This technology generally relates to methods and devices for traffic management and, more particularly, to methods for managing traffic balancing in a multi-service environment and devices thereof.
When making load balancing decisions, a traffic management device will determine a global traffic management or capacity score (gtm_score) for the system. Currently, this capacity score is determined by selecting a minimum score among all modules (APM, WOM, WAM and ASM) configured in a virtual service in the device.
Unfortunately, this calculated capacity score only represents the services used by a front virtual service in the device and does not consider any inner virtual services used behind the front virtual service. When the front virtual service uses other inner virtual services, this calculated capacity score is not an accurate representation of capacity resulting in ineffective load balancing.
A method for managing traffic in a multi-service environment including determining with a traffic management device a self score for a front virtual service which is coupled to one or more inner virtual services. An aggregate score for the front virtual service is determined with the traffic management device based on an aggregate score for each of the one or more inner virtual services and a number of connections between each of the one or more inner virtual services and the front virtual service. An advertised score for the front virtual service for load balancing is obtained with the traffic management device based on the determined self score and the determined aggregate score.
A computer readable medium having stored thereon instructions for managing traffic in a multi-service environment comprising machine executable code which when executed by at least one processor, causes the processor to perform steps including determining a self score for a front virtual service which is coupled to one or more inner virtual services. An aggregate score for the front virtual service is determined based on an aggregate score for each of the one or more inner virtual services and a number of connections between each of the one or more inner virtual services and the front virtual service. An advertised score for the front virtual service for load balancing is obtained based on the determined self score and the determined aggregate score.
A traffic management device includes a memory coupled to one or more processors configured to execute programmed instructions stored in the memory including determining a self score for a front virtual service which is coupled to one or more inner virtual services. An aggregate score for the front virtual service is determined based on an aggregate score for each of the one or more inner virtual services and a number of connections between each of the one or more inner virtual services and the front virtual service. An advertised score for the front virtual service for load balancing is obtained based on the determined self score and the determined aggregate score.
This technology provides a number of advantages including providing more effective methods, computer readable medium and devices for managing traffic when multiple services are being provided. With this technology, a score representative of a current load on a system with multiple layered virtual systems can be determined and provided for load balancing decisions.
A network environment 10 with an exemplary traffic management device 12 for managing traffic when multiple services are being provided is illustrated in
Referring more specifically to
The central processing unit (CPU) or processor 20 executes a program of stored instructions for one or more aspects of the technology as described herein. The memory 22 stores these programmed instructions for one or more aspects of the technology as described herein, although some or all of the programmed instructions could be stored and/or executed elsewhere. A variety of different types of memory storage devices, such as a random access memory (RAM) or a read only memory (ROM) in the system or a floppy disk, hard disk, CD ROM, DVD ROM, or other computer readable medium which is read from and/or written to by a magnetic, optical, or other reading and/or writing system that is coupled to the processor 20, can be used for the memory 22. The interface unit 24 is used to operatively couple data communications between one or more of the client computing devices 14(1)-14(n) and one or more of the server devices 16(1)-16(n), although other types and numbers of systems, devices, blades, components, and elements could be coupled together, such as one or more storage devices.
Each of the client computing devices 14(1)-14(n) and server devices 16(1)-16(n) include a central processing unit (CPU) or processor, a memory, and an interface or I/O system, which are coupled together by a bus or other link, although other numbers and types of network devices could be used. The client computing devices 14(1)-14(n), in this example, may run interface applications, such as Web browsers, that may provide an interface to make requests for and send data to server devices 16(1)-16(n). Generally, server devices 16(1)-16(n) process requests received from requesting client computing devices 14(1)-14(n). A series of applications may run on the server devices 16(1)-16(n) that allow the transmission of data, such as a data file or metadata, requested by the client computing devices 14(1)-14(n). The server devices 16(1)-16(n) may provide data or receive data in response to requests directed toward the respective applications on the server devices 16(1)-16(n) from the client computing devices 14(1)-14(n). Although server devices 16(1)-16(n) are shown, one or more of the server devices 16(1)-16(n) may be implemented as one or more software modules or other sets of programmed instructions and other types and numbers of devices could be coupled to the traffic management device 12.
The communication network 18 is a communication network which uses TCP/IP over Ethernet and industry-standard protocols, including SOAP, XML, LDAP, and SNMP, although other types and numbers of communication networks, such as a direct connection, a local area network, a wide area network, modems and phone lines, e-mail, and wireless communication technology, each having their own communications protocols, can be used.
Although an exemplary environment with the traffic management device 12, the client computing devices 14(1)-14(n), the server devices 16(1)-16(n), and the communication network 18 are described and illustrated herein, other types and numbers of systems, devices, blades, components, elements and communication networks in other configurations can be used. It is to be understood that the systems of the examples described herein are for exemplary purposes, as many variations of the specific hardware and software used to implement the examples are possible, as will be appreciated by those skilled in the relevant art(s).
Furthermore, each of the systems of the examples may be conveniently implemented using one or more general purpose computer systems, microprocessors, digital signal processors, and micro-controllers, programmed according to the teachings of the examples, as described and illustrated herein, and as will be appreciated by those ordinary skill in the art.
In addition, two or more computing systems or devices can be substituted for any one of the systems in any example. Accordingly, principles and advantages of distributed processing, such as redundancy and replication also can be implemented, as desired, to increase the robustness and performance of the devices and systems of the examples. The examples may also be implemented on computer system or systems that extend across any suitable network using any suitable interface mechanisms and communications technologies, including by way of example only telecommunications in any suitable form (e.g., voice and modem), wireless communications media, wireless communications networks, cellular communications networks, G3 communications networks, Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTNs), Packet Data Networks (PDNs), the Internet, intranets, and combinations thereof.
The examples may also be embodied as a computer readable medium having instructions stored thereon for one or more aspects of the technology as described and illustrated by way of the examples herein, which when executed by a processor, cause the processor to carry out the steps necessary to implement the methods of the examples, as described and illustrated herein.
An exemplary method for managing traffic in a multi-service environment when multiple services are being provided will now be described below with reference to
The service components are illustrated by way of example only and other types and numbers of service components could be used, such as WOM, LTM, ASM, a processor, an ASIC/FPGA or any other hardware component. As explained herein, each of these service components can compute its own service specific score in a component specific fashion, although other arrangements could be used such as having the traffic management device 12 programmed with instructions to determine a score for each service component.
In this particular example, the advertised score or global traffic management score (gtm_score) ranges from 0 representing no capacity to 100 representing full capacity, although other ranges and types of scoring or other indicators to identify available capacity could be used. With this technology, the advertised score, which represents available capacity for load balancing, takes into account multiple layered inner virtual services because a self score calculated based on the front virtual service alone would not provide the correct available capacity.
Referring to
In step 102, the traffic management device 12 determines whether a first set period of time starting from any of the obtained time stamps for the requested advertised scores for the front virtual service (FVS1) and for the inner virtual services 1 and 2 (IVS1 and IVS2) from table 5 in memory in the traffic management device 12 has expired. In this particular example, the table illustrated in
In step 104, the traffic management device 12 determines the self score for each of the front virtual service (FVS1) and the inner virtual services 1 and 2 (IVS1 and IVS2) based on the minimum self score for each of the inner virtual services and/or service components respectively coupled to each of the front virtual service (FVS1), the inner virtual service 1 (IVS1), and the inner virtual service 2 (IVS2).
In this particular example, the inner virtual service 1 (IVS1) is coupled to three service components or modules (APM1, WAM1, and a layering iRule) which each have their own criteria and mechanism to set their own service self score, although other types and numbers of service components or inner virtual services and other manners for determining the service self scores could be used. Similarly, the inner virtual service IVS2 is coupled to three service components or modules (APM2, WAM2, and a compression card) which also each have their own criteria and mechanism to set their own service self score, although again other types and numbers of service components or inner virtual services and other manners for determining the service self scores could be used. For example, the APM1 and APM2 service components each could use the active user sessions count to determine their service self score while the WAM1 and WAM2 service components uses the current transactions count to determine their service self score. The table shown in
Next, the inner virtual service 1 (IVS1) selects the minimum value from the service self scores for the APM1, WAM1, and a layering iRule as the self score for the inner virtual service 1 (IVS1), although other manners for obtaining the self score for the inner virtual service 1 (IVS1), such as taking the average of the service self scores could be used. In this example, the minimum value is the service self score “15” for the APM1 as shown in the table in
Next, the front virtual service (FVS1) is coupled to the layer below comprising inner virtual service 1 (IVS1) and the inner virtual service 2 (IVS2), although the front virtual service (FSV1) could be coupled to other types and numbers of inner virtual services and/or service components. In this example, the front virtual service (FSV1) selects the minimum value of the self scores for the inner virtual service 1 (IVS1) and the inner virtual service 2 (IVS2) as its self score, although other manners for obtaining the self score of the front virtual service (FSV1) can be used, such as taking an average of the self scores of the inner virtual service 1 (IVS1) and the inner virtual service 2 (IVS2). In this example, the minimum value is the self score “5” for the inner virtual service (ISV2) in the table in
In step 106, the traffic management device 12 determines an aggregate score for each of the inner virtual service (ISV1), the inner virtual service (ISV2), and the front virtual service (FSV1) based on the determined self score and number of active connections or flows to each service component and/or inner virtual service coupled to the inner virtual service (ISV1), the inner virtual service (ISV2), and the front virtual service (FSV1), respectively. More specifically, an example of determining the aggregate or layered score for each of the inner virtual service (ISV1), the inner virtual service (ISV2), and the front virtual service (FSV1) with the traffic management device 12 is set forth below.
In this example, the aggregate or layered score of the inner virtual service (ISV1), is calculated by the traffic management device 12 as follows:
((Self Score for APM1*C3)+(Self Score for WAM1*C4)+(Self Score for Layering iRule*C5))/(C3+C4+C5)
Additionally, the aggregate or layered score of the inner virtual service (ISV2), is calculated by the traffic management device 12 as follows:
((Self Score for APM2*C6)+(Self Score for WAM2*C7)+(Self Score for Layering iRule*C8))/(C6+C7+C8).
Further, the aggregate or layered score of the front virtual service (FSV1), is calculated by the traffic management device 12 as follows:
((Self Score for IVS1*C1)+(Self Score for IVS2*C2))/(C1+C2).
By way of example only, using the numbers in the table illustrated in
As illustrated in the example above, the service components or layered inner virtual services with a high number of connections/flows to either an inner virtual service or the front virtual service (FVS1) at the next level contribute more to the weighted average. This approach also can be used recursively to calculate the aggregate score of additional inner layered virtual services (not shown). Further, checks may be added in this implementation in the traffic management device 12 to prevent loops.
This example also assumes the relationship between the front virtual FV1 and the inner layered virtuals (IVS1 and IVS2) and the relationship between the inner layered virtuals (IVS1 and IVS2) and the service components as shown in
In step 108, the traffic management device 12 determines the advertised score for the front virtual service (FVS1) by selecting the minimum of the aggregate scores for the inner virtual services 1 and 2 (IVS1 and IVS2), although other manners for determining an advertised score can be used, such as taking the average of the aggregate scores for the inner virtual services 1 and 2 (IVS1 and IVS2). In this particular example using the values in the table illustrated in
In step 110, the traffic management device 12 updates the time stamp for the obtained advertised score for the front virtual service (FVS1) and for the obtained advertised score for the inner virtual services (ISV1 and ISV2) which are stored in the table shown in
Following step 110, the process again returns to step 102 as described earlier. If in step 102, the traffic management device 12 determines the time stamps for the requested advertised scores for the front virtual service (FSV1) and for the inner virtual services 1 and 2 (IVS1 and IVS2) have not expired, then the No branch is taken to step 112, although other manners for triggering the No branch can be used, such as just the time stamps for the requested advertised scores for the front virtual service (FSV1) still being within the set time period and thus valid.
In step 112, the traffic management device 12 provides the requested advertised score in response to the initial received request to the load balancing module (not shown) in the traffic management device 12, although the requested advertised scored can be provided to other modules and applications. In step 114, the traffic management device 12 utilizes the advertised score with the load balancing module to make more accurate load balancing decisions because the load on the layered inner virtual services is taken into account.
Accordingly, as illustrated and described herein this technology provides a number of advantages including providing more effective methods and devices to manage traffic when multiple services are being provided. With this technology, a score representative of a current load on a system with multiple layered virtual systems can be determined and provided for load balancing decisions.
Having thus described the basic concept of the invention, it will be rather apparent to those skilled in the art that the foregoing detailed disclosure is intended to be presented by way of example only, and is not limiting. Various alterations, improvements, and modifications will occur and are intended to those skilled in the art, though not expressly stated herein. These alterations, improvements, and modifications are intended to be suggested hereby, and are within the spirit and scope of the invention. Additionally, the recited order of processing elements or sequences, or the use of numbers, letters, or other designations therefore, is not intended to limit the claimed processes to any order except as may be specified in the claims. Accordingly, the invention is limited only by the following claims and equivalents thereto.
This application claims priority from U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/360,049, filed Jun. 30, 2010 and hereby incorporates by reference the entirety of that application.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5282201 | Frank et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5550816 | Hardwick et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5606665 | Yang et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5623490 | Richter et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5991302 | Berl et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995491 | Richter et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6026500 | Topff et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6029175 | Chow et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6041365 | Kleinerman | Mar 2000 | A |
6047356 | Anderson et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6067558 | Wendt et al. | May 2000 | A |
6104706 | Richter et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6154777 | Ebrahim | Nov 2000 | A |
6157950 | Krishnan | Dec 2000 | A |
6259405 | Stewart et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6260070 | Shah | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6292832 | Shah et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6304913 | Rune | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6330574 | Murashita | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6338082 | Schneider | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6353848 | Morris | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363056 | Beigi et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6370527 | Singhal | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6389462 | Cohen et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6446108 | Rosenberg et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6466580 | Leung | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6469983 | Narayana et al. | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6513061 | Ebata et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6514085 | Slattery et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6542936 | Mayle et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6560230 | Li et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6578069 | Hopmann et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6615267 | Whalen et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6631422 | Althaus et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6654346 | Mahalingaiah et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6701415 | Hendren, III | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6708220 | Olin | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6728704 | Mao et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6738357 | Richter et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6744776 | Kalkunte et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6754215 | Arikawa et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6754699 | Swildens et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6760337 | Snyder, II et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6795860 | Shah | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6857009 | Ferreria | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6862282 | Oden | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6865593 | Reshef et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6868447 | Slaughter et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6871221 | Styles | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6880017 | Marce et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6883137 | Girardot et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6904040 | Salapura et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6914881 | Mansfield et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
6928518 | Talagala | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6970475 | Fraser et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6970924 | Chu et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6973490 | Robertson et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6975592 | Seddigh et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6990074 | Wan et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
6990114 | Erimli et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7003564 | Greuel et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7006502 | Lin | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7020713 | Shah et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7023974 | Brannam et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7035212 | Mittal et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7039061 | Connor et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7065482 | Shorey et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7075924 | Richter et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7076689 | Atkinson | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7080314 | Garofalakis et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7089491 | Feinberg et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7113996 | Kronenberg | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7133863 | Teng et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7155722 | Hilla | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7161904 | Hussain et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7191163 | Herrera et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7228359 | Monteiro | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7236491 | Tsao et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7240100 | Wein et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7257633 | Masputra et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7292541 | C S | Nov 2007 | B1 |
7296263 | Jacob | Nov 2007 | B1 |
7308475 | Pruitt et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7324533 | DeLiberato et al. | Jan 2008 | B1 |
7340571 | Saze | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7373438 | DeBergalis et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7409440 | Jacob | Aug 2008 | B1 |
7555608 | Naik et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7577723 | Matsuda et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7640347 | Sloat et al. | Dec 2009 | B1 |
7647203 | Herz | Jan 2010 | B1 |
7675868 | Balonado | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7684423 | Tripathi et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7698458 | Liu et al. | Apr 2010 | B1 |
7822839 | Pruitt et al. | Oct 2010 | B1 |
7861085 | Case et al. | Dec 2010 | B1 |
7885398 | Chandra | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7895653 | Calo et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7903554 | Manur et al. | Mar 2011 | B1 |
7908245 | Nakano et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7958222 | Pruitt et al. | Jun 2011 | B1 |
7984500 | Khanna et al. | Jul 2011 | B1 |
8024443 | Jacob | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8037528 | Williams et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8064342 | Badger | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8069225 | McCanne et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8155128 | Balyan et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8171124 | Kondamuru | May 2012 | B2 |
8190769 | Shukla et al. | May 2012 | B1 |
8271620 | Witchey | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8396836 | Ferguson et al. | Mar 2013 | B1 |
8463850 | McCann | Jun 2013 | B1 |
8484348 | Subramanian et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8560693 | Wang et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
8601000 | Stefani et al. | Dec 2013 | B1 |
8838817 | Biswas | Sep 2014 | B1 |
8879431 | Ridel et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8959215 | Koponen et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
9143451 | Amdahl et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
20010007560 | Masuda et al. | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20020010757 | Granik et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020012352 | Hansson et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020038360 | Andrews et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020065848 | Walker et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020072048 | Slattery et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020087571 | Stapel et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020087744 | Kitchin | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020099829 | Richards et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020099842 | Jennings et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020103823 | Jackson et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020143819 | Han et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020143852 | Guo et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162118 | Levy et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020174216 | Shorey et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020194112 | dePinto et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020194342 | Lu et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020198956 | Dunshea et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030005172 | Chessell | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009528 | Sharif et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030018450 | Carley | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030018585 | Butler et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030034905 | Anton et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030051045 | Connor | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055723 | English | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030074301 | Solomon | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030105846 | Zhao et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030108000 | Chaney et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030108002 | Chaney et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030128708 | Inoue et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030130945 | Force et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030139934 | Mandera | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030156586 | Lee et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030179755 | Fraser | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030189936 | Terrell et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030191812 | Agarwalla et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195813 | Pallister et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195962 | Kikuchi et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030212954 | Patrudu | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030220835 | Barnes, Jr. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030229665 | Ryman | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030236995 | Fretwell, Jr. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040006591 | Matsui et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040015783 | Lennon et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040017825 | Stanwood et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040030627 | Sedukhin | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040030740 | Stelting | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040043758 | Sorvari et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040059789 | Shum | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040064544 | Barsness et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040064554 | Kuno et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040093361 | Therrien et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040122926 | Moore et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040123277 | Schrader et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040133605 | Chang et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040138858 | Carley | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040167967 | Bastian et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040177165 | Masputra et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040213156 | Smallwood et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040215665 | Edgar et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040236826 | Harville et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050008017 | Datta et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050021703 | Cherry et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050027841 | Rolfe | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050044158 | Malik | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050117589 | Douady et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050165656 | Frederick et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050174944 | Legault et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050175013 | Le Pennec et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050198234 | Leib et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050213587 | Cho et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050234928 | Shkvarchuk et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050240664 | Chen et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050256806 | Tien et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050273456 | Revanuru et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060031374 | Lu et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031778 | Goodwin et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060045089 | Bacher et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060045096 | Farmer et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060047785 | Wang et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060100752 | Kim et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060112367 | Harris | May 2006 | A1 |
20060123210 | Pritchett et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060130133 | Andreev et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060133374 | Sekiguchi | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060140193 | Kakani et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060153201 | Hepper et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060209669 | Nishio | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060229861 | Tatsuoka et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060235998 | Stecher et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060259320 | LaSalle et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060268692 | Wright et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060270341 | Kim et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060282442 | Lennon et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070005807 | Wong | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070016613 | Foresti et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070019636 | Lau et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070038994 | Davis et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070067771 | Kulbak et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070112775 | Ackerman | May 2007 | A1 |
20070124415 | Lev-Ran et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070124502 | Li | May 2007 | A1 |
20070130255 | Wolovitz et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070147246 | Hurley et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070162891 | Burner et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070168320 | Borthakur et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070168525 | DeLeon et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070192543 | Naik et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070233826 | Tindal et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070250560 | Wein et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080004022 | Johannesson et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080010372 | Khedouri et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080022059 | Zimmerer et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080120592 | Tanguay et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080141246 | Kuck et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080208917 | Smoot et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080263401 | Stenzel | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080270578 | Zhang et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080281908 | McCanne et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080281944 | Vorne et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090080440 | Balyan et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090089487 | Kwon et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090094311 | Awadallah et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090097480 | Curtis et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090106413 | Salo et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090125955 | DeLorme | May 2009 | A1 |
20090138314 | Bruce | May 2009 | A1 |
20090161542 | Ho | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090187915 | Chew et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090217163 | Jaroker | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090217386 | Schneider | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090241176 | Beletski et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090265396 | Ram et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090265467 | Peles | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090289828 | Hinchey | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090292957 | Bower et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090300161 | Pruitt et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090316708 | Yahyaoui et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090319600 | Sedan et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100042743 | Jeon et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100061232 | Zhou et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100064001 | Daily | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100070476 | O'Keefe et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100093318 | Zhu et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100131654 | Malakapalli et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100179984 | Sebastian | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100228814 | Mckenna et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100228819 | Wei | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100242092 | Harris et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100250497 | Redlich et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100274772 | Samuels | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100306169 | Pishevar et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100322089 | Raja et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110055921 | Narayanaswamy et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110066736 | Mitchell et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110072321 | Dhuse | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110075667 | Li et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110078303 | Li et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110098087 | Tseng | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110113095 | Hatami-Hanza | May 2011 | A1 |
20110185082 | Thompson | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110188415 | Graziano | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110213911 | Eidus et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120117028 | Gold et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120150805 | Pafumi et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120195273 | Iwamura et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120254293 | Winter et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120257506 | Bazlamacci et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120258766 | Cho et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20130058229 | Casado et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130182713 | Giacomoni et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130238472 | Fan et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20140071895 | Bane et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140099945 | Singh et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140105069 | Potnuru | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140187199 | Yan et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140286316 | Park et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20150058595 | Gura et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2080530 | Apr 1994 | CA |
0605088 | Jul 1994 | EP |
1081918 | Mar 2001 | EP |
06-205006 | Jul 1994 | JP |
8021924 | Mar 1996 | JP |
2000183935 | Jun 2000 | JP |
0058870 | Oct 2000 | WO |
0239696 | May 2002 | WO |
20061091040 | Aug 2006 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Baer, T., et al., “The Elements of Web Services” ADTmag.com, Dec. 1, 2002, pp. 1-6, (http://www.adtmag.com). |
Blue Coat, “Technology Primer: CIFS Protocol Optimization,” Blue Coat Systems Inc., pp. 1-3, (http://www.bluecoat.com). |
“Diameter MBLB Support Phase 2: Generic Message Based Load Balancing (GMBLB)”, last accessed Mar. 29, 2010, pp. 1-10, (http://peterpan.f5net.com/twiki/bin/view/TMOS/TMOSDiameterMBLB). |
F5 Networks Inc., “Big-IP® Reference Guide, version 4.5”, F5 Networks Inc., Sep. 2002, pp. 11-1-1-32, Seattle, Washington. |
F5 Networks Inc., “3-DNS® Reference Guide, version 4.5”, F5 Networks Inc., Sep. 2002, pp. 2-1-2-28, 3-1-3-12, 5-1-5-24, Seattle, Washington. |
F5 Networks Inc., “Using F5's-DNS Controller to Provide High Availability Between Two or More Data Centers”, F5 Networks Inc., Aug. 2001, pp. 1-4, Seattle, Washington, (http://www.f5.com/f5products/3dns/relatedMaterials/3DNSRouting.html). |
F5 Networks Inc., “Deploying the Big-IP LTM for Diameter Load Balancing,” F5® Deployment Guide, Version 2.0, pp. 1-19. |
F5 Networks Inc., “F5 Diameter RM”, Powerpoint document, Jul. 16, 2009, pp. 1-7. |
F5 Networks Inc., “Routing Global Internet Users to the Appropriate Data Center and Applications Using F5's 3-DNS Controller”, F5 Networks Inc., Aug. 2001, pp. 1-4, Seattle, Washington, (http://www.f5.com/f5producs/3dns/relatedMaterials/UsingF5.html). |
F5 Networks Inc., “Case Information Log for ‘Issues with BoNY upgrade to 4.3’”, as early as Feb. 2008. |
F5 Networks Inc., “F5 WANJet CIFS Acceleration”, White Paper, F5 Networks Inc., Mar. 2006, pp. 1-5, Seattle, Washington. |
Fajardo V., “Open Diameter Software Architecture,” Jun. 25, 2004, last accessed Sep. 2, 2008, pp. 1-6, Version 1.0.7, (http://diameter.sourceforge.net/diameter-architecture/indext.html). |
Gupta et al., “Algorithms for packet classification”, Dept. of Comput. Scie., Stanford Univ., CA, Mar./Apr. 2001, pp. 1, vol. 15, Issue 2, abstract only, last accessed May 14, 2007 (http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs—all.jsp?arnumber=912717&isnumber=19697). |
Heinz G., “Priorities in Stream Transmission Control Protocol (SCTP) Multistreaming”, Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware, Spring 2003, pp. 1-35. |
Ilvesjmaki M., et al., “On the capabilities of application level traffic measurements to differentiate and classify Internet traffic”, Presented in SPIE's International Symposium ITcom, Aug. 19-21, 2001, pp. 1-11, Denver, Colorado. |
Internet Protocol,“Darpa Internet Program Protocol Specification”, (RFC:791), Information Sciences Institute, University of Southern California, Sep. 1981, pp. 1-49. |
Kawamoto, D., “Amazon files for Web services patent”, CNET News.com, Jul. 28, 2005, pp. 1-2, last accessed May 4, 2006, (http://news.com). |
LaMonica M., “Infravio spiffs up Web services registry idea”, CNET News.com, May 11, 2004, pp. 1-2, last accessed Sep. 20, 2004, (http://www.news.com). |
Mac Vittie, L., “Message-Based Load Balancing: Using F5 solutions to address the challenges of scaling Diameter, RADIUS, and message-oriented protocols”, F5 Technical Brief, 2005, pp. 1-9, F5 Networks Inc., Seattle, Washington. |
“Market Research & Releases, CMPP PoC documentation”, last accessed Mar. 29, 2010, (http://mainstreet/sites/PD/Teams/ProdMgmt/MarketResearch/Universal). |
“Market Research & Releases, Solstice Diameter Requirements”, last accessed Mar. 29, 2010, (http://mainstreet/sites/PD/Teams/ProdMgmt/MarketResearch/Unisversal). |
Modiano E., “Scheduling algorithms for message transmission over a satellitebroadcast system”, MILCOM 97 Proceedings Lincoln Lab., MIT, Nov. 2-5, 1997, abstract only, last accessed Sep. 12, 2008, (http://ieeexplore,ieee.org/xpl/freeabs)all.jsp?arnumber=646697). |
Nichols K., et al., “Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers”, (RFC:2474) Network Working Group, Dec. 1998, pp. 1-19, last accessed Oct. 8, 2012, (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2474.txt). |
Ott D., et al., “A Mechanism for TCP-Friendly Transport-level Protocol Coordination”, USENIX Annual Technical Conference, 2002, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, pp. 1-12. |
Padmanabhan V., et al., “Using Predictive Prefetching to Improve World Wide Web Latency”, SIGCOM, 1996, pp. 1-15. |
“Respond to server depending on TCP::client—port”, DevCentral Forums iRules, pp. 1-6, last accessed Mar. 26, 2010, (http://devcentral.f5.com/Default/aspx?tabid=53&forumid=5&tpage=1&v). |
Rosen E, et al., “MPLS Label Stack Encoding”, (RFC:3032) Network Working Group, Jan. 2001, pp. 1-22, last accessed Oct. 8, 2012, (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3032.txt). |
Schilit B., “Bootstrapping Location-Enhanced Web Services”, University of Washington, Dec. 4, 2003, (http://www.cs.washington.edu/news/colloq.info.html). |
Seeley R., “Can Infravio technology revive UDDI?”, ADTmag.com, Oct. 22, 2003, last accessed Sep. 30, 2004, (http://www.adtmag.com). |
Shohoud, Y., “Building XML Web Services with VB .NET and VB 6”, Addison Wesley, 2002, pp. 1-14. |
Sommers F., “Whats New in UDDI 3.0—Part 1”, Web Services Papers, Jan. 27, 2003, pp. 1-4, last accessed Mar. 31, 2004, (http://www.webservices.org/index.php/article/articleprint/871/-1/24/). |
Sommers F., “Whats New in UDDI 3.0—Part 2”, Web Services Papers, Mar. 2, 2003, pp. 1-8, last accessed Nov. 1, 2007, (http://www.web.archive.org/web/200406201310061). |
Sommers F., “Whats New in UDDI 3.0—Part 3”, Web Services Papers, Sep. 2, 2003, pp. 1-4, last accessed Mar. 31, 2007, (http://www.webservices.org/index.php/article/articleprint/894/-1/24/). |
Sleeper B., “The Evolution of UDDI: UDDI.org White Paper”, The Stencil Group, Inc., Jul. 19, 2002, pp. 1-15, San Francisco, California. |
Sleeper B., “Why UDDI Will Succeed, Quietly: Two Factors Push Web Services Forward”, The Stencil Group, Inc., Apr. 2001, pp. 1-7, San Francisco, California. |
“UDDI Overview”, Sep. 6, 2000, pp. 1-21, uddi.org, (http://www.uddi.org/). |
“UDDI Version 3.0.1 UDDI Spec Technical Committee Specification”, Oct. 14, 2003, pp. 1-383, uddi.org, (http://www.uddi.org/). |
“UDDI Technical White Paper,” Sep. 6, 2000, pp. 1-12, uddi-org, (http://www.uddi.org/). |
Wang B., “Priority and realtime data transfer over the best-effort Internet”, Dissertation Abstract, 2005, ScholarWorks@UMASS. |
Wikipedia, “Diameter (protocol)”, pp. 1-11, last accessed Oct. 27, 2010, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diameter—(protocol)). |
Woo T.Y.C., “A modular approach to packet classification: algorithms and results”, Nineteenth Annual Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies 3(3):1213-22, Mar. 26-30, 2000, abstract only, last accessed May 14, 2007, (http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs—all.jsp?arnumber=832499). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61360049 | Jun 2010 | US |