Explainable Rule Mining of IPv6 Extension-Header Presence Patterns from Paired-Vantage Captures

We study the problem of learning compact rule-based compressors for structured network traffic. Each packet is a record of header fields that are highly redundant within a flow, and a compressor is a small set of rules matching such records and replacing predictable fields with short codes. We cast rule learning as a two-stage problem: (i) an unsupervised structure-discovery stage that recursively partitions training packets using a normalized entropy-ratio criterion robust to small samples, and (ii) a constrained selection stage that uses dynamic programming to pick the rule subset maximizing expected compression gain under a hard budget on the number of installable rules. We instantiate the framework on Static Context Header Compression (SCHC), the IETF standard for rule-based header compression in constrained networks, and evaluate it on four real-world Internet-of-Things and 5G core-network datasets. Our method, Robust Entropy Clustering for Adaptive comPression (RECAP), surpasses expert-engineered rule sets with a small number of learned rules and removes the need for manual rule design.

Diagnosing 802.11 packet captures requires expert protocol knowledge, is slow, inconsistent across engineers, and unscalable. LLM-based approaches sound plausible but fabricate protocol events absent from captures (especially truncated traces), produce uncalibrated confidence scores, and suffer evaluation bias when golden references are co-produced by the model under test. We introduce PROBE (Protocol Reasoning Over evidence-Based Ensembles), a multi-stage pipeline addressing all three failures. It integrates (i) deterministic PCAP-to-text normalization with frame-level verifiability, (ii) multi-run, multi-candidate ensembles with optional cross-model second opinion and progressive obfuscation, (iii) a verdict-aware evidence framework treating absence of failure evidence as contributing evidence, and (iv) a fully deterministic composite reliability score from evidence validity, run-to-run stability, and cross-model agreement without LLM self-assessment. On 87 enterprise Wi-Fi captures (104 capture-reviewer pairs), single-pass LLM analysis raises weighted evidence F1 from 0.871 (expert baseline) to 0.912 but misses critical frames in 35% of cases. Naive ensemble voting drops below baseline (0.842) as majority voting amplifies conservative verdicts: 50% of confirmed failures are misclassified as 'no issue' or 'insufficient evidence.' Adding evidence-grounded reconciliation achieves 0.957 F1, a 96% auto-accept rate, and a worst-case floor above 0.70. LLM self-reported confidence clusters at 0.95 regardless of difficulty (71% report exactly 0.95), confirming it is uninformative. We also introduce a model-agnostic evaluation framework using per-field assertion matching, eliminating circular bias from model-co-produced golden references.

Invariants, the relations expected to hold among measured signals of a network, underpin applications from verification to traffic generation, telemetry imputation, and input validation, yet writing them by hand demands rare expertise in both formal logic and networking. Automatic miners can help but fall short on two fronts: they still require the hardest input (the grammar of admissible invariants) and they learn only exact, hard'' rules, struggling with real-world approximation caused by inherent noise in data. LLMs are tools that can provide semantic reasoning over data, but are non-deterministic and opaque in their learning. Our key idea is to partition the invariant search problem into an AI-driven grammar discovery'' problem, followed by a statistics-driven ``search'' problem within the learned grammar. Taken together, this allows non-deterministic, hallucination-prone AI to help produce auditable invariants with formal guarantees. We design and implement such a system, Autogram, and evaluate it on both public and production telemetry data, recovering expert-derived invariants with high coverage and low false positives. We close with discussion on open problems on the path toward fully open-ended discovery.