Method and system for passing objects in a distributed system using serialization contexts

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 7296275
  • Patent Number
    7,296,275
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, January 4, 2001
    23 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 13, 2007
    16 years ago
Abstract
A system consistent with the present invention reduces the number of redundant class descriptors that are sent during remote method calls by using serialization contexts. “Serialization contexts” are dictionary objects that map a class descriptor to a corresponding integer handle. When possible, the integer handle, rather than the full class descriptor, is passed, saving processing time in RMI calls.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to data processing systems and, more particularly, to passing serialized versions of objects in a distributed system.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Distributed systems can be made up of various components, including both hardware and software. A distributed system (1) allows its users to share services and resources over a network of many devices; (2) provides programmers with tools and programming patterns that allow development of robust, secured distributed systems; and (3) simplifies the task of administering the distributed system.


A distributed system can be implemented using an object-oriented programming language, such as Java™. The Java™ programming language is typically compiled into a platform-independent format, using a bytecode instruction set, which can be executed on any platform supporting the Java™ virtual machine. The Java™ programming language is described in greater detail in The Java™ Language Specification by James Gosling, Bill Joy, and Guy Steele, Addison-Wesley, 1996, which is incorporated herein by reference. Java™ and Jave-based trademarks are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the United States and other countries.


Distributed systems require that programs running in different address spaces be able to communicate with each other. In a system using an object-oriented programming language, such as the Java™ programming language, this communication can be achieved by passing an “object,” which represents an item or instance manipulated by the system, from one program to another. In such a system, a “class” provides a template for the creation of objects having characteristics of that class. The objects in each class share certain characteristics or attributes determined by the class. A class thus defines the type of an object. Objects are typically created dynamically during system operation. Methods associated with a class are generally invoked on the objects of the same class or subclass.


In a Java™ distributed system, an object is referred to as being remote when its methods can be invoked from another address space, typically a Java™ virtual machine on a different computer. A remote object is described by one or more remote interfaces, which are Java™ interfaces that declare the methods of the remote object. Remote Method Invocation (RMI) is used to invoke a method of a remote interface on a remote object. RMI is explained in, for example, the Remote Method Invocation Specification, Sun Microsystems, Inc. (1997), which is incorporated herein by reference.


As part of RMI, Java™ objects are passed between a client and a server. Before being passed, a Java™ object is converted into a serialized representation of itself. The serialized representation of the object contains enough information to enable the recipient to identify and verify the Java™ class from which the contents of the object were saved and to restore the contents to a new instance. A serialized object contains two main parts: the object data and a class descriptor. The class descriptor describes the content and format of the object data.


When a serialized object is passed, the object data and the class descriptor are transmitted across the network. Although the object data may change over time, the class descriptor remains the same. Therefore, multiple remote method calls can result in passing the same class descriptor multiple times to a recipient who already has a copy of the class descriptor. This is expensive in terms of processing time as well as wasted network bandwidth. It is therefore desirable to reduce the number of times that a class descriptor is sent to a recipient.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Systems and methods consistent with the present invention reduce the number of redundant class descriptors that are sent during remote method calls by using serialization contexts. “Serialization contexts” are dictionary objects that map a class descriptor to a corresponding integer handle and, on the receiving end, map the integer handle back to the class descriptor. When possible, the integer handle, rather than the full class descriptor, is passed, saving processing time in RMI calls.


A method consistent with the present invention passes a first object and a second object, both instances of a class, in distinct remote method calls in a distributed system. The first object is passed from a sender to a recipient with a descriptor of the class and a handle corresponding to the descriptor. The handle and the descriptor are stored by the recipient. The second object is then passed from the sender to the recipient with the handle, and the recipient uses the handle to determine the descriptor.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

This invention is pointed out with particularity in the appended claims. The above and further advantages of this invention may be better understood by referring to the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:



FIG. 1 depicts a distributed system 100 suitable for practicing methods and systems consistent with the present invention;



FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing two serialization contexts consistent with the present invention;



FIG. 3 depicts a flow chart of a method for passing objects using serialization contexts, consistent with the present invention;



FIG. 4 is a flow chart of the “handshake” between a sender and a recipient to agree on a serialization context pair to use; and



FIG. 5 is a flow chart showing how the committed flag can be used to provide two-way communication.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

A system consistent with the present invention reduces the number of redundant class descriptors that are sent during remote method calls by using serialization contexts. “Serialization contexts” are dictionary objects that map a class descriptor to a corresponding integer handle. When possible, the integer handle, rather than the full class descriptor, is passed, saving processing time in RMI calls.



FIG. 1 depicts a distributed system 100 suitable for practicing methods and systems consistent with the present invention. Distributed system 100 includes client computer 102 and server computer 104, communicating via network 106. Network 106 may be, for example, a local area network, wide area network, or the Internet.


Client computer 102 includes a memory 108, a secondary storage device 110, a central processing unit (CPU) 112, an input device 114, and a video display 116. The memory 108 includes a Java™ runtime system 118. The Java™ runtime system 118 includes a Java™ virtual machine 120, and a Java™ remote method invocation (RMI) system 122. The RMI system 122 contains one or more serialization contexts 124. Memory 108 also includes a program 126 running on client computer 102.


Server computer 104 includes a memory 128, a secondary storage device 130, a central processing unit (CPU) 132 an input device 134, and a video display 136. The memory 128 includes a Java™ runtime system 138. The Java™ runtime system 138 includes a Java™ virtual machine 140, and the Java™ remote method invocation (RMI) system 142. The RMI system 142 contains one or more serialization contexts 144. Memory 128 also includes a program 146 running on server computer 104, and one or more objects 148.


Using RMI, objects can be passed between client computer 102 and server computer 104. For example, a program 146 running on client computer 102 can invoke a method on an object 148 stored in the memory 130 of server computer 104. Client computer 102 would use RMI system 122 to convert the method call, including an identification of the remote method and any parameters, into a byte stream that is sent to server computer 104 via network 106. Server computer 104, upon receiving the byte stream, would use its RMI system to convert the byte stream into executable bytecode and initiate the invocation of the method on the remote object. If the method results in a return value, server computer 104 would convert the return value to a byte stream using its RMI system, and transmit the byte stream to the client computer 102.


The byte streams contain serialized versions of Java™ objects, e.g. parameters or return values. A serialized object contains two main parts: the object data and a class descriptor. The class descriptor describes the content and format of the object data. Object serialization is explained in, for example, the Java™ Object Serialization Specification, which is incorporated herein by reference.


Within a single remote method call, a class descriptor is sent with the first object of that type that is serialized, subsequent objects of that type in the same remote method call refer to the class descriptor with a “back reference” (i.e., an integer handle).


Serialization Contexts


In a serialized object, the class descriptor provides the full name of the class and its serialization ID, which uniquely identifies the class. The serialization ID is a 64-bit hash of the class name, interface class names, methods, and fields. Each class descriptor is an instance of the Java™ class ObjectStreamClass, defined as follows:

















public class ObjectStreamClass



{









public static ObjectStreamClass lookup(Class cl);



public String getName( );



public Class forClass( );



public ObjectStreamField[ ] getFields( );



public long getSerialVersionUID( );



public String toString( );









}.










Serialization contexts can be used to pass the class descriptors of serialized objects. As explained above, serialization contexts are dictionary objects that map a class descriptor to a corresponding integer handle. When possible, the integer handle, rather than the full class descriptor, is passed, saving processing time in RMI calls.



FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing serialization contexts 124 and 144 in more detail, consistent with the present invention. Each serialization context is maintained as a pair of tables: one for outgoing handles, e.g., 202 or 206, and one for incoming handles, e.g., 204 or 208. Outgoing handles are used when a program running on the computer acts as a sender (e.g., makes a remote call or sends return values). Incoming handles are used when a program running on the computer acts as a recipient (e.g., receives a remote call or receives return values). In this way, a program 126 running on the client computer and a program 146 running on the server computer can each act as a sender or recipient. Both the RMI system of the client computer and the RMI system of the server computer maintain an outgoing handle table and an incoming handle table.


RMI system 122 of client computer 102 contains serialization context 124, which consists of outgoing handle table 202 and incoming handle table 204, and RMI system 142 of server computer 104 contains serialization context 144, which consists of outgoing handle table 206 and incoming handle table 208. Each incoming handle table has one or more entries including a handle and a class descriptor. Each outgoing handle table has one or more entries, the entries including a flag, a handle, and a class descriptor. The flag in each outgoing handle table entry is a boolean value indicating whether the corresponding handle/class descriptor pair is “committed.” If a handle/class descriptor pair in an outgoing handle table is committed, it is known to be saved in the corresponding incoming handle table of the serialization context pair. For example, if the committed flag in an entry in outgoing handle table 202 is true, then the corresponding class descriptor/handle pair has been stored in incoming handle table 208. If the committed flag is false, incoming handle table 208 may or may not contain the corresponding class descriptor/handle pair. The use of the committed flag will be described in further detail below with reference to FIG. 5.



FIG. 3 depicts a flow chart of a method for passing objects using serialization contexts, consistent with the present invention. First, the sender (e.g., program 126 running on client computer 102) and the recipient (e.g., program 146 running on server computer 104) agree on a serialization context to use during the method call (step 302). As a result of this agreement, or “handshake,” the sender will use serialization context 124 and the recipient will use serialization context 144, as shown in FIG. 2. The “handshake” process is explained below, with reference to FIG. 4.


When the sender wishes to send a class descriptor to the recipient, the sender checks to see if the descriptor is already defined in the outgoing handle table 202 of serialization context 124 (step 304). If so, and if the committed flag is true, as detailed with reference to one embodiment in FIG. 5 below, the sender retrieves the handle corresponding to the class descriptor from the outgoing handle table 202 of serialization context 124, and sends the handle rather than the full class descriptor to the recipient (step 306). The recipient then uses the handle to look up the class descriptor in the incoming handle table 208 of serialization context 144. If the class descriptor that the sender wishes to send is not in the outgoing handle table 202 of serialization context 124, the sender sends both the class descriptor and a new handle (step 310). For subsequent calls, the sender can send just the handle to the recipient.


Handshake



FIG. 4 is a flow chart of the “handshake” between a sender and a recipient to agree on a serialization context pair to use. When a connection between the sender and the recipient is established, e.g., when a new RMI session begins, the sender and recipient “handshake” to agree on a serialization context pair to use, as stated in step 302 of FIG. 3 above. Each pair of serialization contexts, e.g., serialization contexts 124 and 144, is identified by a globally unique context ID. This context ID is used to perform the handshake. First, the sender determines whether one of the sender's serialization contexts is associated with a serialization context of the recipient (step 402). If so, the sender transmits the context ID for that serialization context pair to the recipient (step 404). Otherwise, the sender transmits a null ID to the recipient (step 406). If the recipient receives a non-null context ID (step 408), it check to see if it still has the corresponding serialization context (step 410). If it does, the recipient echoes the context ID back to the sender (step 412).


If the recipient does not have the serialization context corresponding to the context ID received, or if the recipient receives a null ID, the recipient creates a new serialization context (step 414) and sends the new context ID to the sender (step 416). The sender then knows that, if it receives the same context ID that it sent, it can use the proposed serialization context. Otherwise, the sender should create a new serialization context with the new context ID and use that instead.


Using Committed Flags to Enhance Two-Way Communications



FIG. 5 is a flow chart showing how the committed flag can be used to enhance two-way communication by ensuring that handles are sent without class descriptor definitions only when the receiving end is known to have previously received a definition (i.e., a class descriptor) corresponding to the handle. As described in step 306 of FIG. 3 above, when the sender determines that a class descriptor is already defined in outgoing handle table 202, the sender can send the corresponding handle, rather than the full class descriptor, to the recipient. However, before sending the handle, the sender can use the committed flag to ensure that the sender has an entry containing the class descriptor/handle pair in incoming handle table 208.


To use the committed flag in this way, the sender first checks to see if the class descriptor is in the outgoing handle table 202 of serialization context 124 (step 502). If so, then the sender checks the value of the corresponding committed flag (step 504). If the committed flag is true, the sender can send the handle, knowing that the class descriptor/handle pair is stored in the recipient's incoming handle table 208 (step 506).


If the class descriptor is not in the outgoing handle table 202 of serialization context 124, the sender creates a new entry, with a new handle and a committed flag set to false, in outgoing handle table 202 (step 508) and sends the new handle and class descriptor to the recipient (step 510). The recipient stores the new class descriptor/handle pair in incoming handle table 208 (step 512). The sender would also send both the class descriptor and the handle to the recipient if the class descriptor is in outgoing handle table 202, but the committed flag is false (steps 510 & 512). The recipient would simply discard any duplicate handle/class descriptor pairs received.


Handle Acknowledgment-Arguments


To rely on the committed flags as described above, there must be a way to update the flags in both the sender's outgoing handle table and the recipient's outgoing handle table. This updating can be done using the arguments sent from the sender to the recipient and the return values returned from the recipient to the sender.


When an argument, including data and a class descriptor/handle pair, is sent from a sender (e.g., program 126 running on client computer 102) to a recipient (e.g., program 146 running on server computer 104), the recipient uses the class descriptor or handled to recreate the argument data and carry out the method call.


As part of this process, the recipient enters any new handle/class descriptor pairs into the incoming handle table 208. In one embodiment, this updating occurs before the method call can return successfully to the client. Therefore, when the remote method call is successfully returned to the original sender, the handle/class descriptor pair is implicitly acknowledged, and the sender can set the corresponding committed flag in the outgoing handle table 202 to true.


Handle Acknowledgment-Return Values


Class descriptors used by the recipient (e.g., program 126 running on server computer 104) to send return values to the sender (e.g., program 146 running on client computer 102) require an explicit acknowledgment. The recipient has no way of knowing whether the sender successfully stored the handle/class descriptor pair sent with the return value in the incoming handle table 204. To acknowledge that the incoming handle table 204 has been updated, the sender sends an explicit acknowledgment of its successful receipt of the handle/class descriptor pair with its next call to the recipient. The acknowledgment can be delayed in this way because the recipient only needs the acknowledgment if there are future communications between the sender and the recipient.


Garbage Collection


Serialization contexts can get quite large. If a pair of tables is no longer needed, memory space can be saved by deleting the tables. Preferably, this “garbage collection” is made possible by using the globally unique ID codes corresponding to each serialization context pair. A table that maps serialization contexts to their unique ID codes can be maintained by, for example, RMI system 124 or RMI system 144. Space in this table is “leased,” meaning that after a set amount of time has passed, a serialization context/unique ID code pairing is deleted from the table. Each time a serialization context is accessed by an object, e.g., a program running on client computer 102 or server computer 104, the lease time is reset. Therefore, serialization contexts will automatically be available for a set amount of time between uses. After the set amount of time expires and a serialization context is deleted, a new table is created when a client wishes to communicate with the server, as described in FIG. 5.


Other embodiments of the invention will be apparent to those skilled in the art from consideration of the specification and practice of the invention disclosed herein. It is intended that the specification and examples be considered as exemplary only, with a true scope and spirit of the invention being indicated by the following claims.

Claims
  • 1. A method in a distributed system for passing a first object and a second object, wherein the first object and the second object are instances of a class, comprising the steps of: passing the first object from a sender to a recipient with a descriptor of the class and a handle corresponding to the descriptor;storing the handle and the descriptor received from the sender with the first object by the recipient;passing the second object from the sender to the recipient with the handle;using the handle received by the recipient with the second object to access the descriptor received by the recipient with the first object;using the descriptor by the recipient to interpret the first object; andusing the descriptor by the recipient to interpret the second object.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of: assigning, by the sender, the handle to the descriptor of the class.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of: assigning, by the recipient, the handle to the descriptor of the class.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of: creating a serialization context including the handle, the descriptor, and an indicator of whether the serialization context has been sent to the sender.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of: determining whether the class descriptor is accessible to the recipient.
  • 6. A method in a distributed system for passing a first object and a second object to a recipient, wherein the first object and the second object are instances of a class, comprising the steps of: passing, by a sender, the first object to the recipient with a descriptor of the class and a handle corresponding to the descriptor, whereupon receipt by the recipient, the recipient uses the descriptor to interpret the first object and stores the handle and the descriptor; andpassing, by the sender, the second object to the recipient with the handle, whereupon receipt by the recipient, the recipient uses the handle received with the second object to access the descriptor of the class received with the first object and uses the descriptor to interpret the second object.
  • 7. The method of claim 6, further comprising the step of: assigning the handle to the descriptor of the class.
  • 8. The method of claim 6, further comprising the step of: creating a serialization context including the handle, the descriptor, and an indicator of whether the serialization context has been sent to the sender.
  • 9. The method of claim 6, further comprising the step of: determining whether the class descriptor is accessible to the recipient.
  • 10. A method in a distributed system for interpreting a first object and a second object, wherein the first object and the second object are instances of a class, comprising the steps of: receiving the first object from a sender with a descriptor of the class and a handle corresponding to the descriptor;storing the handle and the descriptor;receiving the second object with the handle;using the handle received with the second object to access the descriptor received with the first object;using the descriptor by the recipient to interpret the first object; andusing the descriptor by the recipient to interpret the second object.
  • 11. The method of claim 10, further comprising the step of: assigning the handle to the descriptor of the class.
  • 12. A distributed system comprising: a client computer, comprising: a memory with a client program that sends a first object and a second object of a class to a remote location together with a handle corresponding to a descriptor of the class, and with an outgoing serialization context that stores the descriptor of the class and the handle corresponding to the descriptor; anda processor that runs the client program; anda server computer, comprising: a memory with an incoming serialization context that stores the descriptor of the class and the handle received from the client computer with the first object, and with a server program that uses the descriptor of the class to interpret the first object, receives the second object from the client program, uses the handle received with the second object to access the descriptor of the class stored in the incoming serialization context, and uses the descriptor of the class to interpret the second object; anda processor that runs the server program.
  • 13. A computer-readable medium containing instructions for controlling a data processing system to perform a method, the method for sending a first object and a second object from a source to a destination, wherein the first object and the second object are instances of a class, the method comprising the steps of: sending the first object from the source to the destination with a descriptor of the class and a handle corresponding to the descriptor;storing the handle and the descriptor received from the source by the destination;using the descriptor by the destination to interpret the first object;sending the second object from the source to the destination with the handle;using the handle received by the destination with the second object to access the descriptor received by the destination with the first object; andusing the descriptor to interpret the second object.
US Referenced Citations (273)
Number Name Date Kind
4430699 Segarra et al. Feb 1984 A
4491946 Kryskow, Jr. et al. Jan 1985 A
4558413 Schmidt et al. Dec 1985 A
4567359 Lockwood Jan 1986 A
4713806 Oberlander et al. Dec 1987 A
4800488 Agrawal et al. Jan 1989 A
4809160 Mahon et al. Feb 1989 A
4819233 Delucia et al. Apr 1989 A
4823122 Mann et al. Apr 1989 A
4939638 Stephenson et al. Jul 1990 A
4956773 Saito et al. Sep 1990 A
4992940 Dworkin Feb 1991 A
5088036 Ellis et al. Feb 1992 A
5101346 Ohtsuki Mar 1992 A
5109486 Seymour Apr 1992 A
5187787 Skeen et al. Feb 1993 A
5218699 Brandle et al. Jun 1993 A
5253165 Leiseca et al. Oct 1993 A
5257369 Skeen et al. Oct 1993 A
5293614 Ferguson et al. Mar 1994 A
5297283 Kelly, Jr. et al. Mar 1994 A
5303042 Lewis et al. Apr 1994 A
5307490 Davidson et al. Apr 1994 A
5311591 Fischer May 1994 A
5319542 King, Jr. et al. Jun 1994 A
5327559 Priven et al. Jul 1994 A
5339430 Lundin et al. Aug 1994 A
5339435 Lubkin et al. Aug 1994 A
5341477 Pitkin et al. Aug 1994 A
5386568 Wold et al. Jan 1995 A
5390328 Frey et al. Feb 1995 A
5392280 Zheng Feb 1995 A
5423042 Jalili et al. Jun 1995 A
5440744 Jacobson et al. Aug 1995 A
5446901 Owicki et al. Aug 1995 A
5448740 Kiri et al. Sep 1995 A
5452459 Drury et al. Sep 1995 A
5455952 Gjovaag Oct 1995 A
5459837 Caccavale Oct 1995 A
5471629 Risch Nov 1995 A
5475792 Stanford et al. Dec 1995 A
5475817 Waldo et al. Dec 1995 A
5475840 Nelson et al. Dec 1995 A
5481721 Serlet et al. Jan 1996 A
5491791 Glowny et al. Feb 1996 A
5504921 Dev et al. Apr 1996 A
5506984 Miller Apr 1996 A
5511196 Shackelford et al. Apr 1996 A
5511197 Hill et al. Apr 1996 A
5524244 Robinson et al. Jun 1996 A
5544040 Gerbaulet Aug 1996 A
5548724 Akizawa et al. Aug 1996 A
5548726 Pettus Aug 1996 A
5553282 Parrish et al. Sep 1996 A
5555367 Premerlani et al. Sep 1996 A
5555427 Aoe et al. Sep 1996 A
5557798 Skeen et al. Sep 1996 A
5560003 Nilsen et al. Sep 1996 A
5561785 Blandy et al. Oct 1996 A
5577231 Scalzi et al. Nov 1996 A
5592375 Salmon et al. Jan 1997 A
5594921 Pettus Jan 1997 A
5603031 White et al. Feb 1997 A
5617537 Yamada et al. Apr 1997 A
5628005 Hurvig May 1997 A
5640564 Hamilton et al. Jun 1997 A
5644720 Boll et al. Jul 1997 A
5644768 Periwal et al. Jul 1997 A
5652888 Burgess Jul 1997 A
5655148 Richman et al. Aug 1997 A
5659751 Heninger Aug 1997 A
5664110 Green et al. Sep 1997 A
5664111 Nahan et al. Sep 1997 A
5664191 Davidson et al. Sep 1997 A
5666493 Wojcik et al. Sep 1997 A
5671225 Hooper et al. Sep 1997 A
5671279 Elgamal Sep 1997 A
5675796 Hodges et al. Oct 1997 A
5675797 Chung et al. Oct 1997 A
5680573 Rubin et al. Oct 1997 A
5680617 Gough et al. Oct 1997 A
5682534 Kapoor et al. Oct 1997 A
5684955 Meyer et al. Nov 1997 A
5689709 Corbett et al. Nov 1997 A
5694551 Doyle et al. Dec 1997 A
5706435 Barbara et al. Jan 1998 A
5706502 Foley et al. Jan 1998 A
5710887 Chelliah et al. Jan 1998 A
5715314 Payne et al. Feb 1998 A
5721825 Lawson et al. Feb 1998 A
5721832 Westrope et al. Feb 1998 A
5724540 Kametani Mar 1998 A
5724588 Hill et al. Mar 1998 A
5727048 Hiroshima et al. Mar 1998 A
5727145 Nessett et al. Mar 1998 A
5729594 Klingman Mar 1998 A
5737607 Hamilton et al. Apr 1998 A
5742768 Gennaro et al. Apr 1998 A
5745678 Herzberg et al. Apr 1998 A
5745695 Gilchrist et al. Apr 1998 A
5745703 Cejtin et al. Apr 1998 A
5745755 Covey Apr 1998 A
5748897 Katiyar May 1998 A
5754849 Dyer et al. May 1998 A
5754977 Gardner et al. May 1998 A
5757925 Faybishenko May 1998 A
5758077 Danahy et al. May 1998 A
5758328 Giovannoli May 1998 A
5758344 Prasad et al. May 1998 A
5761507 Govett Jun 1998 A
5761656 Ben-Shachar Jun 1998 A
5764897 Khalidi Jun 1998 A
5764915 Heimsoth et al. Jun 1998 A
5764982 Madduri Jun 1998 A
5768532 Megerian Jun 1998 A
5774551 Wu et al. Jun 1998 A
5774729 Carney et al. Jun 1998 A
5778179 Kanai et al. Jul 1998 A
5778187 Monteiro et al. Jul 1998 A
5778228 Wei Jul 1998 A
5778368 Hogan et al. Jul 1998 A
5784560 Kingdon et al. Jul 1998 A
5787425 Bigus Jul 1998 A
5787431 Shaughnessy Jul 1998 A
5790548 Sistanizadeh et al. Aug 1998 A
5790677 Fox et al. Aug 1998 A
5794207 Walker et al. Aug 1998 A
5799173 Gossler et al. Aug 1998 A
5802367 Held et al. Sep 1998 A
5805805 Civanlar et al. Sep 1998 A
5806042 Kelly et al. Sep 1998 A
5808911 Tucker et al. Sep 1998 A
5809144 Sirbu et al. Sep 1998 A
5809507 Cavanaugh, III Sep 1998 A
5812819 Rodwin et al. Sep 1998 A
5813013 Shakib et al. Sep 1998 A
5815149 Mutschler, III et al. Sep 1998 A
5815709 Waldo et al. Sep 1998 A
5815711 Sakamoto et al. Sep 1998 A
5818448 Katiyar Oct 1998 A
5829022 Watanabe et al. Oct 1998 A
5832219 Pettus Nov 1998 A
5832529 Wollrath et al. Nov 1998 A
5832593 Wurst et al. Nov 1998 A
5835737 Sand et al. Nov 1998 A
5842018 Atkinson et al. Nov 1998 A
5844553 Hao et al. Dec 1998 A
5845090 Collins, III et al. Dec 1998 A
5845129 Wendorf et al. Dec 1998 A
5850442 Muftic Dec 1998 A
5860004 Fowlow et al. Jan 1999 A
5860153 Matena et al. Jan 1999 A
5864862 Kriens et al. Jan 1999 A
5864866 Henckel et al. Jan 1999 A
5872928 Lewis et al. Feb 1999 A
5872973 Mitchell et al. Feb 1999 A
5875335 Beard Feb 1999 A
5878411 Burroughs et al. Mar 1999 A
5884024 Lim et al. Mar 1999 A
5884079 Furusawa Mar 1999 A
5887134 Ebrahim Mar 1999 A
5889951 Lombardi Mar 1999 A
5890158 House et al. Mar 1999 A
5892904 Atkinson et al. Apr 1999 A
5915112 Boutcher Jun 1999 A
5925108 Johnson et al. Jul 1999 A
5933497 Beetcher et al. Aug 1999 A
5933647 Aronberg et al. Aug 1999 A
5935249 Stern et al. Aug 1999 A
5940827 Hapner et al. Aug 1999 A
5944793 Islam et al. Aug 1999 A
5946485 Weeren et al. Aug 1999 A
5946694 Copeland et al. Aug 1999 A
5951652 Ingrassia, Jr. et al. Sep 1999 A
5956509 Kevner Sep 1999 A
5961582 Gaines Oct 1999 A
5963924 Williams et al. Oct 1999 A
5966531 Skeen et al. Oct 1999 A
5969967 Aahlad et al. Oct 1999 A
5974201 Chang et al. Oct 1999 A
5978484 Apperson et al. Nov 1999 A
5978773 Hudetz et al. Nov 1999 A
5982773 Nishimura et al. Nov 1999 A
5987506 Carter et al. Nov 1999 A
5991808 Broder et al. Nov 1999 A
5996075 Matena Nov 1999 A
5999179 Kekic et al. Dec 1999 A
5999988 Pelegri-Llopart et al. Dec 1999 A
6003050 Silver et al. Dec 1999 A
6003065 Yan et al. Dec 1999 A
6003763 Gallagher et al. Dec 1999 A
6009103 Woundy Dec 1999 A
6009413 Webber et al. Dec 1999 A
6009464 Hamilton et al. Dec 1999 A
6014686 Elnozahy et al. Jan 2000 A
6016496 Roberson Jan 2000 A
6016516 Horikiri Jan 2000 A
6018619 Allard et al. Jan 2000 A
6023586 Gaisford et al. Feb 2000 A
6026414 Anglin Feb 2000 A
6031977 Pettus Feb 2000 A
6032151 Arnold et al. Feb 2000 A
6034925 Wehmeyer Mar 2000 A
6044381 Boothby et al. Mar 2000 A
6052761 Hornung et al. Apr 2000 A
6055562 Devarakonda et al. Apr 2000 A
6058381 Nelson May 2000 A
6058383 Narasimhalu et al. May 2000 A
6061699 DiCecco et al. May 2000 A
6067575 McManis et al. May 2000 A
6078655 Fahrer et al. Jun 2000 A
6085255 Vincent et al. Jul 2000 A
6092194 Touboul Jul 2000 A
6093216 Adl-Tabatabai et al. Jul 2000 A
6101528 Butt Aug 2000 A
6104716 Crichton et al. Aug 2000 A
6108346 Doucette et al. Aug 2000 A
6134603 Jones et al. Oct 2000 A
6154844 Touboul et al. Nov 2000 A
6157960 Kaminsky et al. Dec 2000 A
6182083 Scheifler et al. Jan 2001 B1
6185602 Bayrakeri Feb 2001 B1
6185611 Waldo et al. Feb 2001 B1
6189046 Moore et al. Feb 2001 B1
6192044 Mack Feb 2001 B1
6199068 Carpenter Mar 2001 B1
6199116 May et al. Mar 2001 B1
6212578 Racicot et al. Apr 2001 B1
6216158 Luo et al. Apr 2001 B1
6219675 Pal et al. Apr 2001 B1
6226746 Scheifler May 2001 B1
6243716 Waldo et al. Jun 2001 B1
6243814 Matena Jun 2001 B1
6247091 Lovett Jun 2001 B1
6253256 Wollrath et al. Jun 2001 B1
6263350 Wollrath et al. Jul 2001 B1
6263379 Atkinson et al. Jul 2001 B1
6272559 Jones et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282295 Young et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282568 Sondur et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282581 Moore et al. Aug 2001 B1
6292934 Davidson et al. Sep 2001 B1
6301613 Ahlstrom et al. Oct 2001 B1
6321275 McQuistan et al. Nov 2001 B1
6327677 Garg et al. Dec 2001 B1
6339783 Horikiri Jan 2002 B1
6343308 Marchesseault Jan 2002 B1
6351735 Deaton et al. Feb 2002 B1
6360266 Pettus Mar 2002 B1
6363409 Hart et al. Mar 2002 B1
6385643 Jacobs et al. May 2002 B1
6408342 Moore et al. Jun 2002 B1
6418468 Ahlstrom et al. Jul 2002 B1
6564174 Ding et al. May 2003 B1
6578074 Bahlmann Jun 2003 B1
6603772 Moussavi et al. Aug 2003 B1
6604127 Murphy et al. Aug 2003 B2
6604140 Beck et al. Aug 2003 B1
6654793 Wollrath et al. Nov 2003 B1
6704803 Wilson et al. Mar 2004 B2
6757262 Weisshaar et al. Jun 2004 B1
6757729 Devarakonda et al. Jun 2004 B1
6801940 Moran et al. Oct 2004 B1
6801949 Bruck et al. Oct 2004 B1
6804711 Dugan et al. Oct 2004 B1
20010011350 Zabetian Aug 2001 A1
20020059212 Takagi May 2002 A1
20020073019 Deaton Jun 2002 A1
20020111814 Barnett et al. Aug 2002 A1
20030005132 Nguyen et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030084204 Wollrath et al. May 2003 A1
20030191842 Murphy et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030191984 Flaherty et al. Oct 2003 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (44)
Number Date Country
0 300 516 Jan 1989 EP
0 351 536 Jan 1990 EP
0 384 339 Aug 1990 EP
0 472 874 Mar 1992 EP
0 474 340 Mar 1992 EP
497 022 Aug 1992 EP
0 555 997 Aug 1993 EP
0 565 849 Oct 1993 EP
0 569 195 Nov 1993 EP
0 625 750 Nov 1994 EP
0 635 792 Jan 1995 EP
0 651 328 May 1995 EP
0 660 231 Jun 1995 EP
0 697 655 Feb 1996 EP
0 718 761 Jun 1996 EP
0 767 432 Apr 1997 EP
0 778 520 Jun 1997 EP
0 794 493 Sep 1997 EP
0 803 810 Oct 1997 EP
0 803 811 Oct 1997 EP
0 805 393 Nov 1997 EP
0 810 524 Dec 1997 EP
0 817 020 Jan 1998 EP
0 817 022 Jan 1998 EP
0 817 025 Jan 1998 EP
0 836 140 Apr 1998 EP
2 253 079 Aug 1992 GB
2 262 825 Jun 1993 GB
2 305 087 Mar 1997 GB
11-45187 Feb 1999 JP
WO9207335 Apr 1992 WO
WO 9209948 Jun 1992 WO
WO9325962 Dec 1993 WO
WO 9403855 Feb 1994 WO
WO 9603692 Feb 1996 WO
WO9610787 Apr 1996 WO
WO9618947 Jun 1996 WO
WO9624099 Aug 1996 WO
WO9802814 Jan 1998 WO
WO9804971 Feb 1998 WO
WO9917194 Apr 1999 WO
WO0113228 Feb 2001 WO
WO0186394 Nov 2001 WO
WO0190903 Nov 2001 WO
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20020124118 A1 Sep 2002 US