IP Library Granted Patent US 9,319,273
Granted Patent B2
US 9,319,273 · App. 13/715,753 · Granted Apr 19, 2016

Policy coordination between policy enforcement points

Inventors: Martin Schwarze (Burnaby, CA); Mu-Jin Liu (Shanghai, CN); Zhi-Jie Dai (Shanghai, CN); Bo Wang (Shanghai, CN)
Assignee: Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP
H04L41/0816H04L41/5019H04W76/022H04W88/16
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 9,319,273
App. No.
13/715,753
Granted
Apr 19, 2016
Kind
B2
Abstract

According to an example, a unified policy management system may include a session manager module to establish sessions with policy enforcement points. A notification manager module may receive an event trigger notification from a policy enforcement point via an interface session. A coordination engine may determine whether an event identified from the event trigger notification is to cause a change in policy enforced by another policy enforcement point and facilitate the change via another interface session.

Claims (35)

1. A Unified Policy Management (UPM) system comprising:

at least one processor; and

a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that when executed by the at least one processor cause the at least one processor to:

establish interface sessions with a plurality of policy enforcement points (PEPs), wherein the interface sessions are for a same subscriber;

receive an event trigger notification from a first PEP of the plurality of PEPs via a first interface session of the interface sessions;

determine whether an event identified from the event trigger notification is associated with a policy enforced by a second PEP of the plurality of PEPs;

in response to a determination that the event identified from the event trigger notification is associated with a policy enforced by the second PEP, determine whether the policy enforced by the second PEP is to be changed; and

change the policy to be enforced by the second PEP in response to a determination that the policy enforced by the second PEP is to be changed, by sending a message to the second PEP via a second interface session of the interface sessions to change the policy in the second PEP.

2. The UPM system of claim 1 , wherein the instructions are to cause the at least one processor to receive a message from the second PEP indicating that the policy has been changed, and to send a message to the first PEP that the policy has been changed.

3. The UPM system of claim 1 , wherein the first PEP is in a gateway service node.

4. The UPM system of claim 1 , wherein the first PEP is in a gateway service node and the second PEP is in a deep packet inspection device.

5. The UPM system of claim 1 , wherein the first PEP is to perform bearer level quality of service policy enforcement.

6. The UPM system of claim 1 , wherein the second PEP is to enforce service policies.

7. The UPM system of claim 1 , wherein the instructions are to cause the at least one processor to determine whether the policy enforced by the second PEP is changed based on policy change rules stored in a data storage device at the UPM system.

8. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing machine readable instructions executable by at least one processor to:

establish interface sessions between a Unified Policy Management (UPM) system and a plurality of policy enforcement points (PEPs) that enforce policies;

receive an event trigger notification from a first PEP of the plurality of PEPs via a first interface session of the interface sessions;

determine whether an event identified from the event trigger notification is associated with a policy enforced by a second PEP of the plurality of PEPs;

in response to a determination that the event identified from the event trigger notification is associated with a policy enforced by the second PEP, determine whether the policy enforced by the second PEP is to be changed; and

change the policy to be enforced by the second PEP in response to a determination that the policy enforced by the second PEP is to be changed, by sending a message to the second PEP via a second interface session of the interface sessions to change the policy in the second PEP, wherein the first and second interface sessions are for a same subscriber.

9. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the machine readable instructions are executable by the at least one processor to:

establish the first and second interface sessions by exchanging messages with the first and second PEPs, respectively.

10. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the policy change is associated with a bearer level quality of service policy or a service policy.

11. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the machine readable instructions are executable by the at least one processor to:

receive a message from the second PEP via the second interface session indicating that the policy has been changed; and

send a message via the first interface session to the first PEP that the policy has been changed.

12. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the first PEP is in a gateway service node to facilitate communication between a general packet radio service network and an external packet switched network to enforce service policies.

13. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the first PEP is to enforce bearer level quality of service policies.

14. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the second PEP is to enforce service policies.

15. A method comprising:

establishing sessions between a Unified Policy Management (UPM) system and first and second policy enforcement points (PEPS) via first and second interface sessions, respectively;

receiving, by the UPM system, an event trigger notification from the first PEP via the first interface session;

determining, by at least one processor of the UPM system, whether an event identified from the event trigger notification is associated with a policy enforced by the second PEP;

determining whether the policy enforced by the second PEP is to be changed; and

changing the policy to be enforced by the second PEP in response to a determination that the policy enforced by the second PEP is to be changed, by sending a message from the UPM system to the second PEP via the second interface session to change the policy in the second PEP.

Assignments (3)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 17, 2024
From: HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT LP
To: HCL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED
Reel/Frame 069715/0743 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 9, 2015
From: HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P.
To: HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT LP
Reel/Frame 037079/0001 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 20, 2012
From: SCHWARZE, MARTIN; LIU, MU-JIN; DAI, ZHI-JIE; WANG, BO
To: HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P.
Reel/Frame 029513/0772 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20140136674A1 · May 15, 2014