Race Condition for “tel” URI Routing in IMS – Unknown numbers !

Recently, in a discussion I came across a race condition that occurs in IMS for routing tel URIs which no longer exist in the IMS domain (operator’s network).

The problem statement is as follows:

When the operator de-provisions a telephone number from the IMS core, and another IMS subscriber dials this invalid number, then the call traverses the Proxy CSCF and hits the S-CSCF. I am assuming that it is an intra IMS domain call – synonymous to a local call. Here the called party (B-party) is the invalid subscriber. The S-CSCF executes the originating iFC set for the calling party as per the standards. Then, the S-CSCF realizes that the called party address is a tel URI and an ENUM query needs to be performed. As the subscriber has been de-provisioned from the network completely, the ENUM query fails.

This triggers the S-CSCF to forward the call to BGCF believing that legacy interconnect procedures need to be performed and the called party is a legacy subscriber. The BGCF attempts breakout towards the MGCF, which converts it to an IAM and sends it to the PSTN.

The situation would become even more complex with number portability, where we can no longer filter numbers based on ranges alone at the BGCF.

The PSTN domain would send it back to the IMS core thinking that the call was destined towards IMS. As inter-working will take place again at the MGCF for the incoming call leg, this call would land as a brand new call to the I-CSCF (with a refreshed Max-Forwards header) and a new Call-id.

Now, the I-CSCF will perform the DIAMETER user location query to the HSS and this query would fail, as the tel uri never existed in the first place. Based on the procedures in TS 24.229, the I-CSCF will inspect the address (which is the tel URI) and then perform the ENUM query. This query would fail as expected and the call will be forwarded to the BGCF once more mistaking it to the legacy interconnect case.

The sequence of events above would lead to an infinite loop in the network for this call.

Solution:

The solution to this problem is to avoid the breakout to the PSTN through the BGCF in case the user has dialed an invalid number. In order for this to happen, the ENUM query must not fail. Hence, it is proposed that when the user is de-provisioned from the network, the ENUM mapping of his number is changed to a generic SIP URI such as the following –

sip:doesnotexist@domain

This will ensure that this generic SIP URI is returned when the ENUM query is fired. In this case, the S-CSCF will forward the call to the I-CSCF instead of the BGCF. The I-CSCF will then forward the call to the MRFC by executing PSI subdomain routing in the sense of TS 23.228.

This would ensure that the MRF will play an announcement that the “number does not exist”. This is what is needed in this scenario. But, even here, the I-CSCF needs to do some NETANN magic before forwarding the call to the MRF (refer here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4240). Hence, the I-CSCF implementation has to be careful to make this work well.

 

As and when I come across more race conditions in the IMS network, I will post them here (most probably with a possible solution to get around them).

 

Advertisements

IMS User Data Convergence (UDC) and its harmonization with 3GPP GUP

1. Introduction:

In the IP Multimedia Subsystem, data pertaining to the subscriber is managed by different network entities. Network entities maintain role-specific data. This means that the data maintained at the network element satisfies the use cases of that network element only and helps in its proper functioning.

These network entities belong to different telecom planes in the context of network deployment. Some of these entities belong to the signaling plane, some belong to the OSS/BSS plane, others may belong to the services plane and some may be part of the policy/QoS plane.

Therefore, the nature of the data maintained at each telecom tier is specific to the functions it has to perform. There may or may not be a logical/functional linkage between the data fragments belonging to these diverse planes.

However, there are instances where this diverse data has cohesions with respect to each other and there is room for optimized data storage.

Sometimes, it becomes necessary to synchronize the data maintained at different planes. This is usually observed during certain provisioning scenarios.

In order to meet these challenges, and to improve data management and promote optimized storage of data, 3GPP has proposed two central concepts of data management:

1. The 3GPP Generic User Profile (GuP), which represents a uniform and generic data representation paradigm for the IMS subscriber’s data.

2. User Data Convergence (UDC), which presents an alternative architecture for optimized data storage for IMS network elements keeping in mind the challenges of scalability and  redundancy.

This post aims to harmonize these two central concepts to present a unified strategy for IMS data management exploiting the benefits of both these concepts (GuP and UDC).

In addition to subscriber-specific data management, this post also explores possible solutions for maintaining IMS network element specific data by using the concepts of GuP and UDC.

2. Types of User Data in a (telecom) IMS network

The nature of data stored in an IMS network, or in any telecom network can be broadly divided in the following categories:

a. Subscriber specific user profile data

b. Device specific data

c. Service specific data

d. QoS and Policy specific data

e. Charging specific data

f. Provisioning and OSS specific data

g. Access-network specific data

h. IMS network element specific data.

There may me more categories and sub-categories in addition to those defined above. However, these are the “major” data types that are encountered during practical deployment.

The first six categories (a-f) pertain to the data maintained for the customer.

The last  two categories (g-h) are maintained at the individual IMS network elements. This type of data may be regarded as internal configuration data that enables the proper functioning of the network element. This data may also be stored in north-bound management entities (EMS and NMS systems).

Conceptually speaking, the figure shown below summarizes the scope for this post and demarcates the nature of the IMS data that needs to be maintained in a real network:

3. Current Data management situation across telco planes:

Data management in the IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) is distributed amongst network elements.

— When the subscriber is provisioned in an IMS network for the first time, a subscriber user profile is created in the HSS. This data is maintained in the HSS for as long as the subscriber is part of the IMS network.

— If the subscriber opts for certain value added services, data pertaining to such services is maintained in the individual application servers that host the VASs. Some IMS networks also have a Service Delivery Platform (SDP) deployment that is a logical aggregate of SIP application servers. Hence, the data relating to services opted by the subscriber is maintained at the services tier.

— Each subscriber has to be charged and billed for his services based on the tariff plans opted by the subscriber. Charging specific data and the tariff plan related information is maintained at the charging system. The charging system caters to both post-paid (CDF) customers and pre-paid (OCS) customers. This charging profile is used for creating Charging Detail Records (CDRs) when the subscriber consumes his/her services in the IMS network. These CDRs are fed to the billing system (BSS) for the generation of itemized bills.

— As the IMS core network is access independent, an IMS subscriber may own multiple devices that use different access networks to connect to the core network and its services. A subscriber may use Mobile WiMAX to access his data services and video share services. The subscriber may use a mobile handset (HSPA enabled) to access his Presence and presence-enabled services. A set top box may be used for accessing IPTV and triple play services and so on.

Access network based information is stored at the PCRF, HSS and Session Border Controllers (SBCs).

The IMS core network has to store certain information pertaining to these diverse access networks for the following reasons:

a. For providing proper Quality of Service based on the access network being used. Eg: HSPA and Fixed broadband customers shall enjoy GOLD class QoS. However, GPRS and WLAN based customers will be entitled to SILVER class QoS due to the inherent limitations of these networks.

b. For applying access network based policies at the network elements. Eg: If the access network of the customer is Fixed broadband, then the S-CSCF needs to forward all requests unconditionally to an IPTV Application Server.

c. For applying the appropriate charging strategy based on the access network in use. Eg: IPTV based Video on Demand can be charged based on the volume of data downloaded. However, Presence based services may be charged on a monthly basis.

— Device profiles of IMS User Equipment can be stored in an OMA compliant Device Management server. This server can also be used for OTA updates and provisioning actions. Specialized device information such as the contact book, buddy lists and personal network management information can be stored in their respective application servers over the Ut interface.

— OSS information pertaining to the subscriber has to be maintained at provisioning platforms, such as those defined by the NGoSS body. A subscriber may have logged many active requests and queries to the OSS system. These requests are executed by business processes modelled by using BPM (Business Process Management) tools and they frequently require offline action by the carrier. In the meanwhile, the business process related data has to be maintained at the OSS platform until the requests are closed by the operator and the requests are resolved.

In addition to this data, there are special data types that are consumed by the IMS core network for its internal functioning.  Some examples of this data are given below:

a. CSCF internal configuration data (static and runtime)

b. CDRs (at the CDF to be pushed to the BSS)

c. FCAPS data (at the SNMP agent of the NE)

d. Persistent storage data of the CSCFs/HSS (for IMS restoration and HA)

e. Media files of the MRF (announcements, tones etc)

f. EMS/NMS configuration data. (topology graphs, NE information)

g. OSS Data (customer care requests, eTOM module related data)

The following table provides a bird eye’s view on which network entity maintains which data type:

4. The concept of the UDC architecture

4.1 Concepts:

User Data Convergence (UDC) aims to address the siloed approach of data management across telco planes and network entities. In the current data management scenario, data is managed individually by network elements in their own closed repositories. This approach of data management gives rise to rigid data silos.

When scaling the network, the number of network elements also increase. This leads to further fragmentation of user data amongst multiple instances of the same logical application.

Eg: For supporting 3 million BHCA, if we deploy 3 HSS instances in the same domain, then effectively user data of that domain is being maintained at three separate locations, even though the data access function (HSS) is the same logical application.

This siloed approach is logically represented as shown in the figure below:

With the advent of IMS and IMS based services, data management at several places poses a major operational and maintenance issue. Introduction of new user data becomes an issue, as any new user data attribute needs to be reflected at multiple locations. Moreover, data synchronization across multiple locations becomes a major challenge.

4.2 UDC Deliverables:

Therefore, UDC aims to provide the following deliverables:

a. To simplify overall network topology and interfaces

b. To overcome the data capacity bottleneck of a single entry point

c. Avoid data duplication and inconsistency

d. Avoid data fragmentation

e. Reduce CAPEX and OPEX for the carrier.

Therefore, UDC aims to provide convergence of user data in order to enable smoother management and deployment of new services and networks.

A logical view of UDC deliverables can be represented as shown in the figure below:

4.3 UDC Architecture:

This section will provide an introduction to the UDC architectural model and its major interfaces.

The architecture consists of the following major components:

a. Client applications.

Client applications may be IMS clients, XDM clients, SIP based application servers or PC browsers.

b. Application Front ends.

The application front ends are functional entities, such as the HLR/HSS/AUC, Application Servers, Access Network Discovery and Selection Function in Home Network (H-ANDSF), any other Core Network nodes, Provisioning system, etc.

When the UDC architecture is applied, application front ends keep the application logic, but they do not locally store user data permanently. These data-less functional entities are collectively known in the UDC architecture as Application Front Ends.

There is a special Application front end for the UDR which is used as a provisioning application for it. It is called a Provisioning Front End. The Provisioning Front End is defined as an Application Front End for the purpose of provisioning the UDR. The Provisioning Front End provides means to create, delete, modify and retrieve user data.

c. User Data repository.

The User Data Repository (UDR) is a functional entity that acts as a single logical repository that stores converged user data. The user-related data that traditionally has been stored into the HSS /HLR/AuC, Application Servers, etc., is now stored in the UDR according to a UDC information model. UDR facilitates the share and the provisioning of user-related data throughout services of 3GPP system.

UDR provides a unique reference point to one or more Applications Front Ends, such as: one or more HSS/HLR/AuC-FEs, and one or more AS- FEs. The reference point is named Ud. UDR shall provide support for multiple applications simultaneously.

Applications that are 3rd party or are outside the trusted domain of the IMS network can access the UDR after proper authentication and authorization procedures have been applied.

The diagram below shows this architecture:

The Ud reference allows different FEs to create, read, modify and delete user data stored in the UDR.

The Ud reference point also supports subscriptions/notifications functionality which allows a relevant FE to be notified about specific events which may occur on specific user data in the UDR.

The events can be changes on existing user data, addition of user data etc. All these operations are ACID compliant (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, and Durability).

5. The concept of the GUP architecture:

Conceptually speaking, the GUP is a 3 tier architecture. It consists of client applications, the GUP server and the data repositories.

The key objective of having this architecture is to have a harmonized means of data access for a particular user. A user may have data relating to his services, charging policies, QoS metrics and HSS profile data, all of which is maintained separately by these entities. Each entity would also have its own unique semantics of data storage.

The GUP provides a common mechanism of data addressal, reference, access and modification to all applications that may need this data for their functioning. GUP data may be stored at one place, or it may be stored with different entities. However, the data access and manipulation semantics shall comply to the GUP architecture. This will allow uniformity with regard to the management of the subscriber’s data.

The suppliers and consumers of the data can be divided into the following groups of applications:

–     Applications in the home network.

–     3^rd Party Applications.

–     OAM and subscription management applications.

The Generic User Profile architecture is composed of the following major components and interfaces:

a. GUP Server:

The GUP Server acts as a single point of access of subscriber data. The physical location of the GUP server is implementation dependant and the standard does not impose any special requirements. The GUP server acts as a single  interface which is  exposed to the client applications who wish to manipulate the subscriber data.

The GUP server can act in two modes, namely proxy mode and redirect mode. While operating in proxy mode, all requests made to the GUP server are proxied  to the appropriate data repositories. The results of those queries are returned back to the application by the GUP Server.

While operating in redirect mode, the GUP server redirects the client application to the actual GUP repositories that contain the data which was requested initially by the client.

The interface between the client applications and the GUP server is the Rg reference point.

b. Repository Access Function (RAF):

The RAF behaves as an abstraction between the GUP server and the GUP data repositories. It hides the actual implementation of the data repository from the server. The interface between the GUP server and RAF is the Rp reference point.

c. GUP Data Repositories:

The data repositories store the master copy of one or more GUP data components.

d. Rg and Rp reference points:

These are the two major reference points in the GUP architecture. The clients share the Rg reference point with the GUP server. The protocol on this interface is SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol) which is exposed as a web service to the clients.

The GUP server has the Rp reference point towards the RAF. This reference point is implementation dependant. However the standard shows a SOAP interface on this interface

The Rp reference point shall allow the GUP Server or applications, excluding external applications (e.g. located in a third party application or in the IMS UE), to create, read, modify and delete user profile data. Rp is an intra-operator reference point.

e. Client Applications:

These are the application servers and applications that need access to GUP data components. They may host some GUP data components themselves and may act as RAFs.

The physical architecture of the GUP arrangement is shown below:

6. Harmonizing UDC with the GUP architecture:

These two architectural options provided by 3GPP can be harmonized and used together to achieve a cohesive strategy for data management and access.

While UDC provides a common data management and access architecture, GUP provides a means of locating and addressing that data using a common strategy.

This section will provide a unified architecture that leverages upon the concepts of UDC and GUP to provide a unified data management strategy in an IMS network.

6.1 Unified architectural view (GuP+UDC):

A unified view of the integrated Generic User Profile architecture with the User Data convergence paradigm is shown below:

The unified architecture will consist of the following  concepts:

a. The client applications

These are the applications which act as consumers of the data. The data being referred to in the unified architecture is the GUP data fragments. The GUP data is being stored in GUP repositories that form parts of the User Data repository (UDR).

b. The Rg reference point re-use for UDC:

For applications that wish to access the UDR over a proprietary interface (labelled as “other ref points” in the UDC standard) shall use the standardized Rg reference point that follows the SOAP/WSDL standard semantics over HTTP. Client applications such as Web 2.0 applications, OSS entities and self care portals can use the Rg reference point to access the UDR.

c. Partial standardization of the Rp reference point for intra operator entities:

The Rp reference point allows entities belong to the same home network to directly access the user data from the RAF. Therefore, SIP application servers will access the user data over the Sh interface from the HSS belonging in the same network. However, if it needs to modify data that is outside the scope of the Sh XML schema, it will need to send the request to the GUP server over SOAP giving instructions to execute one of the standard procedures over the Rg reference point (Create,Modify, Delete etc). These procedures will be mapped to their appropriate counterparts over the Rp reference point.

d. RAFs integrated with Application Front Ends (FEs):

Application front ends of the UDC architecture will behave as RAFs for their respective GUP components. These RAFs will support both standard interfaces (as described in point c) and SOAP based Rp interfaces.

e. GUP data repositories integrated with the UDR:

The UDR will now be composed of GUP data repositories. However, there may be instances where the data model of certain GUP components require a separate data repository. In such a case, the GUP repository will be outside the UDR. The location of this distributed GUP component will be resolved by the GUP server by locating the appropriate RAF component.

f. Ud interface between integrated RAF+FEs and UDR:

The Ud reference point will be re-used as an interface between the integrated RAF+FEs and the actual UDR (or independent GUP repository).

6.2 Case Study: HSS IMS GuP Components:

The following figure  gives an outline of the UML model of the logical view of the HSS IMS GUP Components. The main Component is called HSSIMSData.

Each element in that figure represents a part of the XML Schema structure, either a GUP Component or a lower level block of data contained in a GUP Component. Elements marked with the same background colour make up an independently manageable GUP Component, whose root is marked with ‘<<GUP Component>>’.

All HSS IMS GUP Components can be managed with the procedures provided by GUP.

(Click on the image for a larger view)

7. User Data access scenarios:

Please refer to the unified architecture described in Section-6 for realizing these use cases.

7.1 Typical IMS use case:

In this use case, the S-CSCF requests data over DIAMETER protocol from the HSS to execute its duties during IMS registration. Here the Rp interface is nothing but the standard Cx interface.

7.2 OSS entity use case:

In this use case, the service activation eTOM of the OSS system activates the service of a particular subscriber by invoking an operation in the IMS HSS. Here the interface under use is the Rg interface over SOAP protocol.

7.3 SIP-Application server use case

In this use case, a SIP application server retrieves data from the HSS regarding the barring status of an IMS public user identity before executing its service logic along with the repository data stored in the HSS. The repository data is retrieved over the Rp interface, which is nothing but the Sh interface. However, the barring indication information is taken over the Rg interface.

7.4 IMS enablers use case:

A Click-to-Call application fetches the buddy list of a subscriber who has just logged into the server over the standard Rp interface that uses XCAP protocol towards the XDM server. The same application then subscribes to the presence status of each buddy present in the list over SIP protocol.

7.5 Web 2.0 use case:

A Web 2.0 application requests the subscriber’s presence information from the Presence Server and his/her photograph from a Flickr application repository. After the presence data has been fetched, this application retrieves the implicit IMPU set from the HSS. Then this application fetches the location of each of the registered public user identities.

All this information is then rendered on a Google Map application complete with presence status and a photograph thumbnail.

7.6 Self help portal use case:

The subscriber requests to subscribe to the voicemail service over a self help portal. On accepting the agreement, the Self help portal sends a trigger to the charging platform to deduct the amount suitable for this service and executes a create procedure towards the HSS to create an iFC component (The ServiceProfile <<GUPComponent>> defined in the standards). This operation takes place over the Rg interface.

8. Conclusion:

It is feasible to integrate and leverage upon the strengths of the User Data Convergence (UDC) architecture in cohesion with the Generic User Profile (GUP) semantics to derive a hybrid data management strategy.

However, the final reference architecture can be derived only when the concrete use cases to be supported are known.

A unified architecture will make data management and data access more intuitive and re-use the standardization principles wherever possible as demonstrated in Section-6.

Operations And Management (OAM) fundamentals for IMS

Introduction:

OA&M is a central requirement of mission critical telecommunication products.

3GPP defines a generic framework for realizing an OAM architecture. This architecture can be applied for the case of IMS, in order to manage the IMS core network entities. OAM frameworks are implemented as Element Management Systems (EMS) and Network Management Systems (NMS).

Architectural Overview:

The OAM architectural framework is based on Integration Reference Points (IRPs). Each IRP provides a set of requirements for that interface and completely defines the management interface. The IRP is fully described by a requirements specification, an Information Service (IS) specification and finally a Solution Set (SS).  The solution set realizes completely the requirements of the given IRP.

There are four possible solution sets that may be considered for implementation of the IRPs:

1. SNMP Solution Set.

2. CORBA Solution Set.

3. SOAP Solution Set.

4. XML Solution Set.

Of these solution sets, SNMP and CORBA have been around for a long time. SNMP has been considered as a de-facto standard for northbound integration and is generally preferred. CORBA has not seen widespread adoption as compared to SNMP.  SOAP and XML solution sets also present themselves as additional options for IRP realization.

The stress has been on making the IRPs technology independent. Hence multiple options have been provided.

Deployment Architecture:

Each network element that has to be managed, consists of a management client. This management client is called an IRP agent. The IRP agent interacts with the management server, also known as the IRP manager.  In the context of OAM, the management server is the Element Management System for that network element.  The IRP agent is part of the network element that is being managed. These element management systems further integrate with a central network management system.

The overall deployment architecture is shown in the figure below:

The figure above illustrates the following management interfaces:

1. Between the network element and the element manager.

2. Between the element manager and the network manager.

3. Between different element managers.

There can also be interfaces between the network manages of different service provider domains. Those interfaces are not shown in the figure above. The interface between the network element and the element manager implements one of the four proposed solution sets. SNMP is the most widespread protocol used at this interface.

Several element managers integrate to a centralized network management system. At the NMS, abstract functions such as topology management, service provider interface managements, point of interconnects, interfaces towards OSS and BSS systems can be managed and monitored.

Management information also flows between the network elements themselves. However, that interface is not shown as the information may not necessarily be used for monitoring purposes.

Integration Reference Point (IRP) applications:

Some practical IRP applications will be discussed in this section. All IRPs are not covered.

Some of the needed applications are those of FCAPS: (Fault, Configuration,Alarms,Performance and Security).

a) Alarm Management IRP (Fault Management):

Network elements may encounter certain operational faults. These faults have to be escalated in the form of alarms to the element management system. There are two types of faults that may need to be handled.

The first category is that of a ADAC (Automatically Detected and Cleared) fault. Such faults are raised by the network element and then cleared by the network element itself after a certain period of time. These are not critical faults and do not hinder the operational state of the system.

The second category of alarms are those of ADMC (Automatically Detected and Manually Cleared) faults. These faults require that the network element manager or administrator clears the alarms after taking corrective action.

Faults and alarms that are raised by network elements fall under the following basic categories:

1. Hardware faults:

These alarms signify faults in the physical hardware that hosts the application. Hardware failures can cause serious service interruption and need to be conveyed to the element management system. Hardware failures are usually ADMC faults.

2. Software faults:

These alarms signify faults that may occur in the internal modules of a software subsystem of the network element. Such faults may occur due to protocol level errors, exception handling conditions, database errors etc.

3. Functional faults:

These alarms signify that there is an issue with the functionality of the software module that may potentially impede service delivery and may cause potential loss of service.

4. Loss of NE capabilities:

These alarms signify that the network element has lost its capability to provide service due to congestion or overload conditions for example.

5. Communication link failures with other NEs.

These alarms signify that the network element has lost contact with some other network elements. As for example, the S-CSCF may lose its connection to the HSS or the Charging System. Database connectivity may be lost etc.

Fault recovery and corrective actions depends upon the nature of the fault and the process defined for its recovery by the carrier.

b) Configuration Management IRP and Trace Control:

Configuration management pertains to the manipulation of configurable parameters of the network element by the element manager.  This may include logging management, activation or deactivation of tracing on the network element, subscriber specific tracing, enabling or disabling of lawful interception for a certain subscriber etc.

It also includes configuring a high availability cluster of the network element, adding of new nodes, removal of faulty nodes for servicing, dumping of CDRs to an alternate location etc.

Configuration management is of two types:

1. Passive Configuration Management: Passive CM signifies that the management entity gets notified of configuration changes at the network element by virtue of alarms that are raised at the NE.

2. Active Configuration Management: Active CM signifies that the management entity actively participates in manipulating the configurable parameters of the network element.

There can be two approaches by which we may use configuration management. These are:

1. Basic Configuration Management: This involves the changing of a single configurable parameter. Basic CM operations are singular in nature and take place serially.

2. Bulk Configuration Management: This involves the execution of configuration actions by executing a batch file or by spawning a cron job. Such operations affect many configurable parameters parallely and are usually automated.

Configuration management is an important aspect of the product life cycle of a telecom product. In production grade systems, all changes to the network element are carried out using the configuration management reference point. Some of the configurable parameters may also need to be changed for improved performance of the product under certain conditions.

As for example: Database connection pool size manipulation, tracing level modifications and other product specific parameters.

c) Performance Management (Alarm IRP):

Performance of a network element is determined by examining performance counters. As per the architecture, performance management re-uses the Alarm integration reference point.

Performance counters may be of varying types. Network element vendors may also define some of their own proprietary performance counter categories.

However, there are some basic concepts of performance measurement that remain common to most network elements:

1. Traffic measurements and BHCA: This includes the examination of traffic counters pertaining to successfully handled calls and the current BHCA load on the system in production. This gives a fair idea of system performance.

2. Call failure rate: This pertains to the examination of the failed calls, failure reasons and the rate of failure as a percentage of total calls. This provides the administrator with valuable figures to ensure that the system provide carrier grade performance or not (5 nines).

3. Network evaluation: This pertains to the evaluation of the performance on of the system after certain configuration changes take effect on the production grade system. This helps the operator to evaluate whether the changes that took effect were of any benefit to the overall system performance or not.

4. Quality of Service: For media and data intensive applications, there may be performance measurements regarding QoS. This may include parameters such as packet loss and jitter. For more detailed information, please refer to ITU-T Recommendation E.880.

5. Resource consumption: This provides information regarding the resource consumption by the application at a given load. This includes memory footprint, threads, congestion levels, CPU utilization, response time etc.

Performance data may be written to a file and dumped to the filesystem. This file can later be parsed and presented to the administrator on the Graphical User Interface (GUI).

In certain cases, when the performance degrades below a certain level, alarms need to be raised to the network manager. Some examples of such conditions may be overload, congestion, resource exhaustion, call failure rate increase etc. Performance related alarms may be escalated depending upon which performance threshold has been crossed. As for example:

— A new alarm notification A1 (minor) is generated when Level 1 is crossed

–A changed alarm notification A1 (critical) is generated when Level 2 and 3 are crossed

–A changed alarm notification A1 (minor) is generated when Level 3 and 2 are crossed

–A cleared alarm notification A1 is generated when Level 1 is crossed. Alternatively, this alarm may be marked as a ADMC alarm, where the alarm is cleared manually by the administrator.

Alarm generation may happen periodically by a configured monitoring period. This process is illustrated below:

In this regard, performance management functions use the Alarm IRP to communicate with the element manager and raise alarms relating to performance of the network element.

d) Security Management IRP:

Security management has a special meaning when applied to OAM. For the OAM domain, security management refers to the protection of management traffic, operations, authentication of the administrator and role management of various managers that manipulate the network element. The basic goal is to prevent any intentional or accidental damage to the network elements in production.

Security management in OAM should also be accompanied by the generation of security related alarms by the system, in case there is a security breach. What action is taken upon servicing such alarms is based on the local policy of the operator.

Some of the security threats that have been identified by ITU-T in ITU-T Recommendation X.800 are as follows:

• Masquerade.
• Eavesdropping.
• Unauthorized access.
• Loss or corruption of information.
• Repudiation.
• Forgery.
• Denial of service.

ITU-T Recommendation X.800 also mandates that the following security services be provided in order to protect the network against these security risks:

• Peer entity authentication.
• Data origin authentication.
• Access control service.
• Connection confidentiality.
• Connectionless confidentiality.
• Selective field confidentiality.
• Traffic flow confidentiality.
• Connection Integrity with recovery.
• Connection integrity without recovery.
• Selective field connection integrity.
• Connectionless integrity.
• Selective field connectionless integrity.
• Non-repudiation Origin.
• Non-repudiation. Delivery.

For managing security, it is suggested that the IRP Agent authenticates with the IRP managing entity so as to establish a trusted relationship between the NE and the EMS. Authentication should be bidirectional. This means, that the IRP Agent should check whether the IRP manager is authorized to perform certain operations on the NE. On the other hand, the IRP manager should check whether the data/traffic is being received from a trusted IRP Agent.

If there is any bulk data transfer, then the integrity of the data should be examined. At all times, an activity trace log should be maintained of all the operations that have been performed between the IRP Agent and the IRP manager.

In case of any discrepancies,  the management entity should immediately raise security alarms towards the network management system.

Conclusion:

It is imperative that any IMS deployment is supported by a robust EMS and NMS infrastructure. Without a proper standardized management mechanism in place, network management and support is not possible.

In conclusion, the following are some of the salient features that should characterize a management system. This list is not exhaustive and may be extended as per the requirements of the operator.

The salient features of any management infrastructure (MI) are as follows:

1. The MI should be capable of managing nodes supplied by different vendors in addition to the management system itself.

2. It should support standardized interfaces such as SNMP, CORBA or SOAP as specified by the solution sets earlier.

3. It should provide fault management capabilities.

4. It should facilitate remote management operations towards the network elements.

5. Interoperability with other networks regarding the exchange of management information should be supported.

6. It should be secure.

7. It should be able to restore the operational state of the network element in case of failover or switchover scenarios.

8. It should be possible for installing new software releases into the managed network element.

9. It should be possible for managing and installing new instances of the network element into the network.

10. It should be possible for conducting tests against the new installation before commissioning into the live network.

11. Interfaces should be supported towards OSS and BSS subsystems.

12. External non-realtime interfaces towards CRMs should be supported.

There can be many more requirements. However, these ten requirements are an absolute must for any management infrastructure.

In case you found this post useful, please feel free to provide feedback by leaving comments. Thank you.

Scalability Planning for the IMS Charging architecture

Introduction:

The IP Multimedia subsystem provides a well defined and streamlined architecture for charging multimedia calls and services. The IMS network elements interface to the charging platform over the DIAMETER protocol to enable both pre-paid and post-paid charging.

Architectural Overview of IMS Charging:

The IMS charging platform is sub-divided into two major components:

1. The Charging Data Function (CDF).

2. The Online Charging System (OCS).

The CDF is responsible for receiving triggers for offline (post-paid) charging, while the OCS  is responsible for receiving pre-paid charging triggers. The CDF supports the Rf DIAMETER application, while the OCS supports the Ro DIAMETER application interface.

The Charging Detail Records (CDRs) are collected and co-related at the Charging Gateway Function (CGF). The CGF acts as a gateway to the Billing System, which performs mediation duties.

Scalability Challenges:

In the IMS architecture, the P-CSCF, S-CSCF, SIP-application servers, MRF ,MGCF,BGCF and the I-BCF all need to support the offline charging application interface (Rf interface). This means, that they all act as charging clients (CTF) in case of post-paid scenarios and send triggers to the CDF.

The S-CSCF, the MRF and SIP Application servers support the online charging interface towards the OCS. The IMS Gateway function facilitates the online charging functionality in the IMS architecture by acting as a SIP AS.

A quick look at this architectural challenge, presents us with a nearly all connected architecture for the CDF (it interfaces with almost all network elements for postpaid charging). This means, that the CDF acts as a multiplexer of incoming DIAMETER commands.



Even for a simple IMS call, the CDF will receive triggers from the P-CSCF and the S-CSCF. If there is an application server involvement (Eg: Supplementary services) in the call flow, it will receive a trigger from that AS as well. If an I-BCF is present in the network, and the call needs to be terminated in another IMS domain, the I-BCF will also send a trigger to the CDF. This is a very practical scenario, as almost all IMS customers will subscribe to at least one supplementary service and every IMS core network is expected to have border control and peering functions for security (I-BCF acting as an entry and exit point to the network).

This translates into four DIAMETER transactions for the CDF for a single IMS transaction. A single IMS call initiated by an INVITE may have multiple chargeable transactions involved (those for UPDATEs, RE-INVITEs and finally for BYE).

The OCS interfaces with only the S-CSCF, the MRFC and SIP application servers. Hence it is expected to be less loaded as compared to the CDF as shown below:

Scalability Requirements Quantified:

Let us take an example of one IMS call for the sake of calculation. A reasonable load of 100 calls per second is assumed in the calculations.

We will only consider “chargeable” transactions i.e. transactions for whom a DIAMETER trigger will be sent to the CDF. A single call can have an INVITE transaction, an UPDATE transaction, a RE-INVITE transaction (assuming there was only 1 re-invite in the call) and finally a BYE transaction. Thus, we have 4 “chargeable” transactions. For each transaction, a DIAMETER ACR/ACA exchange takes place between each network node and the CDF.

Even for a reasonable load of 100 calls per second on the IMS core, the DIAMETER transactions for the CDF will need to scale up to 1600 TPS. This provides us with a 1:16 scalability requirement for the Charging Data Function.

For the Online Charging System, only the S-CSCF (through the IMS GWF), SIP application servers (if any in the call path) and the MRFC send charging triggers.

For the sake of calculation, if we have one application server in the path of an IMS call, then a single IMS transaction will result in 2 DIAMETER transactions on the Ro interface. Taking the above assumptions, where a single call has 4 “chargeable” transactions, and a moderate load of 100 cps, the OCS requires to support 800 TPS. This provides us with a 1:8 scalability requirement for the Online Charging System.

The scalability factor requirement for both the CDF and OCS is considerable. In case of the OCS, the response time of the CCR will also affect the call setup latency, as the calls to CCR are synchronous. Unless a CCA is received, the SIP signaling is not put through.

Other considerations to plan for scalability:

In view of the above scalability requirements, we can now plan further on the nature of the deployment architecture of the CDF and the OCS.  Even though the scalability requirements for the OCS may seem to be half (800 TPS) of what is projected for the CDF (1600 TPS) , but the complexity of the OCS is much more as compared to the CDF. The online charging system has many internal modules responsible for real-time rate determination, calculation of the units to be debited and account balance management. Moreover, these modules need to be invoked for each IMS call. The OCS also needs to support time based and content based charging paradigms. This means, that the OCS node is a mission-critical and real-time charging engine. Apart from real-time traffic, non-real time traffic such as pre-paid balance inquiries, pre-paid recharging etc also need to be handled at the OCS (either through an IVR or a SMS based mechanism).

On the other hand, the CDF is responsible for creating and dumping the CDR files. There is no real time rate determination or account balance management involved. The raw CDRs are transported to the billing system (BSS) over FTP, where the itemized billing and mediation takes place.

Deployment planning and possible scenarios:

In view of these architectural discrepancies and varying levels of complexities between the CDF and the OCS, it is clear that there needs to be an architectural separation between the OCS and CDF for deployment. This means, that we have to deploy both nodes independently on dedicated machines and possibly in their own independent clusters.

Let us consider a single IMS domain. A single IMS domain will consist of its own S-CSCF, P-CSCF, SIP application servers (as needed), MRF, I-BCF(or a comparable SBC) and the charging platform (consisting of the OCS and the CDF).

For greater scalability, it is proposed to have a dedicated cluster for each charging entity. The OCS application should have its own cluster and so should the CDF. Both the OCS and CDF may share the same gateway (CGF) to interface to the Billing domain. The clusters should have a DIAMETER load balancer (for the Ro and Rf applications) installed to distribute load amongst the cluster instances.

For hardware configuration, the cluster members may reside on the same machine (for smaller deployments) and on a hardware pair (active-standby) to achieve hardware redundancy. Usually, for carrier grade deployments, hardware redundancy is a necessity.

Discussed below are certain deployment configurations of the OCS and the CDF for varying load requirements. The deployment architectural choices shown below also consider hardware redundancy.

NOTE: “Servers” may vary from case to case. You may go for a T-1000, T-2000 or a higher end SUN server. You may also go for a “cheaper” option by using HP servers (8 cores and 16 GB RAM). For large-scale carrier grade deployments, an ATCA is a must (12 blades and above).

Deployment for up to 1 million BHCA (approx 270 CPS):

270 CPS is assumed to be the call rate of SIP signaling during peak load. This is the most common deployment scenario considered in telecom and usually serves as a benchmark.

For IMS deployments for up to 270 CPS, we can have multiple options. We may go for a HP server pair configured as follows:

a) Server-1 has CDF active and OCS as stand-by.

b) Server-2 has CDF stand-by and OCS as active.

This simple deployment will provide us with software and hardware redundancy, while also providing dedicated 8 core servers for each charging application (OCS and CDF).

Software redundancy can be performed by providing 2 independent processes of the CDF and OCS on each server (active) and 2 more processes of the CDF and OCS (for stand-by). A software load balancer may be used for distributing this load amongst the OCS and CDF processes.

This is called a 1+1 active-standby configuration. Each active instance of the CDF is expected to handle up to 4320 TPS at peak load. Each active instance of the OCS is expected to handle up to 2160 TPS at peak load.

This deployment scenario is shown below. The red-arrows depict change-over in case of hardware failure. Software fault tolerance is taken care of by switching between the software instances of the OCS and the CDF by using a software load balancer.

Each server may host multiple software processes for the CDF and the OCS. Each process can be a full CDF/OCS application in its own right. The load balancer may also be deployed in an active-standby configuration similar to the CDF and the OCS. The CDF and OCS active processes may be more in number, based on the scalability requirements. Each new process of the OCS or the CDF may be instantiated using a CLI or over SNMP, when the element management systems get an alarm of possible overload or traffic peaks.

This  kind of a deployment architecture is shown below:

Other interfaces for this deployment can be a command line interface (CLI) for polling the system and performing administrative tasks. Other interfaces will be over SNMP to the northbound management systems for monitoring the system health and servicing alarms.

Other possibilities:

In case of higher loads, the system can switch to a 1+1 Active-Active configuration, where all software processes of the CDF and the OCS are accepting DIAMETER requests. The load balancer will handle the distribution of the requests amongst the processes. In case the capacity is still not sufficient, new application processes of the CDF and the OCS can be started by firing the appropriate CLI command to scale horizontally.

For deployments for over 1 million BHCA, as shown earlier, the load on the charging platform will be even higher. For catering to such traffic, a time will come when the system needs to scale out. We may require a server pair for the CDF and the OCS dedicatedly.

Another interim option is to have all active CDF processes on one machine and all active OCS process on another machine and horizontally scale by increasing the number of processes.

Conclusion:

This post was an attempt to quantify the challenges at hand for scaling the Charging platform in the conetxt of IMS. As seen, the requirements for scalability for the charging platform is more challenging than the other core network nodes. The scalability factors increase almost exponentially as the load on the IMS core increases. Hence, a robust scalability architecture needs to be devised for catering to the same.