Patent Grant
8316129
Many data communication protocols that are still in use today, such as the SMB (Server Message Block) protocol, were developed at a time when computing resources were very different, e.g., network bandwidth was typically limited and memory was very precious. As a result, when used in contemporary networks, such protocols may limit overall performance. For example, because of having been designed when memory was limited, small buffer sizes are used, requiring more round trips to communicate large amounts of data.
Moreover, the existing SMB protocol has other limitations that have become apparent over time. For example, the existing SMB protocol is susceptible to denial of service attacks; the design of the protocol makes it difficult to fight these attacks. Likewise, the method for ensuring packet security is cumbersome. Also, there is no current mechanism for performing quality of service-like operations, in that a trusted client, for example, obtains the same server resources as an untrusted client. In sum, while still a frequently-used and valuable protocol, existing SMB versions are less than ideal when used with contemporary network resources.
Briefly, various aspects of the present invention are directed towards the use of sequence numbers for client-server communication, such as incorporated into a data communication protocol, to control a client's use of server resources. Various aspects apply the use of sequence numbers to a protocol where ordering is not important, but provide for quality of service, denial of service combating, division of server resources, secure message signing, and other numerous benefits.
A server grants the client credits, and the client uses a credit for sending each command to the server. Each credit corresponds to a sequence number, with the set of sequence numbers forming a valid command window. The server enforces that for each received command, the command includes a sequence number that is within the valid command window and that the sequence number has not been used with another command. The server may also maintain a maximum window size, such that even a client that has credits cannot send a command with a sequence number that beyond a maximum sequence number corresponding to the maximum window size.
In general, upon receiving a command from the client, the server verifies that the sequence number is within the window and has not been used before. The server then eliminates the corresponding sequence number from among those that the client can use, thereby consuming one credit. The server then determines whether to grant the client one or more other credits.
Thus, there is provided a mechanism for limiting use of server resources by controlling a number of credits granted to the client, via a valid operation window containing a unique number for each credit granted to the client. An enforcement mechanism ensures that to allow further server operations on a received command, the command includes a sequence number that is within the valid operation window and that the unique number has not been used with another command An allocation mechanism that controls credits granted to the client and the unique numbers within the valid operation window.
Other advantages will become apparent from the following detailed description when taken in conjunction with the drawings.
The present invention is illustrated by way of example and not limited in the accompanying figures in which like reference numerals indicate similar elements and in which:
The invention is operational with numerous other general purpose or special purpose computing system environments or configurations. Examples of well known computing systems, environments, and/or configurations that may be suitable for use with the invention include, but are not limited to: personal computers, server computers, hand-held or laptop devices, tablet devices, multiprocessor systems, microprocessor-based systems, set top boxes, programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, distributed computing environments that include any of the above systems or devices, and the like.
The invention may be described in the general context of computer-executable instructions, such as program modules, being executed by a computer. Generally, program modules include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, and so forth, which perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. The invention may also be practiced in distributed computing environments where tasks are performed by remote processing devices that are linked through a communications network. In a distributed computing environment, program modules may be located in local and/or remote computer storage media including memory storage devices.
With reference to
The computer 110 typically includes a variety of computer-readable media. Computer-readable media can be any available media that can be accessed by the computer 110 and includes both volatile and nonvolatile media, and removable and non-removable media. By way of example, and not limitation, computer-readable media may comprise computer storage media and communication media. Computer storage media includes volatile and nonvolatile, removable and non-removable media implemented in any method or technology for storage of information such as computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules or other data. Computer storage media includes, but is not limited to, RAM, ROM, EEPROM, flash memory or other memory technology, CD-ROM, digital versatile disks (DVD) or other optical disk storage, magnetic cassettes, magnetic tape, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium which can be used to store the desired information and which can accessed by the computer 110. Communication media typically embodies computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules or other data in a modulated data signal such as a carrier wave or other transport mechanism and includes any information delivery media. The term “modulated data signal” means a signal that has one or more of its characteristics set or changed in such a manner as to encode information in the signal. By way of example, and not limitation, communication media includes wired media such as a wired network or direct-wired connection, and wireless media such as acoustic, RF, infrared and other wireless media. Combinations of the any of the above should also be included within the scope of computer-readable media.
The system memory 130 includes computer storage media in the form of volatile and/or nonvolatile memory such as read only memory (ROM) 131 and random access memory (RAM) 132. A basic input/output system 133 (BIOS), containing the basic routines that help to transfer information between elements within computer 110, such as during start-up, is typically stored in ROM 131. RAM 132 typically contains data and/or program modules that are immediately accessible to and/or presently being operated on by processing unit 120. By way of example, and not limitation,
The computer 110 may also include other removable/non-removable, volatile/nonvolatile computer storage media. By way of example only,
The drives and their associated computer storage media, described above and illustrated in
The computer 110 may operate in a networked environment using logical connections to one or more remote computers, such as a remote computer 180. The remote computer 180 may be a personal computer, a server, a router, a network PC, a peer device or other common network node, and typically includes many or all of the elements described above relative to the computer 110, although only a memory storage device 181 has been illustrated in
When used in a LAN networking environment, the computer 110 is connected to the LAN 171 through a network interface or adapter 170. When used in a WAN networking environment, the computer 110 typically includes a modem 172 or other means for establishing communications over the WAN 173, such as the Internet. The modem 172, which may be internal or external, may be connected to the system bus 121 via the user input interface 160 or other appropriate mechanism. In a networked environment, program modules depicted relative to the computer 110, or portions thereof, may be stored in the remote memory storage device. By way of example, and not limitation,
Data Communication Coordination With Sequence Numbers
Various aspects of the technology described herein are directed towards a mechanism that may be employed in a data communication protocol, such as a modified version (2.x or greater) of the SMB protocol. In one example implementation generally described herein, the mechanism controls data/command flow in this revised SMB protocol, which is used for Windows®-based file sharing. However, as can be readily appreciated, the present invention is not limited to Windows®-based systems or the SMB protocol, but rather, the example technique is applicable to other file sharing protocols and data communication protocols in general, including those that do not necessarily deal with file data. For example, numerous ways to implement the present invention are feasible, including for use in communication with printers, named data pipes, generic devices and so forth. As such, the present invention is not limited to any of the particular file-based or other examples used herein, but rather may be used numerous ways that provide benefits and advantages in computing in general.
Turning to
Network file system commands from an application program 206 are handled by a client redirector component 208, which communicates with a counterpart common network module (SRVNET) 210 to carry out the commands on the file system 212. In general, the client 202 establishes a connection and then negotiates with the server 204 to ultimately set up a session. As part of this, before file system-directed commands are processed, the client and server agree upon a communication protocol. In this example, the agreed-upon protocol for this connection/session is SMB 2.0, whereby a client-side SMB engine 220 employs an SMB 2.0 driver for communications to and from the server 204. The common network module (SRVNET) 210 similarly employs an SMB 2.0 provider 226 for handling client communications over this connection. The provider 226 includes or is otherwise associated with the enforcement mechanism and data structures that ensure that a client uses a proper sequence number, as described below.
Turning to the concept of data communication coordination with sequence numbers, sequence numbers provide a mechanism by which a server may throttle the amount of work a given client can issue against the server. As will be understood, this is accomplished by having the server provide a window of available sequence numbers that the client is allowed to use when identifying a given command. To implement sequence numbers and the desired behavior, the concept of credits is employed, where a credit grants the client the right to consume a portion of server-side resources, including the memory required to back an operation and the CPU cycles it may consume. A client consumes a credit on each command sent, and depending on the server's response, may be granted zero, one or more additional credits. A client is not allowed to reuse a sequence number, and thus the number of commands a client can issue is controlled. Note that monotonically increasing sequence numbers are used for convenience, however any unique (per session/connection) number is equivalent.
For example, if a server grants a client five credits, the server is giving the client the right to submit up to five operations simultaneously. When a server needs to throttle a client, the server does so by reducing the available credits to that client. When a server wants to give a client more resources to work with, the server does so by granting credits.
This gives the server several options. By granting zero credits to a client, the server runs down the resources allocated to that client. Alternatively, by returning one credit, the server maintains the previous window size. By returning more than one credit, the server allows the client more resources for executing commands. One restriction is that the server cannot allow the window size to hit zero (no valid sequence numbers), unless the server has a method of granting a credit out of band, assuming that the protocol is strictly a command-response protocol. Note that if there is a method of granting a client credits without requiring the client to ask for them in the protocol that is using this method, then the restriction does not apply.
Note that a negotiate request/response has a sequence number, (also referred to as a message identifier, or MID) of zero, and a window size of one. In SMB 2.0, the following header facilitates the passing of such information, as further described in the aforementioned related, copending United States patent application entitled “Data Communication Protocol”:
As can be seen from the above header structure, the client requests as many credits as desired, however the server is in control of granting credits to the client. The server thus has the ability to shrink or grow the window based on the client's identity, behavior, or any other attributes or criteria. Sequence numbers also provide a way to uniquely identify a command sent from the client to the server for a given connection.
The client and server begin by establishing a command window. The command window starts by using either a default or a negotiated initial sequence number (ISN) (also referred to as an initial message identifier, or MID) and number of credits (NoC), which represents the range of allowable numbers the server will accept to identify a given command. Thus, the command window initially comprises [ISN, ISN+NoC−1]. For most protocols, the default may be ISN=1, NoC=1, so when first negotiated the command window is simply [1,1], representing that the only sequence number the server will accept to identify a command is one (1).
As communications progress, the client moves the down the numbers in the window by using up numbers within the range. Once a number is used, it cannot be reused, as this is enforced by the server. At the same time, the server may, as determined by the server, extend the end of the window by granting more credits to the client. For example, if the command window is [A, B], when the client sends command A, the valid command window becomes essentially [A+1, B]. When the server responds to command A, it can grant the client anywhere from zero to any practical number of credits. Thus, if the server returned N credits, the valid command window becomes [A+1, B+N].
The use of the sequence numbers in the allowable range is not required to be in order. The protocol is setup to facilitate asynchronous use of the sequence numbers, as long as the number being used is within the valid range. This allows the network protocol to send packets as they are available, instead of trying to force ordered sends. Thus, if sequence number A is claimed for a very large packet, but while the buffers are being prepared sends for A+1 and A+2 come in and are very small, it is legal to send A+1 and A+2 (as long as the end of the window is >=A+2) without waiting for the send of A to start.
Note that if there is a valid command window of [1, 5], and packets 2, 3, 4 are sent, the server may grant credits back allowing for a window of [1, 8] except {2, 3, 4} (meaning all numbers between 1 and 8 except 2 thru 4). Eventually, the server will likely stop granting credits until packet 1 is sent and the window is allowed to slide. If at this point, the client sends 1, and the server responds granting a credit, than the window becomes [5, 9].
The enforcement of the valid command window is done on the server side. This system permits a client-side structure to be as simple as having the current sequence number and the max sequence number, and using interlocked compares and increments as the only required synchronization method.
Thus, a valid command window, also referred to as a valid operation or Valid Op window) comprises the window of valid identifiers that the server will accept. The client sends each subsequent command with the next valid sequence number, (up to its valid credits), and need not maintain a view of the valid window. The client is required to understand the concept of a “Maximum Window Size” as described below). Examples of the use of the valid command/operation window are set forth below.
Any operation that could block for an indefinite amount of time, such as a change-notify or a named-pipe read, or create (as it may pend on an oplock break), is considered a blocking operation. To facilitate such operations, the client may supply an “operation context” value, i.e., a blocking flag, in the command send. The server will then respond when it successfully initiates the operation, allowing the sequence number to be incremented, even though the operation is still in process on the server side. However, the resources held by such long-running operations can often be a subset of the resources required for a normal command. Thus, a server is allowed to determine the maximum number of “Blocking Op Credits” (also referred to as long-operation credits, or LOC) that a client is allowed to consume. Sequence numbers also allow for long-running commands and commands with multiple responses from the server, balanced by controlling how many resources the client can consume.
Thus, an extension to the valid command window is to allow the window to continue to slide as normal, and not be held up by operations that may take an indefinite amount of time. To this end, the client is granted a given number of Blocking Op credits by the server and any operation issued with the Blocking Op flag will consume a Blocking Op credit. When the server receives a command, the server may send an interim response back to the client with such a flag set that acknowledges the receipt of a long-standing command, and returns a long-standing command ID, also referred to as an asynchronous identifier (AsyncID). This response allows the valid command window to slide as it normally would. When the long-standing command is completed, a new response is sent back to the client using the long standing command ID to indicate to which packet it is responding. This send-response-response architecture allows the window to continue to move, and the credit mechanism allows the server to retain control over how many resources the client can consume. The server can even shrink the valid command window if there are a large number of long standing operations in progress from the client.
Alternative implementations include a protocol that allows the client to hint to the server that a long-standing command may be coming. Another implementation of the asynchronous concept also may have the client issue an interim “accept” or the like, such that an async/blocking operation takes the form, “send-rec-send-rec” as opposed to simply send-rec-rec. Note that some underlying transports (e.g., TCP) are often tuned for request-response traffic, and may introduce delays in a request-response-response situation.
Due to the asynchronous nature of the protocol and the transports, the current valid window will not be directly equal to the current minimum sequence ID plus the credits, since some intermediate commands may be received first, or, for example, the command with sequence ID=1 may take a long time to process. However, the server may place a limit on how large this valid window can grow before it is stopped from growing. Continuing with the above example, the server may specify that the maximum window size is ten (10). This means that the valid operation (command) window may grow to [1, 10] if the server receives and processes packets 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 before its receives or completes processing of packet 1. Thus, the sequence numbers that would be valid are 1, 7, 8, 9, 10. However, if the server then receives packet 7 and processes it, the valid operation (command) window will not slide to [1, 11], but remains at [1, 10] with acceptable sequence numbers of 1, 8, 9, 10. The response on command 8 would indicate a (−1) credit to tell the client that the client is reaching the end of its acceptable limits, that is, its Credits value is now 4. This is one way in which the server prevents the client from ever skipping a given number in the sequence that would prevent the window from sliding nicely. This also demonstrates the value of issuing “Blocking Ops” against a server for commands that will take a long time.
Tracking the valid command window on the server side may be computationally expensive as the server needs to keep track of intersecting sets. To simplify this, one example implementation will establish the maximum window size described above, as the largest the server will ever let the command window become. Once this is established, the server allocates a buffer representing this size, and as commands come in, the value at that location in the buffer is changed. As long as the window size remains less than or equal to the maximum window size, then as the start of the window moves forward, the server moves its buffer pointer forward. Likewise, when the end grows as credits are granted, the server moves its end pointer along the buffer. Arithmetic handles situations where the buffer “wraps” the maximum window size. It is possible to grow the maximum window size dynamically, by allocating a larger buffer and copying the current values into it. Interlocked operations are used to track the status of the valid commands within the window, starting as AVAILABLE. Upon receiving the command from the client, they transition to IN_PROGRESS, and when the response (or interim response for a long-running command case) is sent, it transitions to USED. If the value transitioning to USED is the first value in the window, the window is slid forward until a non-USED value is encountered.
Another alternative allows for the server to revoke credits via an alternate channel or through unsequenced communication. For example, consider that the server has granted the client ten credits, but wants to trim the client down to five credits, which ordinarily will not happen until the client uses five commands. If the client is idle, the server may indicate to the client that it must use five credits in the next N seconds, or it will be in violation and terminated (or lose the credits). This allows the server to throttle down clients without relying on the client to move their own window.
Turning to an explanation of the operation of the invention via the use of various examples, the current state will be set forth in the format below:
The Min column shows the lowest unused client sequence number that the client is allowed to use; current credits are how many credits are granted to the client, in the form (normal credits, blocking op credits). A client consumes a credit on a send, and possibly re-increments on the receive (depending on the response). The next column, simply “Credits” shows the current maximum number of credits the client is allowed.
Valid and Max represent server-side structures for sequence identifier validation; (note that the client need not have any idea about these). Valid shows the Valid Op Window along with the exceptions of sequence identifiers that were already used (e.g., tracked by bitmap), and Max shows the MaxCommandWindow that the client can ever fill before completing the first operation, that is, the operation that would cause the window to shift.
In
The valid op window 320S is used to trivially reject packets; if they lie within the valid op window 320S, the server 204 than checks an internal exception map to guarantee a sequence number has not been already used.
In the typical event of a monotonically increasing receive, the client sends a packet with MID=1, and the client and server transition to the state represented in
In
When the server responds, it grants the client an additional (+1) credit on the response, and slides the window, as represented in
The client now has a valid window of [2, 6]. Consider when an out-of-order receive occurs, e.g., the asynchronous send on the transport is such that the server received command 3 before command 2 (and responds to it). The valid op window 630S would then conceptually exist as represented in
Note that in the table, the valid window extends, but the maximum window does not slide. However, when the server receives command 2 and responds, the window 730S will slide over both, as in
Consider next a malicious client attempting to use up resources on the server by sending commands and refusing the responses. Here the client has sent the server commands 4 and 5, and is refusing the responses. The state becomes as represented in
After commands with sequence identifiers 6, 7, 8 are sent, because of credit enforcement, the client is out of credits and all packets are refused, as represented in
Turning to examples of maximum window enforcement,
The client sends commands 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and the server responds, but without sending command 4. This state is shown in
Note that the client still has five credits because there are still five viable slots in the command window. However, when the client sends, and the server responds, to command 11, the state in
Note that the client then continues with 12, 13, 14. The client's available number of credits has been reduced by one for each command because there is not an available slot in the MaxWindow. This will continue for commands 12, 13, 14:
Now the only command the server will accept from the client is command 4, as represented in
As can be readily appreciated, the attributes of a window of sequence numbers are very advantageous in a number of desirable scenarios. Some of these scenarios include preventing denial-of-service, allowing quality-of-service, providing a common language for the client and server to reference commands that were executed over a given connection, allow for long-running commands and commands with multiple responses from the server, but balance it with controlling how many resources the client can consume, and allowing for continuous use of security signatures.
With respect to preventing denial-of-service, the server may limit the amount of resources a given client connection may consume, until the server has authenticated the client and the client is behaving correctly. For example, by allowing the server to control the resources allocated to a client, when an apparent attack is detected, the server can enter a “panic mode” where it reduces resources available to its clients to a minimum, and grants them back on a trust-basis. The server gives each client a small enough window to allow work to happen, but prevents any single client from overwhelming essentially all of the resources. When the attack is over or reduced, the server can begin re-granting resources to clients that prove trustworthy.
With respect to allowing quality-of-service, the variable window scheme allows the server to scale the amounts of resources allocated to clients based on their identity and/or their behavior. For example, the server may allot more resources to a web server connecting to the file server than to a single user accessing individual documents. As another example, if another server is a database server that is accessing a file server, the file server may weight the number of credits granted higher than that granted to an average user.
Moreover, when controlling quality of service, the allocation of resources to clients may be dynamically altered based on the clients' various needs. This allows the server to grant credits in a completely fair manner, or to take other information into account. An administrator may configure machines on resource priority basis, and this may be utilized and change dynamically as users connect and disconnect.
Sequence numbers also provide a common language for the client and server to reference commands that were executed over a given connection. This assists in the building of various features, including persistent handles. For example, because both the client and the server have agreed on a common language for identifying commands as they are sent and received, that is, the sequence number mechanism, when a disconnect occurs there is a straightforward way upon connection reestablishment for the server and client to determine which commands were received and which were not. Without such a set scheme, it is more difficult to track, particularly when the command identifier is chosen by the client and potentially re-used.
Sequence numbers further allow for continuous use of security signatures, without the extreme performance problems of current models; the sends need not be sequenced, (although the checksum of the whole packet will still need to be calculated, and entire packet received before issuing). With respect to packet signing, replayability is not possible. More particularly, a network protocol that does signing needs to embed an index number into the packet to prevent replayability of the signed packet, otherwise an attacker simply reissues the packet without having to resign it, and the packet remains valid. Other methods include timestamps and the like, however these require some form of synchronization between client and server. If index numbers are used, often the network traffic between the client and the server becomes serialized, because the client must ensure the server receives packet 1 before it sends packet 2.
With a sequence number embedded as the command identifier, and a valid window supported on the server, parallel command sends with sequence numbers in them occur naturally. The server enforces the valid window, so each command can only be issued once, whereby replayability is not a problem, as long as the protocol ensures that the key used for signing is unique for each authenticated connection. Note that if the command identifier rolls over, then replayability could become a problem, and thus sequence numbers on the order of 32 bits or 64 bits are desirable to prevent this, with 64 bits likely more desirable if the re-establishment of broken connections is allowed.
While the invention is susceptible to various modifications and alternative constructions, certain illustrated embodiments thereof are shown in the drawings and have been described above in detail. It should be understood, however, that there is no intention to limit the invention to the specific forms disclosed, but on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, alternative constructions, and equivalents falling within the spirit and scope of the invention.
The present application claims priority to U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 60/685,008, filed May 25, 2005, and herein incorporated by reference. The present application is related to United States patent application entitled “Data Communication Protocol”, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/182,251, filed concurrently herewith, assigned to the assignee of the present invention, and hereby incorporated by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4399504 | Obermarck | Aug 1983 | A |
| 4780821 | Crossley | Oct 1988 | A |
| 4791566 | Sudama | Dec 1988 | A |
| 4825354 | Agrawal | Apr 1989 | A |
| 4887204 | Johnson | Dec 1989 | A |
| 4891785 | Donohoo | Jan 1990 | A |
| 4914570 | Peacock | Apr 1990 | A |
| 5008853 | Bly | Apr 1991 | A |
| 5109519 | Zimmet | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5113519 | Johnson | May 1992 | A |
| 5202971 | Henson | Apr 1993 | A |
| 5218696 | Baird et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5261051 | Masden et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5265261 | Rubin et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5313646 | Hendricks et al. | May 1994 | A |
| 5349642 | Kingdon | Sep 1994 | A |
| 5410697 | Baird | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5437013 | Rubin et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
| 5452447 | Nelson | Sep 1995 | A |
| 5493728 | Solton | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5513314 | Kandasamy | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5522042 | Fee et al. | May 1996 | A |
| 5535375 | Eshel et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5560008 | Johnson et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5588117 | Karp et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5628005 | Hurvig | May 1997 | A |
| 5764887 | Kells et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5826027 | Pedersen et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5931913 | Meriwether et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5933602 | Grover | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5978802 | Hurvig | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6085247 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6092199 | Dutcher | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6125122 | Favichia et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6131125 | Rostoker et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6208952 | Goertzel et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6219799 | Kandasamy | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6247139 | Walker et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6324581 | Xu et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6401123 | Shields et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6453354 | Jiang et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6640226 | Shringeri et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6658476 | Van | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6829473 | Raman et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
| 6910082 | Marcotte | Jun 2005 | B1 |
| 6928577 | Moser et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 7020651 | Ripley | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7103007 | Natarajan et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7111035 | McClellan et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7111060 | Araujo et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7197535 | Salesky et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7243132 | Choi | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7318102 | Krause et al. | Jan 2008 | B1 |
| 7330910 | Young et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7339885 | Ahrens et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7380080 | Hughes | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7380155 | Fung et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7386889 | Shay | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7421502 | Czap et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7434087 | Singh | Oct 2008 | B1 |
| 7444536 | Jairath | Oct 2008 | B1 |
| 7453879 | Lo | Nov 2008 | B1 |
| 7457722 | Shain et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
| 7509407 | Miller et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7539722 | Mohamed et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7664991 | Gunda et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
| 7702745 | Lin et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 20020019874 | Borr | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020083130 | Shimada et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020152315 | Kagan et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020161980 | Nishikawa | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20030056069 | Cabrera et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030058277 | Bowman-Amuah | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030093678 | Bowe et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030112754 | Ramani et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030115341 | Sinha et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030126195 | Reynolds et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030140129 | Livnat et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030169859 | Strathmeyer et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030182282 | Ripley | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20040003210 | Duale et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040003241 | Sengodan et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040018829 | Raman et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040032876 | Garg et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040103342 | Moser et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040136325 | Dobric et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040160909 | Sheynblat | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040215794 | Lauer | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040260748 | Springer, Sr. et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040267932 | Voellm et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040268118 | Bazan Bejarano | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050010670 | Greschler et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050015511 | Izmailov et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050015747 | Zatloukal et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050021832 | Bennett et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050041686 | Roy et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050055345 | Ripley | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050060442 | Beverly et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050091212 | Mohamed et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050102537 | Zheng | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050111030 | Berkema et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114670 | Bowe et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050125378 | Kawada | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050129045 | Machulsky et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050131832 | Fransdonk | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050132077 | Biran et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050138528 | Ameigeiras et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050149817 | Biran et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050177635 | Schmidt et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050182850 | Kohno | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050198113 | Mohamed et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050198247 | Perry et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050223014 | Sharma et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050246803 | Spencer | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050248803 | Ohara | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050251448 | Gropper | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050257022 | Hughes | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050258022 | Horton et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050262084 | Tomita | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050262103 | Stakutis et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20060031519 | Helliwell et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060041698 | Han et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060047818 | Kruglick et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060080443 | Kruglick et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060085328 | Cohen et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060095382 | Mahlbacher | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060130107 | Gonder et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060168262 | Frazer | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060206705 | Khosravi | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060271697 | Kruse et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060281525 | Borissov | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070171793 | Mesut et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20080151885 | Horn et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080172397 | Maeda et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20090077097 | Lacapra et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090138615 | Cristallo et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090172085 | Arthursson | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090319661 | Shiozawa et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090327798 | D'Amato et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20100185704 | George et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20120151249 | Swan et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 1 259 045 | Nov 2002 | EP |
| 1259045 | Nov 2002 | EP |
| 1 727 056 | Nov 2006 | EP |
| 60-019341 | Jan 1985 | JP |
| 62-297927 | Dec 1987 | JP |
| 63-061148 | Mar 1988 | JP |
| 63-205747 | Aug 1988 | JP |
| 63-256165 | Oct 1988 | JP |
| 64-061148 | Aug 1989 | JP |
| 02-101847 | Apr 1990 | JP |
| 03-048558 | Mar 1991 | JP |
| 03-074745 | Mar 1991 | JP |
| 03-245939 | Sep 1991 | JP |
| 04-172039 | Jun 1992 | JP |
| 04-229746 | Aug 1992 | JP |
| 05-089048 | Apr 1993 | JP |
| 05-143488 | Jun 1993 | JP |
| 06-075890 | Mar 1994 | JP |
| 10-313342 | Nov 1998 | JP |
| 11-055314 | Feb 1999 | JP |
| 2001-094613 | Apr 2001 | JP |
| 2003-016766 | Jan 2003 | JP |
| 2003-032727 | Feb 2003 | JP |
| 2003-069610 | Mar 2003 | JP |
| 2003-281091 | Mar 2003 | JP |
| 2003-125022 | Apr 2003 | JP |
| 2004-005427 | Jan 2004 | JP |
| 2004-139385 | May 2004 | JP |
| 2004-229143 | Aug 2004 | JP |
| 2005-322016 | Nov 2005 | JP |
| 2007-49755 | Feb 2007 | JP |
| 3967758 | Jun 2007 | JP |
| 10-1994-0001700 | Mar 1994 | KR |
| 10-0860152 | Sep 2008 | KR |
| WO 03096646 | Nov 2003 | WO |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20060271692 A1 | Nov 2006 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60685008 | May 2005 | US |
