User:Birattlesnake/sandbox

birattlesnake Network Restoration Proposal

Networks are essential to any business environment, without networks organizations would be limited to one building or a set location for data transfer. Network engineers should always have a contingency plan for network failure, which I will discuss in detail. For any networked infrastructure, damage to arcs or nodes and associated disruption of network services is inevitable. To reestablish service in a damaged network, affected components must be repaired or reconfigured, a process that can be time consuming and costly. Documentation and planning must be done to identify network restoration strategies that reestablish service quickly and efficiently. The number one strategic goal of service restoration is to ensure that your facility restoration is prioritized so that system performance is maximized. My hopes are to propose a multi-objective optimization approach for network restoration during disaster recovery. The proposed model permits tradeoffs between two objectives, minimization of system cost and maximizahttp://www.training-hipaa.net/template_suite/network_recovery_plan.htmtion of system flow. References: http://searchdisasterrecovery.techtarget.com/Network-disaster-recovery-plan-template http://www.google.com/search?q=newtork+recovery+plans&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGHP_enUS443

Your initial recovery plan should be approached as a project; the most important project a senior network engineer will ever develop and complete. Networked infrastructures are considered an ongoing risk of service disruption due to environmental, technological or intentional damage to networks. Natural disasters, such as earthquakes, floods and hurricanes can have catastrophic effects on wide area and large area networks. Depending on the geographic range of impact, there could be considerable portions of transportation and network outages. For instance, the effects of hurricane Katrina on the U.S. Gulf Coast is a good example of how widespread infrastructure-based disruption can happen due to such an event. In less serious cases such as the December 2006 earthquake off the coast of Taiwan, key components of a network can be impacted, severely limiting the performance of infrastructure systems.

Unexpected events that are smaller in geographic scope can also cause significant damage because their impacts can radiate through a system, resulting in cascading failure of networks and loss of service. For instance, the initial loss of a single electrical generation plant in Ohio led to widespread network outage in the 2003 blackout of the Northeastern portion of the U.S. power grid. More recently, both the failure of a disconnect switch and the subsequent fire in an electrical substation west of Miami resulted in nearly three million customers losing power throughout Florida.

Similarly, structural failures, accidents, as well as seemingly innocuous events such as construction or the dropping of a ship’s anchor, can disrupt service and require time consuming repair efforts. Although accidents and natural disasters are always a concern, other more sinister threats oriented at maximizing infrastructure damage, such as terrorism and acts of war, add additional potential for system disruption. For instance, a major threat to networks heavily reliant on electrical components is a High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) attack. A HEMP insult consists of discharging a nuclear weapon high above the earth’s surface in an effort to generate an intense electromagnetic pulse.

The resulting electromagnetic field has the potential to debilitate electrical, computer and telecommunications equipment over an extremely large area. For example, in the early 1960s, the United States conducted a high altitude nuclear test over the Pacific Ocean and the resulting electromagnetic pulse disrupted electronic equipment and radio communications 800 miles away in Hawaii. In this context, it is believed that a single detonation over Kansas has the potential to impact electronic equipment throughout the continental U.S.

}}

Various approaches have been proposed to address the basic problem of optimal utilization of resources for reestablishing network service. For example, Meshkovskiy and Rokotyan note the importance of restoring network connectivity following a disaster involving the loss of a substantial portion of a network. In particular, they address the case where insufficient restoration equipment exists to completely restore network connectivity.

The problem is viewed as a Steiner tree and a solution heuristic is proposed to restore connectivity to a set of high-priority nodes (as defined beforehand) at minimal cost. Sarker et al. address the problem of sitting housing crews for efficient response to disruptions in electrical power distribution systems. electrical distribution system as a set of cells, with each displaying varying levels of demand. A quadratic, mixed-integer formulation is proposed to site response crews such that the transportation costs associated with repair are minimized. Chen and Tzeng (1999) propose a multi-objective bi-level optimization model for identifying restoration plans that minimize total repair time, transportation costs and down time between projects.

A genetic algorithm is outlined for identifying solutions to their model. Cho et al. (2000) investigate a heuristic approach to restoring earthquake damaged highway infrastructure. Their approach involves assigning damaged network components to spatial clusters in order to facilitate staging of restoration The problem of network restoration is also closely related to that of network maintenance/rehabilitation project scheduling ( Kiyota et al. 1999; Bonyuet et al. 2002; Wang et al. 2003; Madanat et al. 2006). In such problems, the task is to decide which network arcs to rehabilitate or upgrade to optimize user benefit/cost. Although restoration and maintenance/improvement scheduling do share some similarities, they are fundamentally different since service maintenance/improvement assumes system connectivity whereas this condition may not hold in damaged infrastructure. Another related class of network design models has an objective of minimizing the cost associated with locating and installing spare capacity in a network to facilitate restoration after damage to a network (see Balakrishnan et al. 2001, 2002).

Reference: Wilson C (2004) High altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) and high power microwave (HPM) devices: threat assessments. CRS Report: RL32544

U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment [USCOTA] (1990) Physical vulnerability of electric system to natural disasters and sabotage. OTA-E-453. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

Sarker BR, Mann L, Triantaphyllou E, Mahankali S (1996) Power restoration in emergency situations. Comput Ind Eng 31(1/2):367–370