The disclosed technology relates to systems and methods for reducing packet latency in a service function path (SFP) of a software defined network (SDN). In particular, the subject technology provides ways to reduce packet latency and/or jitter by skipping optional service functions (SFs) when a predicted packet delay is likely to exceed a predetermined latency threshold.
The utilization of NFV and SDN technologies allows the decoupling of network functions from underlying hardware so they can run as software images or logical modules on commercial off-the-shelf and purpose-built hardware. NFV is possible implementing virtualization technologies (computers, networks, and storage media) to virtualize the network functions. One common objective of NFV deployments is to reduce the dependence on dedicated physical devices by allocating and using the physical and virtual resources only when and where needed. With this approach, service providers can reduce costs by shifting components to a common physical infrastructure while optimizing use. The virtualization of network functions can also accelerate the time to market for new services by allowing for more automated and streamlined approaches to service delivery.
In order to describe the manner in which the above-recited and other advantages and features of the disclosure can be obtained, a more particular description of the principles briefly described above will be rendered by reference to specific embodiments thereof which are illustrated in the appended drawings. Understanding that these drawings depict only example aspects of the disclosure and are not therefore to be considered to be limiting of its scope, the principles herein are described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the accompanying drawings in which:
Various embodiments of the disclosure are discussed in detail below. While specific implementations are discussed, it should be understood that this is done for illustration purposes only. A person skilled in the relevant art will recognize that other components and configurations may be used without parting from the spirit and scope of the disclosure.
Additional features and advantages of the disclosure are set forth in the description that follows, and in part are obvious from the description, or can be learned by practice of the principles disclosed herein. The features and advantages of the disclosure can be realized and obtained by means of the instruments and combinations particularly pointed out in the appended claims. These and other features of the disclosure will become more fully apparent from the following description and appended claims, or can be learned by the practice of the principles set forth herein.
Aspects of the instant disclosure relate to systems, methods, and computer-readable media for reducing packet latency and/or jitter in an overlay network. In some implementations, a method of the technology can include steps for sending a packet along a service function chain (SFC) to an egress node, the SFC including multiple service function forwarders (SFFs) each associated with at least one service function (SF), and receiving the packet at a first SFF in the SFC, wherein the first SFF is associated with a first SF. In some aspects, the first SFF can also be configured to perform operations including, reading an option flag of the packet, and determining whether to forward the packet to the first SF based on the option flag.
As discussed in further detail below, option flag setting (or removal) by the SFF can be based on various network parameters. In some approaches, the option flag can be set (or removed) based on a packet time delay, and in particular, whether the delay has exceeded a pre-determined latency threshold, for example, that is specified by a Service Level Agreement (SLA). In other approaches, option flag setting can be based on a measured variance in packet delivery time (jitter). As such, option flag setting (or removal) can be implemented in some in-band operation, administration, and maintenance (iOAM) solutions to ensure policy compliance of select traffic flows.
Description:
A service function (SF) or “SF instance” can be implemented using a combination of hardware and/or software solutions. As discussed in further detail below, SF instantiation can be facilitated by a service function forwarder (SFF), for example that is configured to receive a packet, make a determination regarding an applicable service function type and based on the determination, forward the packet to the appropriate SF for network function invocation. Similar to other virtualized network components, SFFs can be logical modules implemented using a variety of hardware and software solutions. For example, SFs and SFFs can be implemented by software routines executed on the same (or different) virtual machines (VMs), or executed in separate logical environments for example, running on different VMs and located at geographically disparate locations. As used herein, an ordered set of SF invocations can be referred to as a “service function chain” (SFC).
SFCs are used to facilitate the ordered execution of predetermined service functions on traffic flows. However, due to time delays incurred with each SF invocation, traffic latency and packet delivery deviations (i.e., “jitter”) are exacerbated for traffic moving over long SF paths. Aspects of the technology provide solutions for reducing latency and/or jitter by providing ways to avoid optional service functions in the service function path.
A latency threshold can be designated for a given service function path. The latency threshold can define a maximum acceptable delay for packet delivery across the network path, e.g., to a desired end-point or egress node. As discussed in further detail below, the latency threshold can be set as part of a Service Level Agreement (SLA), e.g., a contract between a network service provider and one or more end users that defines a level of service expected from the provider. Packet delivery delays predicted to exceed the latency threshold (e.g., causing violation of an SLA) can trigger the skipping of “optional” service functions, for example, that are of a lower priority and therefore not necessary for packet delivery.
The optional application of certain SFs can be indicated by setting an “option flag” in the packet data. By way of example, a given packet for which delivery to a destination egress node is predicted to exceed the latency threshold can be marked with an option flag by the processing/forwarding SFF. Based on the option flag, downstream SFFs can optionally skip packet presentation to one or more of their associated SFs, e.g., to speed transport of the packet along the service function path.
Additionally, in some aspects, packets for which an option flag has been set can be later predicted to achieve delivery within the latency threshold. In such instances, the processing SFF can rewrite (remove) the option flag, for example, to indicate that subsequent network function application is nondiscretionary. As such, each subsequent and downstream SFF can proceed with normal application of SFs. As with option flag setting, option flag removal can also be dictated by one or more network policies, such as those determined by an obtaining SLA.
Latency thresholds for a given SFP and/or traffic flow type can be user configured, for example, by a network administrator using a network controller. In other aspects, latency thresholds can be automatically designated and/or adjusted, for example, using an algorithm or machine learning approach. In yet another aspect, latency threshold may be automatically determined and/or configured based on one or more parameters dictated by a SLA or similar policy.
Time delay predictions for a given packet can be calculated at each SFF or at specifically designated SFFs in the service function chain. Time delay predictions can also be based on different types of metrics for information available to the processing SFF. For example, time delay predictions may be based on a number of hops in a service function chain, and/or time value designations that are specific to the type of SF invoked in the service function path.
Leaf routers 104 can be responsible for routing and/or bridging tenant or endpoint packets and applying network policies. Spine routers 102 can perform switching and routing within fabric 112. Thus, network connectivity in fabric 112 can flow from spine routers 102 to leaf routers 104, and vice versa.
Leaf routers 104 can provide servers 1-4 (106A-D) (collectively “106”), hypervisors 1-4 (108A-108D) (collectively “108”), virtual machines (VMs) 1-4 (110A-110D) (collectively “110”), collectors 118, engines 120, and the Layer 2 (L2) network access to fabric 112. For example, leaf routers 104 can encapsulate and decapsulate packets to and from servers 106 in order to enable communications throughout environment 100. Leaf routers 104 can also connect other network-capable device(s) or network(s), such as a firewall, a database, a server, etc., to the fabric 112. Leaf routers 104 can also provide any other servers, resources, endpoints, external networks, VMs, services, tenants, or workloads with access to fabric 112.
VMs 110 can be virtual machines hosted by hypervisors 108 running on servers 106. VMs 110 can include workloads running on a guest operating system on a respective server. Hypervisors 108 can provide a layer of software, firmware, and/or hardware that creates and runs VMs 110. Hypervisors 108 can allow VMs 110 to share hardware resources on servers 106, and the hardware resources on servers 106 to appear as multiple, separate hardware platforms. Moreover, hypervisors 108 and servers 106 can host one or more VMs 110. For example, server 106A and hypervisor 108A can host VMs 110A-B.
In some cases, VMs 110 and/or hypervisors 108 can be migrated to other servers 106. For example, VM 110A can be migrated to server 106C and hypervisor 108B. Servers 106 can similarly be migrated to other locations in network environment 100. For example, a server connected to a specific leaf router can be changed to connect to a different or additional leaf router. In some cases, some or all of servers 106, hypervisors 108, and/or VMs 110 can represent tenant space. Tenant space can include workloads, services, applications, devices, and/or resources that are associated with one or more clients or subscribers. Accordingly, traffic in network environment 100 can be routed based on specific tenant policies, spaces, agreements, configurations, etc. Moreover, addressing can vary between one or more tenants. In some configurations, tenant spaces can be divided into logical segments and/or networks and separated from logical segments and/or networks associated with other tenants.
As discussed in further detail below, VMs 110 can be used to implement one or more service chains SFCs (not illustrated).
In environment 200, SFC 204 includes classifier 206, a plurality of service function forwarders (SFFs), i.e., SFF1, SFF2, and SSF3 (208A-214A), and an egress node 216. Each SFF is associated with a respective SF, i.e., SF1_FW, SF2_LB, SF3_DPI, and SF4_RT (208B-214B), configured to apply a particular function type to any received packets/data flows.
By way of example, in environment 200, SF1 (208B) is associated with a “firewall” function, SF2 (210B) is associated with a “load balancing” function, SF3 (212B) is associated with a “deep packet inspection” function, and SF4 (214B) is associated with a “routing” function, respectively. Although the example of environment 200 illustrates each SFF (e.g., 208A-214A) as paired with a single SF (e.g., 208B-214B), it is understood that each SFF can be associated with two or more SFs, without departing from the scope of the technology.
In practice, a packet received by classifier 206 is routed to egress node 216, via SFC 204. As the packet is transferred to each subsequent SFF (208A-214A), a determination is made, by the receiving SFF, as to whether the packet should be forwarded to one or more corresponding SFs. Depending on the desired implementation, determinations as to whether or not to skip a particular SF in the SFC may be made at each SFF, or only by pre-designated SFFs in the service chain.
SF forwarding determinations can be based on an option flag indicated in the packet data. Although the option flag can reside in any portion of the packet data, in some aspects, the option flag is indicated as part of an IP address header (e.g., in IPv6), or using data inserted between the IP address and payload, e.g., in a network service header.
In some approaches, SF forwarding determinations are made (e.g., by the processing SFF), based on a status indicated by the option flag, as well as a determination of whether a particular SF is “mandatory” or “optional.” For example, even if an option flag indicates that SF forwarding should be skipped, SF forwarding can still occur if the associated SF is mandatory, e.g., if the SF is critical for security or packet delivery. However, if the option flag indicates that SF forwarding should be skipped, and the associated SF is optional, then the processing SFF can forward the packet to the next SFF in the SFC, reducing overall delivery latency by an amount of time it would have taken for application of the skipped SF.
Option flag settings can be evaluated/re-evaluated at each hop along the SFC, by particularly designated SFFs, or at certain times during the occurrence (or non-occurrence) of certain conditional events. For example, option flag settings can be re-evaluated at each SFF (208A-214A) in SFC 204, or at every other SFF (e.g., 210A and 214A). In some implementations, option flag evaluations may be triggered in response to detected changes in a SLA or other network policy.
By way of example, a packet forwarded by classifier 206 can include an option flag indicating that SF forwarding should be skipped when possible (e.g., the option flag is “present” or “set”). The option flag can be designated as part of the IP header of an IP address associated with the next SF. For example, classifier 206 can forward the packet to IP address 2001:1111::2, wherein address 2001:1111 is associated with SF1208B, and ‘2’ is used to designate invocation of the forwarding option. Upon receiving the packet, SFF1208A inspects the packet to determine if it should be forwarded to SF1208B. If the network function associated with SF1208B is mandatory, then SFF1208A sends the packet to SF1208B. Alternatively, if the network function associated with SF1208B is optional, SFF1208A can forward the packet directly to the next hop in the SFC, e.g., SFF2.
In some instances, the option flag status can be reevaluated by the processing SFF. In such instances, SFF1208A can make a determination as to whether or not a time delay associated with the packet is predicted to exceed the latency threshold for delivery to egress node 216. By way of example, if the latency threshold is 100 ms, and the determined time delay at SFF1208A is 10 ms, then SFF1208A can edit the option flag e.g., to indicate that SF delivery is mandatory e.g., since only four hops remain in the SFC. In such embodiments, SFF1208A could forward the packet to IP address 2001:2222::1, where 2001:2222 indicates an IP address of SF2210B, and ‘1’ is the option flag used to indicate that SF forwarding (e.g., now by SFF2210A) is mandatory.
Alternatively, if the latency threshold was 10 ms, and the determined time delay at SFF1208A was 5 ms, then SFF1 may leave the option flag designation unchanged, e.g., to encourage further SF skipping along the SFC to increase a probability of delivery of the packet to egress node 216 within the designated latency threshold. In such embodiments, SFF1208A would forward the packet to IP address 2001:2222::2, where 2001:2222 indicates an IP address of SF2210B, and ‘2’ is the unchanged option flag previously set by classifier 206.
Various types of calculations can be performed to make predictions as to whether the time delay of a packet is likely to exceed the latency threshold. By way of example, the current time delay can be compared to a latency threshold divided by the number of hops along the SFC. Alternatively, weighted time designations can be considered as between different SF types, for example, to take account for variations in processing time (at a time delay) for different SF types.
In some aspects, option flag status can be evaluated (or re-evaluated) based on a measured jitter for a particular traffic flow. For example, detected measures of jitter exceeding a predetermined variance or “jitter threshold” can trigger the re-evaluation of option flag setting for any (or all) packets in a corresponding traffic flow. As such, changes to option flag settings (e.g., latency thresholds and/or jitter thresholds) can also be based on changes to one or more network policies, such as an obtaining Service Level Agreement.
Method 300 begins with step 302 in which a packet is received by a service function forwarder (SFF). The receiving SFF can be any of a number of SFFs in an SFC, for example, along a network path to a destination egress node (e.g., egress node 216).
After the SFF has received the packet, method 300 proceeds to step 304 in which the SFF determines if an option flag has been set in the received packet. As discussed above, the option flag may have been written (or rewritten) by any SFF upstream in the SFC. If at step 304, if it is determined that no option flag has been set, method 300 proceeds to step 306, in which the SFF forwards the packet to its associated service function (SF). Subsequently, at step 308, the SFF performs a calculation to determine if a predicted latency of the packet exceeds a predetermined latency threshold for the SFC.
The predicted latency calculation can be based on a variety of network parameters and/or calculation methods. For example, the latency can be based on a number of SFs in the service function path, and an average time needed to apply a network function at each SF instance.
Next, at step 310, it is determined if the predicted latency calculated in step 308 exceeds a predetermined latency threshold for the SFC. If it is determined that latency threshold is not likely to be exceeded, method 300 proceeds to step 312 and the packet is forwarded to the next SFF in the SFC. Alternatively, in implementations wherein multiple SFs in the service function path are associated with a common SFF, forwarding may be simply performed to the next SF designated by the function path.
Alternatively, if at step 310 it is determined that the latency threshold is likely to be exceeded, method 300 proceeds to step 314, and an option flag is set in the packet before it is forwarded to the next SFF.
In some alternative approaches, step 310 may additionally (or alternatively) include a determination of whether a jitter for the corresponding traffic flow exceeds a predetermined jitter threshold. As discussed above, the jitter threshold can be a value specifying an acceptable amount of variance in packet delivery latency for a given traffic flow.
Referring back to step 304, if it is determined that the option flag in the received packet is not set, method 300 proceeds to step 316, wherein it is determined whether a next SFF designated in the service function path is mandatory. Mandatory SFs can include network functions with high priority designations, including, but not limited to SFs that perform: routing, firewall, and/or deep packet inspection functions, etc. It is understood that priority designations (i.e., to designated whether a given SF is mandatory or non-mandatory), can be configured, for example, by an administrator.
If at step 316 it is determined that the associated SF is mandatory, process 300 proceeds to step 318 wherein the packet is forwarded to the mandatory SF. Subsequently, in step 312, the packet is forwarded to the next SFF in the service function path. In some alternative implementations, after the packet is provided to required SF (e.g., at step 318), process 300 proceeds to step 320 in which a predicted latency for the packet is calculated.
Alternatively, at step 316, if it is determined that invocation of the associated SF is not mandatory, process 300 proceeds to step 320, where a calculated latency prediction is performed. Next, at step 322, it is determined if the predicted latency exceeds the predetermined latency threshold, and if so, method 300 proceeds back to step 312, and the packet is forwarded to the next SFF. Alternatively, if the latency threshold is not exceeded, the option flag of the packet is removed and/or the packet is forwarded down the service function chain, e.g., to the next SFF in the path, or to a final destination (egress) node.
Network device 410 includes a master central processing unit (CPU) 462, interfaces 468, and a bus 415 (e.g., a PCI bus). When acting under the control of appropriate software or firmware, the CPU 462 is responsible for executing packet management, error detection, and/or routing functions. The CPU 462 preferably accomplishes all these functions under the control of software including an operating system and any appropriate applications software. CPU 462 may include one or more processors 463 such as a processor from the Motorola family of microprocessors or the MIPS family of microprocessors. In an alternative embodiment, processor 463 is specially designed hardware for controlling the operations of router 410. In a specific embodiment, a memory 461 (such as non-volatile RAM and/or ROM) also forms part of CPU 462. However, there are many different ways in which memory could be coupled to the system.
Interfaces 468 are typically provided as interface cards (sometimes referred to as “line cards”). Generally, they control the sending and receiving of data packets over the network and sometimes support other peripherals used with the router 410. Among the interfaces that can be provided are Ethernet interfaces, frame relay interfaces, cable interfaces, DSL interfaces, token ring interfaces, and the like. In addition, various very high-speed interfaces can be provided such as fast token ring interfaces, wireless interfaces, Ethernet interfaces, Gigabit Ethernet interfaces, ATM interfaces, HSSI interfaces, POS interfaces, FDDI interfaces and the like. Generally, these interfaces may include ports appropriate for communication with the appropriate media. In some cases, they may also include an independent processor and, in some instances, volatile RAM. The independent processors may control such communications intensive tasks as packet switching, media control and management. By providing separate processors for the communications intensive tasks, these interfaces allow the master microprocessor 462 to efficiently perform routing computations, network diagnostics, security functions, etc.
Although the system shown in
Regardless of the network device's configuration, it may employ one or more memories or memory modules (including memory 461) configured to store program instructions for the general-purpose network operations and mechanisms for roaming, route optimization and routing functions described herein. The program instructions may control the operation of an operating system and/or one or more applications, for example. The memory or memories may also be configured to store tables such as mobility binding, registration, and association tables, etc.
To enable user interaction with the computing device 500, an input device 545 can represent any number of input mechanisms, such as a microphone for speech, a touch-sensitive screen for gesture or graphical input, keyboard, mouse, motion input, speech and so forth. An output device 535 can also be one or more of a number of output mechanisms known to those of skill in the art. In some instances, multimodal systems can enable a user to provide multiple types of input to communicate with the computing device 500. The communications interface 540 can generally govern and manage the user input and system output. There is no restriction on operating on any particular hardware arrangement and therefore the basic features here may easily be substituted for improved hardware or firmware arrangements as they are developed.
Storage device 530 is a non-volatile memory and can be a hard disk or other types of computer readable media which can store data that are accessible by a computer, such as magnetic cassettes, flash memory cards, solid state memory devices, digital versatile disks, cartridges, random access memories (RAMs) 525, read only memory (ROM) 520, and hybrids thereof.
The storage device 530 can include software modules 532, 534, 536 for controlling the processor 510. Other hardware or software modules are contemplated. The storage device 530 can be connected to the system bus 505. In one aspect, a hardware module that performs a particular function can include the software component stored in a computer-readable medium in connection with the necessary hardware components, such as the processor 510, bus 505, display 535, and so forth, to carry out the function.
Chipset 560 can also interface with one or more communication interfaces 590 that can have different physical interfaces. Such communication interfaces can include interfaces for wired and wireless local area networks, for broadband wireless networks, as well as personal area networks. Some applications of the methods for generating, displaying, and using the GUI disclosed herein can include receiving ordered datasets over the physical interface or be generated by the machine itself by processor 555 analyzing data stored in storage 570 or 575. Further, the machine can receive inputs from a user via user interface components 585 and execute appropriate functions, such as browsing functions by interpreting these inputs using processor 555.
It can be appreciated that example systems 500 and 550 can have more than one processor 510 or be part of a group or cluster of computing devices networked together to provide greater processing capability.
For clarity of explanation, in some instances the present technology may be presented as including individual functional blocks including functional blocks comprising devices, device components, steps or routines in a method embodied in software, or combinations of hardware and software.
In some embodiments the computer-readable storage devices, mediums, and memories can include a cable or wireless signal containing a bit stream and the like. However, when mentioned, non-transitory computer-readable storage media expressly exclude media such as energy, carrier signals, electromagnetic waves, and signals per se.
Methods according to the above-described examples can be implemented using computer-executable instructions that are stored or otherwise available from computer readable media. Such instructions can comprise, for example, instructions and data which cause or otherwise configure a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or special purpose processing device to perform a certain function or group of functions. Portions of computer resources used can be accessible over a network. The computer executable instructions may be, for example, binaries, intermediate format instructions such as assembly language, firmware, or source code. Examples of computer-readable media that may be used to store instructions, information used, and/or information created during methods according to described examples include magnetic or optical disks, flash memory, USB devices provided with non-volatile memory, networked storage devices, and so on.
Devices implementing methods according to these disclosures can comprise hardware, firmware and/or software, and can take any of a variety of form factors. Typical examples of such form factors include laptops, smart phones, small form factor personal computers, personal digital assistants, rackmount devices, standalone devices, and so on. Functionality described herein also can be embodied in peripherals or add-in cards. Such functionality can also be implemented on a circuit board among different chips or different processes executing in a single device, by way of further example.
The instructions, media for conveying such instructions, computing resources for executing them, and other structures for supporting such computing resources are means for providing the functions described in these disclosures.
Although a variety of examples and other information was used to explain aspects within the scope of the appended claims, no limitation of the claims should be implied based on particular features or arrangements in such examples, as one of ordinary skill would be able to use these examples to derive a wide variety of implementations. Further and although some subject matter may have been described in language specific to examples of structural features and/or method steps, it is to be understood that the subject matter defined in the appended claims is not necessarily limited to these described features or acts. For example, such functionality can be distributed differently or performed in components other than those identified herein. Rather, the described features and steps are disclosed as examples of components of systems and methods within the scope of the appended claims. Moreover, claim language reciting “at least one of” a set indicates that one member of the set or multiple members of the set satisfy the claim.
It should be understood that features or configurations herein with reference to one embodiment or example can be implemented in, or combined with, other embodiments or examples herein. That is, terms such as “embodiment”, “variation”, “aspect”, “example”, “configuration”, “implementation”, “case”, and any other terms which may connote an embodiment, as used herein to describe specific features or configurations, are not intended to limit any of the associated features or configurations to a specific or separate embodiment or embodiments, and should not be interpreted to suggest that such features or configurations cannot be combined with features or configurations described with reference to other embodiments, variations, aspects, examples, configurations, implementations, cases, and so forth. In other words, features described herein with reference to a specific example (e.g., embodiment, variation, aspect, configuration, implementation, case, etc.) can be combined with features described with reference to another example. Precisely, one of ordinary skill in the art will readily recognize that the various embodiments or examples described herein, and their associated features, can be combined with each other.
A phrase such as an “aspect” does not imply that such aspect is essential to the subject technology or that such aspect applies to all configurations of the subject technology. A disclosure relating to an aspect may apply to all configurations, or one or more configurations. A phrase such as an aspect may refer to one or more aspects and vice versa. A phrase such as a “configuration” does not imply that such configuration is essential to the subject technology or that such configuration applies to all configurations of the subject technology. A disclosure relating to a configuration may apply to all configurations, or one or more configurations. A phrase such as a configuration may refer to one or more configurations and vice versa. The word “exemplary” is used herein to mean “serving as an example or illustration.” Any aspect or design described herein as “exemplary” is not necessarily to be construed as preferred or advantageous over other aspects or designs.
Moreover, claim language reciting “at least one of” a set indicates that one member of the set or multiple members of the set satisfy the claim. For example, claim language reciting “at least one of A, B, and C” or “at least one of A, B, or C” means A alone, B alone, C alone, A and B together, A and C together, B and C together, or A, B and C together.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/491,352 filed on Apr. 19, 2017, the contents of which is incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3629512 | Yuan | Dec 1971 | A |
4769811 | Eckberg, Jr. et al. | Sep 1988 | A |
5408231 | Bowdon | Apr 1995 | A |
5491690 | Alfonsi et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5557609 | Shobatake et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5600638 | Bertin et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5687167 | Bertin et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
6115384 | Parzych | Sep 2000 | A |
6167438 | Yates et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6400681 | Bertin et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6661797 | Goel et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6687229 | Kataria et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6799270 | Bull et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6888828 | Partanen et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6993593 | Iwata | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7027408 | Nabkel et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7062567 | Benitez et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7095715 | Buckman et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7096212 | Tribble et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7139239 | Mcfarland et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7165107 | Pouyoul et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7197008 | Shabtay et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7197660 | Liu et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7209435 | Kuo et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7227872 | Biswas et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7231462 | Berthaud et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7333990 | Thiagarajan et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7443796 | Albert et al. | Oct 2008 | B1 |
7458084 | Zhang et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7472411 | Wing et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7486622 | Regan et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7536396 | Johnson et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7552201 | Areddu et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7558261 | Arregoces et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7567504 | Darling et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7571470 | Arregoces et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7573879 | Narad et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7610375 | Portolani et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7643468 | Arregoces et al. | Jan 2010 | B1 |
7644182 | Banerjee et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7647422 | Singh et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7657898 | Sadiq | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7657940 | Portolani et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7668116 | Wijnands et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7684321 | Muirhead et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7738469 | Shekokar et al. | Jun 2010 | B1 |
7751409 | Carolan | Jul 2010 | B1 |
7793157 | Bailey et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7814284 | Glass et al. | Oct 2010 | B1 |
7831693 | Lai | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7852785 | Lund et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7860095 | Forissier et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7860100 | Khalid et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7895425 | Khalid et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7899012 | Ho et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7899861 | Feblowitz et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7907595 | Khanna et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7908480 | Firestone et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7983174 | Monaghan et al. | Jul 2011 | B1 |
7990847 | Leroy et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
8000329 | Fendick et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8018938 | Fromm et al. | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8094575 | Vadlakonda et al. | Jan 2012 | B1 |
8095683 | Balasubramaniam Chandra | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8116307 | Thesayi et al. | Feb 2012 | B1 |
8166465 | Feblowitz et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8180909 | Hartman et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8191119 | Wing et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8195774 | Lambeth et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8280354 | Smith et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8281302 | Durazzo et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8291108 | Raja et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8305900 | Bianconi | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8311045 | Quinn et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8316457 | Paczkowski et al. | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8355332 | Beaudette et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8442043 | Sharma et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8451817 | Cheriton | May 2013 | B2 |
8464336 | Wei et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8473981 | Gargi | Jun 2013 | B1 |
8479298 | Keith et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8498414 | Rossi | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8520672 | Guichard et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8601152 | Chou | Dec 2013 | B1 |
8605588 | Sankaran et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8612612 | Dukes et al. | Dec 2013 | B1 |
8627328 | Mousseau et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8645952 | Biswas et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8676965 | Gueta et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8676980 | Kreeger et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8700892 | Bollay et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8724466 | Kenigsberg et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8730980 | Bagepalli et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8743885 | Khan et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8751420 | Hjelm et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8762534 | Hong et al. | Jun 2014 | B1 |
8762707 | Killian et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8792490 | Jabr et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8793400 | Mcdysan et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8812730 | Vos et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8819419 | Carlson et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8825070 | Akhtar et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8830834 | Sharma et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8904037 | Haggar et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8984284 | Purdy, Sr. et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9001827 | Appenzeller | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9071533 | Hui et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9077661 | Andreasen et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9088584 | Feng et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9130872 | Kumar et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9143438 | Khan et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9160797 | Mcdysan | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9178812 | Guichard et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9189285 | Ng et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9203711 | Agarwal et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9253274 | Quinn et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9300579 | Frost et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9300585 | Kumar et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9311130 | Christenson et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9319324 | Beheshti-Zavareh et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9325565 | Yao et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9338097 | Anand et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9344337 | Kumar et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9374297 | Bosch et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9379931 | Bosch et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9385950 | Quinn et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
9398486 | La Roche, Jr. et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
9407540 | Kumar et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9413655 | Shatzkamer et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9424065 | Singh et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9436443 | Chiosi et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
9444675 | Guichard et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
9473570 | Bhanujan et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9479443 | Bosch et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9491094 | Patwardhan et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9537836 | Maller et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9558029 | Behera et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9559970 | Kumar et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9571405 | Pignataro et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9608896 | Kumar et al. | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9614739 | Kumar et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9660909 | Guichard et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9723106 | Shen et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9774533 | Zhang et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
9794379 | Kumar et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
9882776 | Aybay et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
9929945 | Schultz et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
10003530 | Zhang et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
10333855 | Nainar | Jun 2019 | B2 |
20010023442 | Masters | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20020085562 | Hufferd et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020131362 | Callon | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020156893 | Pouyoul et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020167935 | Nabkel et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030023879 | Wray | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030026257 | Xu et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030037070 | Marston | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030088698 | Singh et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030110081 | Tosaki et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030120816 | Berthaud et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030214913 | Kan et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030226142 | Rand | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040109412 | Hansson et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040148391 | Lake, Sr. et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040199812 | Earl | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040213160 | Regan et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040264481 | Darling et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040268357 | Joy et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050044197 | Lai | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050058118 | Davis | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050060572 | Kung | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050086367 | Conta et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050120101 | Nocera | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050152378 | Bango et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050157645 | Rabie et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050160180 | Rabje et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050204042 | Banerjee et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050210096 | Bishop et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050257002 | Nguyen | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050281257 | Yazaki et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050286540 | Hurtta et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050289244 | Sahu et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060005240 | Sundarrajan et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060031374 | Lu et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060045024 | Previdi et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060074502 | Mcfarland | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060092950 | Arregoces et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060095960 | Arregoces et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060112400 | Zhang et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060155862 | Kathi et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060168223 | Mishra et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060233106 | Achlioptas et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060233155 | Srivastava | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070061441 | Landis et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070067435 | Landis et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070094397 | Krelbaum et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070143851 | Nicodemus et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070237147 | Quinn et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070250836 | Li et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080056153 | Liu | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080080509 | Khanna et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080080517 | Roy et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080170542 | Hu | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080177896 | Quinn et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080181118 | Sharma et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080196083 | Parks et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080209039 | Tracey et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080219287 | Krueger et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080225710 | Raja et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080291910 | Tadimeti et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090003364 | Fendick et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090006152 | Timmerman et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090037713 | Khalid et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090094684 | Chinnusamy et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090204612 | Keshavarz-nia et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090271656 | Yokota et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090300207 | Giaretta et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090305699 | Deshpande et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090328054 | Paramasivam et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100058329 | Durazzo et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100063988 | Khalid | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100080226 | Khalid | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100165985 | Sharma et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100191612 | Raleigh | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100211658 | Hoogerwerf et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20110023090 | Asati et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110032833 | Zhang et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110055845 | Nandagopal et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110131338 | Hu | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110137991 | Russell | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110142056 | Manoj | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110161494 | Mcdysan et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110222412 | Kompella | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110255538 | Srinivasan et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110267947 | Dhar et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120131662 | Kuik et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120147894 | Mulligan et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120324442 | Barde | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120331135 | Alon et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130003735 | Chao et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130003736 | Szyszko et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130040640 | Chen et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130044636 | Koponen et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130121137 | Feng et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130124708 | Lee et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130163594 | Sharma et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130163606 | Bagepalli et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130238806 | Moen | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130272305 | Lefebvre et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130311675 | Kancherla | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130329584 | Ghose et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140010083 | Hamdi et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140010096 | Kamble et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140036730 | Nellikar et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140050223 | Foo et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140067758 | Boldyrev et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140105062 | McDysan et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140181267 | Wadkins et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140254603 | Banavalikar et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140259012 | Nandlall et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140279863 | Krishnamurthy et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140280836 | Kumar et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140317261 | Shatzkamer et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140321459 | Kumar et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140334295 | Guichard et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140344439 | Kempf et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140362682 | Guichard et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140362857 | Guichard et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140369209 | Khurshid et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140376558 | Rao et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150003455 | Haddad et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150012584 | Lo et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150012988 | Jeng et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150029871 | Frost et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150032871 | Allan et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150052516 | French et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150071285 | Kumar et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150074276 | DeCusatis et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150082308 | Kiess et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150085635 | Wijnands et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150085870 | Narasimha et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150089082 | Patwardhan et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150092564 | Aldrin | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150103827 | Quinn et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150117308 | Kant | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150124622 | Kovvali et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150131484 | Aldrin | May 2015 | A1 |
20150131660 | Shepherd et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150156035 | Foo et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150180725 | Varney et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150180767 | Tam et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150181309 | Shepherd et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150188949 | Mahaffey et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150195197 | Yong | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150215172 | Kumar et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150222516 | Deval et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150222533 | Birrittella et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150236948 | Dunbar et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150319078 | Lee et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150319081 | Kasturi et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150326473 | Dunbar et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150333930 | Aysola et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150334027 | Bosch et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150341285 | Aysola et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150365495 | Fan et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150381465 | Narayanan et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150381557 | Fan et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160028604 | Chakrabarti et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160028640 | Zhang et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160043952 | Zhang et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160050117 | Voellmy et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160050132 | Zhang | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160080263 | Park et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160099853 | Nedeltchev et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160112337 | Zhang | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160119159 | Zhao et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160119253 | Kang | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160127139 | Tian et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160134518 | Callon et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160134535 | Callon | May 2016 | A1 |
20160139939 | Bosch et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160164776 | Biancaniello | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160165014 | Nainar et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160173373 | Guichard et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160173464 | Wang et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160182336 | Doctor et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160182342 | Singaravelu et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160182684 | Connor et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160212017 | Li et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160226742 | Apathotharanan et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160248685 | Pignataro et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160277250 | Maes | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160285720 | Maenpaa et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160323165 | Boucadair et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160352629 | Wang et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160380966 | Gunnalan et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170019303 | Swamy et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170031804 | Ciszewski et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170078175 | Xu et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170104847 | Zhang et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170187609 | Lee et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170208000 | Bosch et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170214627 | Zhang et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170237656 | Gage et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170250917 | Ruckstuhl et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170272470 | Gundamaraju et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170279712 | Nainar et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170310611 | Kumar et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170318097 | Drew | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20170331741 | Fedyk et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20180013841 | Nainar et al. | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180026884 | Nainar et al. | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180026887 | Nainar et al. | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180041470 | Schultz et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
20180062991 | Nainar et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
103716123 | Apr 2014 | CN |
103716137 | Apr 2014 | CN |
3160073 | Apr 2017 | EP |
2016149686 | Aug 2016 | JP |
WO 2011029321 | Mar 2011 | WO |
WO 2012056404 | May 2012 | WO |
WO 2015065353 | May 2015 | WO |
WO 2015180559 | Dec 2015 | WO |
WO 2015187337 | Dec 2015 | WO |
WO 2016004556 | Jan 2016 | WO |
WO 2016058245 | Apr 2016 | WO |
WO 2017011607 | Jan 2017 | WO |
Entry |
---|
3GPP TR 23.401 V9.5.0 (Jun. 2010) Technical Specification: Group Services and Systems Aspects; General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Enhancements for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) Access (Release 9), 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), 650 Route des Lucioles—Sophia Antipolis Valbonne—France, Jun. 2010; 259 pages. |
3GPP TR 23.803 V7.0.0 (Sep. 2005) Technical Specification: Group Services and System Aspects; Evolution of Policy Control and Charging (Release 7), 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), 650 Route des Lucioles—Sophia Antipolis Val bonne—France, Sep. 2005; 30 pages. |
3GPP TS 23.203 V8.9.0 (Mar. 2010) Technical Specification: Group Services and System Aspects; Policy and Charging Control Architecture (Release 8), 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), 650 Route des Lucioles—Sophia Antipolis Val bonne—France, Mar. 2010; 116 pages. |
3GPP TS 23.401 V13.5.0 (Dec. 2015) Technical Specification: 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Services and System Aspects; General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) access (Release 13), 3GPP, 650 Route des Lucioles—Sophia Antipolis Valbonne France, Dec. 2015. |
3GPP TS 29.212 V13.1.0 (Mar. 2015) Technical Specification: 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Core Network and Terminals; Policy and Chargig Control (PCC); Reference points (Release 13), 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), 650 Route des Lucioles—Sophia Antipolis Valbonne—France, Mar. 2015; 230 pages. |
Aldrin, S., et al. “Service Function Chaining Operation, Administration and Maintenance Framework,” Internet Engineering Task Force, Oct. 26, 2014, 13 pages. |
Alizadeh, Mohammad, et al., “CONGA: Distributed Congestion-Aware Load Balancing for Datacenters,” SIGCOMM '14, Aug. 17-22, 2014, 12 pages. |
Author Unknown, “ANSI/SCTE 35 2007 Digital Program Insertion Cueing Message for Cable,” Engineering Committee, Digital Video Subcommittee, American National Standard, Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers, © Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers, Inc. 2007 All Rights Reserved, 140 Philips Road, Exton, PA 19341; 42 pages. |
Author Unknown, “AWS Lambda Developer Guide,” Amazon Web Services Inc., May 2017, 416 pages. |
Author Unknown, “CEA-708,” from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Nov. 15, 2012; 16 pages http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CEA-708&oldid=523143431. |
Author Unknown, “Cisco and Intel High-Performance VNFs on Cisco NFV Infrastructure,” White Paper, Cisco and Intel, Oct. 2016, 7 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Cloud Functions Overview,” Cloud Functions Documentation, Mar. 21, 2017, 3 pages; https://cloud.google.com/functions/concepts/overview. |
Author Unknown, “Cloud-Native VNF Modelling,” Open Source Mano, © ETSI 2016, 18 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Digital Program Insertion,” from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Jan. 2, 2012; 1 page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Digital_Program_Insertion&oldid=469076482. |
Author Unknown, “Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP,” from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Oct. 25, 2012; 3 pages, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dynannic_Adaptive_Streanning_over_HTTP&oldid=519749189. |
Author Unknown, “GStreamer and in-band metadata,” from RidgeRun Developer Connection, Jun. 19, 2012, 5 pages https://developersidgerun.conn/wiki/index.php/GStreanner_and_in-band_nnetadata. |
Author Unknown, “IEEE Standard for the Functional Architecture of Next Generation Service Overlay Networks, IEEE Std. 1903-2011,” IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, Oct. 7, 2011; 147 pages. |
Author Unknown, “ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29, Information Technology—Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP (DASH)—Part 1: Media Presentation Description and Segment Formats,” International Standard © ISO/IEC 2012—All Rights Reserved; Jan. 5, 2012; 131 pages. |
Author Unknown, “M-PEG 2 Transmission,” © Dr. Gorry Fairhurst, 9 pages [Published on or about Jan. 12, 2012] http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/future-net/digital-video/mpeg2-trans.html. |
Author Unknown, “MPEG Transport Stream,” from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Nov. 11, 2012; 7 pages, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MPEG_transport_streann&oldid=522468296. |
Author Unknown, “Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV); Use Cases,” ETSI, GS NFV 001 v1.1.1, Architectural Framework, © European Telecommunications Standards Institute, Oct. 2013, 50 pages. |
Author Unknown, “OpenNebula 4.6 User Guide,” Jun. 12, 2014, opennebula.org, 87 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Understanding Azure, A Guide for Developers,” Microsoft Corporation, Copyright © 2016 Microsoft Corporation, 39 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Service-Aware Network Architecture Based on SDN, NFV, and Network Intelligence,” 2014, 8 pages. |
Baird, Andrew, et al. “AWS Serverless Multi-Tier Architectures; Using Amazon API Gateway and AWS Lambda,” Amazon Web Services Inc., Nov. 2015, 20 pages. |
Bi, Jing, et al., “Dynamic Provisioning Modeling for Virtualized Multi-tier Applications in Cloud Data Center,” 2010 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Cloud Computing, Jul. 5, 2010, pp. 370-377, IEEE Computer Society. |
Bitar, N., et al., “Interface to the Routing System (I2RS) for the Service Chaining: Use Cases and Requirements,” draft-bitar-i2rs-service-chaining-01, Feb. 14, 2014, pp. 1-15. |
Boucadair, Mohamed, et al., “Differentiated Service Function Chaining Framework,” Network Working Group Internet Draft draft-boucadair-network-function-chaining-03, Aug. 21, 2013, 21 pages. |
Bremler-Barr, Anat, et al., “Deep Packet Inspection as a Service,” CoNEXT '14, Dec. 2-5, 2014, pp. 271-282. |
Cisco Systems, Inc. “Cisco NSH Service Chaining Configuration Guide,” Jul. 28, 2017, 11 pages. |
Cisco Systems, Inc. “Cisco VN-LINK: Virtualization-Aware Networking,” 2009, 9 pages. |
Dunbar, et al., “Architecture for Chaining Legacy Layer 4-7 Service Functions,” IETF Network Working Group Internet Draft, draft-dunbar-sfc-legacy-14-17-chain-architecture-03.txt, Feb. 10, 2014; 17 pages. |
Ersue, Mehmet, “ETSI NFV Management and Orchestration—An Overview,” Presentation at the IETF# 88 Meeting, Nov. 3, 2013, 14 pages. |
Farrel, A., et al., “A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture,” RFC 4655, Network Working Group, Aug. 2006, 40 pages. |
Fayaz, Seyed K., et al., “Efficient Network Reachability Analysis using a Succinct Control Plane Representation,” 2016, ratul.org, pp. 1-16. |
Halpern, Joel, et al., “Service Function Chaining (SFC) Architecture,” Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), Cisco, Oct. 2015, 32 pages. |
Hendrickson, Scott, et al. “Serverless Computation with OpenLambda,” Elastic 60, University of Wisconson, Madison, Jun. 20, 2016, 7 pages, https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/hotcloud16/hotcloud16_hendrickson.pdf. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion from the International Searching Authority, dated Aug. 30, 2017, for the corresponding International Application No. PCT/US2017/040575, 13 pages. |
Jiang, Y., et al., “An Architecture of Service Function Chaining,” IETF Network Working Group Internet Draft, draft-jiang-sfc-arch-01.txt, Feb. 14, 2014; 12 pages. |
Jiang, Yuanlong, et al., “Fault Management in Service Function Chaining,” Network Working Group, China Telecom, Oct. 16, 2015, 13 pages. |
Katsikas, Goergios P., et al., “Profiling and accelerating commodity NFV service chains with SCC,” The Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 127, Jan. 2017, pp. 12-27. |
Kumar, Surendra, et al., “Service Function Path Optimization: draft-kumar-sfc-sfp-optimization-00.txt,” Internet Engineering Task Force, IETF; Standard Working Draft, May 10, 2014, 14 pages. |
Kumbhare, Abhijit, et al., “Opendaylight Service Function Chaining Use—Cases,” Oct. 14, 2014, 25 pages. |
Li, Hongyu, “Service Function Chaining Use Cases”, IETF 88 Vancouver, Nov. 7, 2013, 7 pages. |
Mortensen, A., et al., “Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Open Threat Signaling Requirements,” DOTS, Mar. 18, 2016, 16 pages; https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/draft-ietf-dots-requirements-01.pdf. |
Newman, David, “Review: FireEye fights off multi-stage malware,” Network World, May 5, 2014, 7 pages. |
Nguyen, Kim-Khoa, et al. “Distributed Control Plane Architecture of Next Generation IP Routers,” IEEE, 2009, 8 pages. |
P. Quinn, et al., “Network Service Header,” Network Working Group, Feb. 14, 2014, 21 pages; https://svn.tools.ietf.org/html/draft-quinn-sfc-nsh-02 . |
P. Quinn, et al., “Service Function Chaining (SFC) Architecture,” Network Working Group, May 5, 2014, 31 pages; https://svn.tools.ietf.org/html/draft-quinn-sfc-arch-05. |
Penno, Reinaldo, et al. “Packet Generation in Service Function Chains,” draft-penno-sfc-packet-03, Apr. 29, 2016, 25 pages. |
Penno, Reinaldo, et al. “Services Function Chaining Traceroute,” draft-penno-sfc-trace-03, Sep. 30, 2015, 9 pages. |
Pierre-Louis, Marc-Arhtur, “OpenWhisk: A quick tech preview,” DeveloperWorks Open, IBM, Feb. 22, 2016, modified Mar. 3, 2016, 7 pages; https://developer.ibm.com/open/2016/02/22/openwhisk-a-quick-tech-preview/. |
Pujol, Pua Capdevila, “Deployment of NFV and SFC scenarios,” EETAC, Master Thesis, Advisor: David Rincon Rivera, Universitat Politecnica De Catalunya, Feb. 17, 2017, 115 pages. |
Quinn, P., et al., “Network Service Header,” Network Working Group, Mar. 24, 2015, 42 pages; https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-00.pdf. |
Quinn, P., et al., “Network Service Chaining Problem Statement,” draft-quinn-nsc-problem-statement-03.txt, Aug. 26, 2013, 18 pages. |
Quinn, Paul, et al., “Network Service Header,” Network Working Group, draft-quinn-nsh-00.txt, Jun. 13, 2013, 20 pages. |
Quinn, Paul, et al., “Network Service Header,” Network Working Group Internet Draft draft-quinn-nsh-01, Jul. 12, 2013, 20 pages. |
Quinn, Paul, et al., “Service Function Chaining: Creating a Service Plane via Network Service Headers,” IEEE Computer Society, 2014, pp. 38-44. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/252,028, filed Aug. 30, 2016, entitled “System and Method for Managing Chained Services in a Network Environment,” Inventor(s): Hendrikus G.P. Bosch, et al. |
Wong, Fei, et al., “SMPTE-TT Embedded ID3 for HTTP Live Streaming, draft-smpte-id3-http-live-streaming-00,” Informational Internet Draft, Jun. 2012, 7 pages http://tools.ietf.org/htnnl/draft-snnpte-id3-http-live-streaming-00. |
Yadav, Rishi, “What Real Cloud-Native Apps Will Look Like,” Crunch Network, posted Aug. 3, 2016, 8 pages; https://techcrunch.com/2016/03103/what-real-cloud-native-apps-will-look-like/. |
Zhang, Ying, et al. “StEERING: A Software-Defined Networking for Inline Service Chaining,” IEEE, 2013, IEEE, p. 10 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190312818 A1 | Oct 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15491352 | Apr 2017 | US |
Child | 16449991 | US |