Dynamic restoration process

Claim 2

A process for generating an optimal restoral route for a telecommunications network having a diverse interconnected set of nodes arranged in a dynamically changing topology updated in a database, the network impacted at a failure point between source and target nodes, the process comprising the steps: identifying all possible short routes, which are those that accumulate less than a specified maximum threshold of cost, and include either a left-hand route from the source node to the target node, or a right-hand route from the target node to the source node; and if no short route is found that connects the source and target nodes, then identifying long routes by identifying an intersection of right-hand and left-hand routes.

Claim 3

A process for generating an optimal restoral route for a telecommunications network having a diverse interconnected set of nodes arranged in a dynamically changing topology updated in a database, the network impacted at a failure point between source and target nodes, the process comprising the steps: (a) defining the source and target nodes separated by the failure point; (b) finding a left hand short route between the source and target nodes; (c) assessing operational costs along the route; (d) determining, from the costs, whether the route is optimal; (e) exiting the process if the route is optimal and identifying the left hand short route.

Claim 4

A process for generating an optimal restoral route for a telecommunications network having a diverse interconnected set of nodes arranged in a dynamically changing topology updated in a database, the network impacted at a failure point between source and target nodes, the process comprising the steps: (a) defining the source and target nodes separated by the failure point; (b) finding a left hand short route between the source and target nodes; (c) assessing operational costs along the route; (d) determining, from the costs, whether the route is optimal; (e) exiting the process if the route is optimal and identifying the left hand short route.

Claim 5

The process set forth in claim 2 further comprising the steps: (f) continuing as follows with the process if the route is not optimal; (g) finding a right hand route between the source and the target nodes; (h) finding a long route between the source and target nodes; and (i) determining whether the long route is superior to the left hand route.

Claim 6

The process set forth in claim 3 further comprising the steps: (j) exiting the process if the long route is superior, and identifying the long route as an optimal route; or (k) exiting the process if the long route is not superior, and identifying the short route as an optimal route.

Claim 7

The process of claim 2 wherein steps (b) and (g) respectively comprise the subprocess steps: finding a next node set between the source and target nodes to be evaluated; exiting the subprocess if there is no next node set; continuing with the subprocess if there is a next node set; finding a best route for the current node set; comparing a current route to a previous optimal route; returning to the step of finding a next node set if the comparison is unfavorable; and identifying the current route as an optimal route in the event the comparison is favorable.

Claim 8

The process of claim 5 wherein the step of finding a next node set comprises the subprocess steps: determining if an instant node set is for a left hand route; if the determination is positive, continuing as follows-- processing the next source node from the instant node set; determining whether there is a next source node; exiting the subprocess if the determination is negative; if the determination is affirmative, processing the next viable target node; determining if there is a next target node; exiting the subprocess if there is a next target node, or returning to processing a further next source node if there is not; if the determination is negative, continuing as follows-- processing the next target node as a source node; determining whether there is a next target node; exiting the subprocess if the determination is negative; if the determination is affirmative, processing the source node as the next target node; determining if there is a next source node; exiting the subprocess if there is a next source node, or returning to processing a new next target node as the next source node if there is not.

Claim 9

The process of claim 5 wherein the step of finding a best route for a current node set comprises the subprocess steps: beginning the subprocess at a source node; determining a route to a next node; determining whether the next node already exists in a current route and if it does determining the operational cost for a new route segment from the database; accumulating the cost over the route, including the next node; recording the cost over the route; comparing the accumulated cost to a preselected threshold; if the accumulated cost exceeds the threshold, continuing as follows-- eliminating the next node from routing consideration; and returning to the step of determining a route to the next node; if the accumulated cost does not exceed the threshold, continuing as follows-- determining whether the accumulated cost exceeds the best current route cost; if the determination is affirmative, eliminating the next node from routing consideration and reiterating the subprocess to select a new route to a new next node; and if the determination is negative, identifying the new route as the best route between the source and the current node.

Claim 10

The process of claim 7 further comprising the subprocess steps: recording intersection information, from the database, between the new best route and other routes connecting the source an current node; determining whether the route is a left hand route or a right hand route; if it is a right hand route, continuing with the following-- determining whether the current node is an intersection node and routing to the next node if it is not; or if it is, alternatively determining if the route is optimal; exiting the subprocess if the route is optimal; or if it is not, alternatively determining if the route is better than the best current route; routing to a next node if the route is not better; or if it better, alternatively recording the route as a best current route; if it is a left hand route, continuing with the following-- determining whether the current node is a target node and routing to the next node if it is not; or if it is, alternatively determining if the route is optimal; exiting the subprocess if the route is optimal; or if it is not, alternatively determining if the route is better than the best current route; and routing to a next node if the route is not better; or if it better, alternatively recording the route as a best current route.