroury, Elloy and Ricordel “Specification of a Secured Multi-server MMS protocol” IEEE 1995.*
Cho, Hachtel, MAcii, Plessier and Somenzi “Algorithms for Approximate FSM Traversal” ACM 1993.*
Cai “An Object-Oriented Model for Intelligent Networks” ACM 1992.*
Yoshiaki Kakuda et al., “A Dynamic Resolution Method for Feature Interactions and Its Evaluation”, pp. 97-114, Oct. 11, 1995.
Yasuro Kawarasaki et al., “A New Proposal for Feature Interaction Detection and Elimination”, 127-139, Oct. 11, 1995.
Norbert Fritsche, “Runtime Resolution of Feature Interactions in Architectures with separated Call and Feature Control”, pp. 43-63, Oct. 11, 1995.
T.W. Abernethy et al., “Intelligent Networks, Standard and Services”, pp. 9-20, Apr. 1995.
C.D. Sharp et al., “Advanced Intelligent Networks—Now a Reality”, pp. 153-162, June 1994.

Affiliated with

Also associated with

Rating

Validation of procedures does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.

If you have personal experience with Validation of procedures, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Validation of procedures will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2990099