CERTIUM Blog

As part of this evolution, the industry is exploring both active and passive monitoring approaches. These methodologies promise to enhance the robustness of ATC communications, providing real-time insights into voice quality and potential issues. In this article, we will discuss the pros and cons of each monitoring approach, offering guidelines to help stakeholders select the most appropriate solution for their specific operational needs. By embracing these innovations, the aviation sector aims to maintain its impeccable safety record while adapting to the challenges of an increasingly digital sky.

The evolving landscape of ATC communication

Traditionally, ATC relied on dedicated, point-to-point analog or digital circuits for voice communication. These systems, while reliable, were inflexible and resource-intensive. The move to VoIP brings newfound agility and efficiency to ATC operations. It allows for more dynamic resource allocation, easier integration of geographically dispersed control centers and the potential for enhanced features like improved audio quality and system redundancy as well as easier introduction of data services over a shared IP network infrastructure.

However, this transition is not without its challenges. The packet-switched nature of IP networks introduces new variables that can affect voice quality. Unlike circuit-switched systems, where a dedicated path ensures consistent performance, VoIP transmissions can be subject to packet loss, jitter and latency. These factors can potentially degrade voice quality and, in the worst-case scenario, lead to miscommunications in a field where clarity is paramount.

Moreover, the shared nature of IP networks means that ATC voice traffic may now coexist with other data types on the same infrastructure. This convergence necessitates robust Quality of Service (QoS) mechanisms to ensure that critical voice communications always receive priority.

These new challenges underscore the need for sophisticated monitoring solutions. Modern ATC systems require real-time monitoring capabilities that can detect issues like packet loss, jitter and latency before they impact communications. These monitoring systems must be capable of providing a holistic view of network performance, from end-to-end call quality metrics to granular packet-level analysis.

Furthermore, as ATC systems become more interconnected and complex, monitoring solutions must evolve to provide not just reactive alerting, but proactive insights. Predictive analytics and machine learning algorithms are increasingly being employed to anticipate potential issues before they occur, enabling preventative maintenance and ensuring the highest levels of system availability.

In this evolving landscape, the role of monitoring has expanded from a technical necessity to a critical component of air traffic safety. As we continue to leverage the benefits of VoIP in ATC, robust and intelligent monitoring solutions will be key to maintaining the reliability and clarity of communications that the aviation industry demands.

The ED-138 standard: Broadening the perspective

The ED-138 standard, developed by EUROCAE Working Group 67 SG-6, has been a cornerstone in defining network requirements and performance standards for Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in Air Traffic Management (ATM) systems. Initially published in 2009, ED-138 set the stage for the integration of VoIP technology into the critical realm of air traffic control communications.

As the aviation industry continues to evolve, so do its standards. The upcoming revision, ED-138A that is currently being worked on, represents a significant broadening of perspective in response to the changing technological landscape and operational needs. This update shifts focus from specific protocols to broader network behavior requirements, reflecting the increasing complexity and diversity of modern ATM communication systems.

The working group behind ED-138A has recognized the need for greater flexibility and future-proofing in the standard. A key objective of the revision is to accommodate the growing trend of shared network infrastructures, where VoIP traffic coexists with other critical applications. This shift acknowledges the industry's move towards more cost-efficient and operationally versatile network architectures.

Furthermore, ED-138A expands its scope and extends the functions of the supervision interface of its reference architecture. It encompasses not only VoIP but a wide range of protocols that allow ATM networks and services to be monitored as a whole. This holistic approach ensures that all aspects of network performance, security and safety crucial to ATM operations are addressed.

By broadening its perspective, ED-138A aims to provide Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs) with a more comprehensive and adaptable framework for implementing and managing VoIP systems in the dynamic environment of air traffic control.

Active monitoring: The classic testing approach

Active monitoring stands as a cornerstone in the realm of network performance assessment. This methodology involves the deliberate injection of synthetic traffic into a network to evaluate its performance under controlled conditions. By simulating real-world scenarios, active monitoring provides network administrators with valuable insights into the health and capabilities of their infrastructure.

At its core, active monitoring operates independently of live traffic. Rather than analyzing existing network activity, it creates test scenarios to identify potential issues and assess network performance. This approach utilizes specialized tools and software that generate and send test traffic across the network, measuring various performance metrics along the way.

Key features of active monitoring include:

• Synthetic traffic generation: Active monitoring tools create and send test data packets that mimic real network traffic. These packets traverse the network, allowing the measurement of performance metrics under controlled conditions.
• End-to-end testing: By simulating traffic between endpoints, active monitoring can assess the entire communication path, including all network elements in between.
• Customizable test scenarios: Network administrators can design specific test cases to evaluate particular aspects of network performance or to simulate high-stress situations.
• Repeatable measurements: Each test is a controlled experiment where only the condition of the network changes
• Scheduled testing: Tests can be automated and scheduled to run at regular intervals, allowing continuous monitoring and trend analysis over time.

The methodologies employed in active monitoring typically involve sending test packets or making test calls across the network and analyzing the results. In VoIP environments, active monitoring might utilize artificial endpoints that mimic the characteristics of devices such as Controller Working Positions (CWPs), radios and Voice Communication Systems (VCS). These artificial endpoints generate simulated voice traffic to assess call quality and network readiness for real-time communication.

While active monitoring offers several advantages, it is important to consider its characteristics objectively. It provides an independent assessment of network performance, without relying on live traffic. This allows potential issues to be identified even in low-traffic periods or before a new service launch. The ability to simulate various scenarios, including extreme conditions, offers valuable insights into network capabilities and limitations.

Furthermore, active monitoring excels in providing detailed, end-to-end metrics on network performance. The reproducibility of test scenarios enables easy comparison over time, facilitating the detection of gradual performance degradations.

However, not relying on live traffic is not only a strength, it can also be seen as a limitation. The introduction of additional traffic into the network can potentially impact service performance, especially if tests are improperly configured or scheduled too frequently. Moreover, while active monitoring offers controlled testing, it may not always reflect real-world conditions experienced by actual users. The insights gained are limited to the specific paths and scenarios tested, potentially missing issues that occur in unmonitored segments of the network or during periods between tests. Also, while an end-to-end view is valuable when results are good, it does not help to locate potential issues within specific segments of the network.

In conclusion, active monitoring serves as a powerful tool in the network assessment arsenal, offering independent performance evaluation and detailed insights. However, its limitations underscore the importance of a comprehensive monitoring strategy that combines multiple approaches for a holistic view of network health.

Passive monitoring: The silent observer

At its essence, passive monitoring acts as a silent observer, capturing and examining the natural flow of data across a network. By tapping into live traffic, it offers insights into genuine user interactions and service performance without altering the network environment.

Key features of passive monitoring include:

• Non-intrusive observation: Passive monitoring tools capture and analyze existing network traffic without generating any additional load or affecting network performance.
• Continuous real-time analysis: By observing live traffic 24/7, passive monitoring provides an ongoing, up-to-the-minute view of network and service performance.
• Comprehensive coverage: All user traffic can be monitored, offering a broad perspective on network behavior and user experience across various services and applications.
• Detailed metrics extraction: Depending on the traffic type, passive monitoring can extract a wealth of performance metrics, such as delay, jitter and packet loss for VoIP traffic.
• User experience insights: By analyzing actual user traffic, passive monitoring offers valuable data on real-world user experience and service quality.

Passive monitoring offers several distinct advantages. Its non-intrusive nature means it doesn't introduce any additional network load or risk of service disruption. This approach provides a genuine representation of network conditions and user experience across various scenarios and traffic patterns. Furthermore, passive monitoring often requires minimal setup and configuration, making it relatively easy to implement and maintain.

Another significant benefit is the ability to provide detailed, midpoint metrics on network performance. This capability enables the precise isolation of issue sources, facilitating more efficient troubleshooting and problem resolution. Passive monitoring also excels in supporting customer care efforts, as it captures data on real customer interactions and experiences.

While passive monitoring offers a wealth of advantages, it is important to acknowledge its constraints within a balanced perspective. The primary consideration is its reliance on live traffic, which means that issues are identified only as they occur during actual network usage. However, this characteristic ensures that the data collected is always relevant and reflective of real-world conditions, providing invaluable insights into genuine user experiences. While reproducing exact conditions for identified issues can be challenging, this challenge is offset by the authenticity of the data captured, offering a true representation of network performance under varied, real-world scenarios.

Comparing apples and oranges: Active vs passive

The following table presents a side-by-side comparison of active and passive Network Performance Monitoring (NPM). This comparison highlights the key pros and cons of each approach, allowing a quick assessment of their respective capabilities and limitations. By examining these factors, network professionals can make informed decisions about which monitoring strategies best suit their specific network environments and performance goals.

As you read through this comparison table, consider how these approaches might complement each other in a real-world network monitoring scenario. The synergies between active and passive monitoring can often provide a more complete picture of network performance than either method alone.

Choosing the right approach

In the dynamic world of Air Traffic Control (ATC) communications, the ideal monitoring strategy often lies in a synergistic blend of active and passive approaches. By leveraging the strengths of both methodologies, organizations can achieve comprehensive oversight of their network performance and user experience.

Active monitoring shines in controlled environments, such as laboratories or during system testing, where real traffic may be scarce. It is invaluable for sporadic availability checks on standby resources or for simulating high-stress scenarios. Conversely, passive monitoring excels in capturing the nuances of actual user experiences, providing a continuous, real-time window into network performance under genuine operational conditions.