The present application claims priority from U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/916,628 for ON-DEMAND OVERLAY ROUTING FOR COMPUTER-BASED COMMUNICATION NETWORKS filed Jul. 27, 2001, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,778,502, issued Aug. 17, 2004; which claims priority from U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/886,966 for ON-DEMAND OVERLAY ROUTING FOR COMPUTER-BASED COMMUNICATION NETWORKS filed Jun. 25, 2001, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,473,405 issued Oct. 29, 2002 which claims priority from U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/336,487 for ON-DEMAND OVERLAY ROUTING FOR COMPUTER-BASED COMMUNICATION NETWORKS filed Jun. 18, 1999, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,275,470 issued Aug. 24, 2001, the entirety of each of these applications'is incorporated herein by reference for all purposes.
This invention relates to computer networks, and more specifically to a mechanism for finding improved communication paths through a heterogeneous computer network by means of an overlay network.
The Internet today consists of a collection of interconnected administrative domains. Each domain is under the control of one or more administrators who decide what hardware equipment to employ and what control software to run. This localized control of the administrative domains requires the coexistence of a number of disparate, heterogeneous systems. The basic communication protocol through which different domains communicate is IP (Internet Protocol). Each Internet data communication is translated into the delivery of a sequence of varying sized IP protocol packets that travel across one or more administrative domains until they reach the final destination.
In IP, the sender of the data only specifies the destination address, whereas the network (the collection of hardware and software systems distributed through several administrative domains) chooses a forwarding path through which to route the IP packets. Routing protocols cooperate across different administrative domains, and through a variety of different software and hardware techniques, to monitor the presence and/or the state of connections in the Internet. Because of the great size and heterogeneous nature of the Internet, and the complexity of the routing task, these routing protocols are typically minimalistic and tend to focus on guarantee of connection and minimizing routing hops rather than optimizing performance. The result, among other problems, is the familiar, frustrating user experience of protracted delay when attempting to access information through the World Wide Web, particularly during periods of heavy usage.
Many proposals to improve the utilization of the Internet exist and feature a wide variety of sophistication and/or response time in changing forwarding paths and thus providing the best routing performance. In practice, these proposals are hardly being used because it is very hard to coordinate their deployment into the Internet. Inter-operation among different administrative domains is crucial and any change to the protocols affecting the forwarding paths may greatly affect the availability of connections. As a result, in practice the forwarding paths between endpoints are determined using very simplistic cost functions and/or heuristics and/or manual intervention. This scheme tends to greatly under-utilize the networks. Depending on local configurations, when faults occur, previously chosen forwarding paths that experience a breakage will be followed for several minutes or hours until the fault is remedied or some manual forwarding path reconfiguration occurs. Several companies, such as Inktomi (Traffic Server product, http://www.inktomi.com) and Akamai (FreeFlow product, http://www.akamai.com) are currently offering and/or developing technology for improving Internet communications speeds by mechanisms which essentially replicate or cache copies of frequently-referenced Internet content, and strategically distribute such copies “closer” to the end-user clients who need the information. Such approaches are valuable, but are often limited or ineffective with respect to dynamically generated content (such as cgi-scripted web pages). Moreover, these approaches generally entail significant costs for using large-capacity computer servers to physically store extra copies of massive volumes of data, and for maintaining synchronization among the various repositories of frequently updated content.
What is needed is a mechanism enabling the selection of optimized network paths for the transmission of data, including dynamically generated data, without requiring any change whatsoever to firmly entrenched communication protocols like IP. Furthermore, preferably the mechanism should be essentially transparent to users of the network.
The present invention provides an on-demand method and system for discovering optimized paths for the transmission of data between source and destination points on a heterogeneous, computer-based communications network. The invention further provides methods and apparatus for transmitting data along such optimized paths, in a transparent manner that does not require modification of existing communication protocols. The data to be transmitted can (but need not) include pages that are dynamically generated in response to an initial request received by the source from the destination, such as an http request to get a cgi-scripted web page.
Briefly, the present invention discloses steps and means, responsive to requests for transmission of data, for measuring a cost of communicating data from the source point to the destination point along a default path, the default path being derived by means of one or more existing routing mechanisms of the communications network. The invention further provides steps and means for measuring the costs of transmitting the message from the source to the destination along one or more non-default, alternative paths passing through a special group of intermediate nodes. In a preferred embodiment, those intermediate nodes are referred to as an “overlay network”. An optimized path for sending the requested transmission is ultimately selected by comparing the default cost against the alternative costs.
Further, the present invention discloses steps and means for transmitting messages along an optimized non-default path passing through overlay nodes, including forwarding of the message from the source to a first one of the intermediate overlay nodes, and from a last one of the intermediate nodes to the destination, in a manner that does not require modification of existing network communication protocols. In a further embodiment, the invention includes steps and means for returning a reply to the transmitted message back along the optimized non-default path from the destination to the source.
Note that whenever referring to “optimized” or “optimal” paths throughout this patent, we simply mean paths that are deemed preferable with respect to selected cost/performance criteria and with respect to a set of identified alternative paths. We are not speaking of global optimality.
a graphically represents an example of overlay network topology, with full mesh connectivity.
b graphical represents an example of overlay network topology, after pruning in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
a graphically represents the discovery of an optimized path through overlay nodes for transmitting network data from a source to a destination.
b graphically represents the association of a cost with an optimized path through overlay nodes for transmitting network data from a source to a destination.
A. Overview
A preferred embodiment of the present invention provides a mechanism for finding and using optimized paths for the transmission of data between source and destination points on a computer network such as the Internet, for example, without requiring any modifications to existing communication protocols. The mechanism preferably combines an overlay routing mechanism with an on-demand routing mechanism, which may be very briefly summarized as follows:
The various processes and structures in a preferred embodiment of the present invention will now be discussed individually in greater detail.
B. On-Demand Discovery of Improved Overlay Forwarding Paths
1. Monitoring
Our invention preferably provides on-demand routing, discovering and adding useful forwarding paths through the overlay network only when needed. This avoids having to pre-compute and record all possible forwarding paths in advance, and advantageously uses the default Internet routing mechanism for bootstrapping and default operations. More particularly, the preferred embodiment of our invention creates a new forwarding path from endpoint A to endpoint B only when: (1) an end-to-end communication is requested between A and B (per step 200 of
Therefore, the discovery of an overlay forwarding path preferably starts with monitoring one or more cost/performance metrics of interest for the data communications that are carried out on the default Internet routing path. Such monitoring would most typically be performed at a gateway router or the source endpoint, node 100. Module 120 employs a predetermined cost function that combines the monitored metrics and detects end-to-end communications that do not meet specific predetermined requirements. For such communications, the detection process would extract from the monitoring operations (1) the source address A, (2) the destination address B and (3) the cost of the data communication from A to B. Computation of cost information is discussed further below. This information is then used in the process of on-demand forwarding path discovery, as discussed below.
2. Finding an Improved Path
Source node 100 (as well as any of the routers on the default Internet forwarding path) can potentially discover end-to-end communications that do not meet specific requirements. In that event, in order to initiate steps 220-225, module 120 sends a query to the overlay network nodes 130 to determine if the overlay network is capable of offering a better forwarding path. The query is preferably sent to a specified number (“q”) of the overlay network routers 130, depending on the configuration. In a relatively simple embodiment, each of the q forwarding path query messages preferably includes: (1) a destination address B, (2) a source address A, and (3) an identifier for a predefined cost function F. In the example illustrated in
When each of the q overlay network nodes 130receives a forwarding path query, it performs step 220 and measures the assigned cost function F with respect to communications transmitted to destination address B from overlay node, yielding the value F(B,i). F(B,i) is measured for a default network path from the ith overlay node to destination B. In this simple embodiment, the querying node's module 120 receives a single reply from each of the q overlay network routers queried. The querying node at any time during the reception of the replies may decide to pick a particular forwarding path and ignore any additional query replies. In order to pick an optimized forwarding path, the querying node's module 120 preferably combines the F(B) value in each reply with the cost function F(i,A) which measures the cost of communication to overlay node 130i from the querying node, once again along a default network path. As those of skill in the art will appreciate, the combining of cost functions may entail adding values (as where the cost metric is delay) or calculating the minimum value (as for bandwidth), or in general may involve a complex parameterized combination of the cost functions. In any case, at steps 230-235 module 120 preferably uses the computed total costs for the alternative overlay paths and for the default path to select an optimized path for communication between source node 100 (A) and destination node 160 (B).
3. Finding Improved Paths Through Multiple Overlay Nodes
In general, for an overlay network with multiple overlay nodes 130a-n, it may be useful to consider alternative overlay paths that pass through more than one overlay node (“multi-hop paths”). This section describes an alternative, preferred embodiment that includes discovery of multi-hop paths.
In principle, an overlay network is capable of logical complete connectivity (in other words, any overlay node can communicate with any other node) through the underlying default Internet routing mechanisms. However, for purposes of multi-hop path discovery, it is generally not computationally worthwhile attempting to exhaustively evaluate the set of all possible multi-hop paths. Therefore, in our preferred embodiment, a topological representation of overlay network connectivity is pruned so as to reduce the number of possible forwarding paths to other overlay nodes from any given overlay node to a fixed, relatively small number (“N”). For example,
In this alternative preferred embodiment, each overlay node module 150 measures the cost of communication (via the underlying network's default communication paths) to all other overlay router nodes. For each of a given node 130i's neighbors, the cost functions L(j,i) measuring the cost of default communication from overlay node 130i to neighbor overlay node 130j are used for pruning and subsequently for route discovery. In the pruning process, each overlay network node 130i starts with the full connectivity mesh to all other overlay network nodes, and a set of costs L(j,i) associated with the links to each other overlay node 130j. The pruning operation preferably consists of two phases. In the first phase, direct links that are more expensive than indirect links are deleted. In the second phase, if there are still more than N direct links from any given overlay node, additional direct links with worst cost functions are pruned. At the end of these two phases each overlay network router has <=N direct link connections, thus satisfying the preferred constraint, and the resulting overall topology of the overlay network may or may not be fully connected. The resulting topology is then used in the subsequent process of alternate path discovery.
The forming of the initial topology and the determination of the final logical topology and associate link costs are preferably performed using the default Internet communication mechanisms. If the overlay nodes are connected to each other by means of specialized or enhanced communication mechanisms—which is by no means required—overlay link costs L(j,i) would be computed on that basis.
Step 225 in conjunction with step 220 of
In this multi-hop preferred embodiment, in order to compute and compare the relevant total costs for each of the possible overlay forwarding paths at steps 230-235, module 110 of the querying node combines all of the appropriate cost functions. Thus, in the example of
C. Construction and Use of Overlay Forwarding Paths
In the event that an overlay forwarding path is selected at steps 230-235 as the optimized path for sending the user's requested communication, a preferred embodiment of our invention combines existing Internet protocols in an manner that dynamically constructs forwarding paths through the overlay network.
Referring again to
For illustration, we will begin with a simple example, in which the message is one-way (no reply), and the alternative overlay path is a one-hop path (i.e., it goes through a single overlay node). In this example, the client at node 100 (or a client connected through gateway node 100 to the network) wishes to send a message on a network such as the Internet to destination node 160. In accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention, steps 210-240 are first performed, to discover an optimized overlay path for communicating with 160. Suppose this process determines that, at the present moment, an optimized path for sending a message to 160 (better than the default network path, at any rate) is to send packets from 100 to overlay node 130a, and then to forward them from 130a to 160. In other words, the desired path strategy is to send packets from 100 to 130a using the default network path for 100→130a, and then forward those packets from 130a to 160 using the default network path for 130a→160. At step 250, this transmission is actually carried out, as detailed in
We next present a further example, involving a multi-hop overlay path; once again, the example treats a one-way communication. In this example, we assume that the process of steps 210-240 discovers an optimized path for transmitting messages from 100 to 160, passing through overlay nodes 130a and 130b. In other words, this time the desired path strategy is to send packets from 100 to 130a using the default network path for 100→130a, then forward those packets from 130a to 130b using the default network path for 130a→130b, and finally to forward those packets from 130b to 160 using the default network path for 130b 160. Once again, at step 500, overlay software 120 at node 100 addresses the packets to 130a, and encapsulates the address of 160. The message is then sent to overlay node 130a, at step 510. When 130a receives the packets, overlay software 150a finds the encoded “160” address, and at step 520, software 150a of node 130a checks the overlay path information stored earlier at step 240 and identifies overlay node 130b as the next node on the overlay forwarding path. Following the flow of
As a third example, we will now consider the case of a message that requests a return reply (such as an http request to get a file), once again in the context of the multi-hop forwarding path through overlay nodes 130a and 130b as in the previous example. In this scenario, our preferred embodiment operates in the same manner as in the previous example, until module 150b reaches step 535 and determines that the message does indeed request a return reply from the destination node 160. Following the flow in
In this manner, control and data packets exchanged between source and destination endpoints on a network are advantageously re-routed through an overlay network without any modification of the source or destination nodes (except for the addition of module 110 at the source), and without any modification of the established communication protocols for the underlying network. This transparency is a valuable benefit created by preferred embodiments of the present invention, because it increases the applicability of this approach as a practical solution for legacy network-based applications.
D. Cost Metrics, Applications
There are many potential applications of this invention to practical problems of interest to companies, individuals, and other entities. Cost/performance metrics may be freely chosen as beneficial for desired applications. For example, preferable metrics include delay, throughput, jitter, and loss. Some sample applications will now be discussed.
1. Reliability
Online trading is an Internet application that is assuming a very important role in today's global economy. Real-time trading requires uninterrupted access to the points of sale. A delay of a few minutes in carrying out an order can cost an online trader large amounts of money. In fact it can be argued that the trader with the best and most reliable Internet service will have a definite advantage over others. In this application of our invention we illustrate how dynamic on-demand overlay routing can allow routing around a failure that would otherwise cause the inability to sell or buy shares.
At present, all Internet routing protocols have a built-in mechanism to rebuild routing paths, and therefore ultimately allow detection and reaction to a network fault in appropriate ways. In the default case, a stock trader's ability to carry out orders in the presence of a link failure is dependent on the rerouting capability of its ISP and may greatly vary. Current routing practices typically require anywhere from a minimum of 45 seconds for a localized ad-hoc solution, to a maximum of several hours depending on the particular ISP. The fast, light-weight, on-demand routing capability made possible in accordance with the present invention can potentially reduce the time required for suitable re-routing to less than a few seconds. In a preferred embodiment, when a stock trader pushes a button to enter a trade, the TCP connection delay is passively measured by a rerouting daemon running on the trader's internal network. This measurement is performed with a timeout of 1 second. In case of a link failure the TCP connection measurement would timeout. Immediately after this measurement, our rerouting daemon sends a query to the overlay network specifying its measured connection time (1 second in case of a link failure). If the overlay network is able to find an alternate route to the destination it will return the new route to the rerouting daemon within a few milliseconds. The new route is immediately installed on the stock trader's local network and any subsequent TCP connection requests are forwarded through the newly discovered route rather than the faulty route. This rerouting mechanism has two major advantages for the stock trader: (1) The reaction to finding a new route is reduced from minutes to less than two seconds and (2) the rerouting mechanism is entirely decoupled from his/her ISP configuration and can be independently managed.
2. Bandwidth
The diffusion of multimedia data through the Internet is likely to become much more prominent with the increase of bandwidth to the home. Current bandwidth availability is enough for audio transmission and some low quality video but in the near future, the increase in bandwidth will allow the transmission of full motion video. In addition to the increase of raw bandwidth Quality of Service Routing and other resource allocation protocols (such as RSVP) will allow user applications to acquire a predictable amount of bandwidth in order to guarantee an adequate level of service. The transition of the Internet to using these new protocols is likely to be problematic and diffused over several years.
In this domain, the present invention enables the addition of an additional layer of control on top of the QOS service provided by Internet standards. In this application the overlay network's function is to oversee the resulting performance of the system and its protocols. In this case one can think of an overlay system in accordance with the present invention as a fall-back when the default Internet mechanism does not deliver the necessary quality of service. An overlay routing system in accordance with the present invention can be used to find paths that offer better bandwidth than those provided by the default Internet protocols (either current or future). In this application the end system which is receiving the video can passively monitor the quality of the video being received. A rerouting daemon running on the local network of the user detects that the video quality is poor by measuring the average bit rate consumed by the reception of the video. When the bit rate falls below a certain threshold the routing daemon can query the overlay network for a better path. The overlay network measures the available bit rates that are available through alternate paths and returns the appropriate overlay-forwarding path to the user (if any). The overlay nodes measure the available bit rate of the alternate paths by requesting a video from the video source and measuring the quality of the link. Such requests will be performed using the default Internet protocols and thus do not need to be described here. The overlay nodes requesting the video should be configured to possess the same credentials of the user on whose behalf the rerouting is attempted. In addition to measuring the effective throughput from the video source, the overlay nodes also measure, through the transmission of test packets, the quality of the overlay links to the user. If an overlay forwarding path with better total bandwidth is found, the routing daemon is notified and the video reception is rerouted through the overlay network. In this transition loss of synchronization may occur and the user may experience discontinuity in the viewing; this drawback needs to be considered in allowing the rerouting only when the discomfort of the signal degradation due to loss of bandwidth can be considered greater than the resynchronization discontinuity.
3. Delay
Hyperspace is bringing people together in ways that were unimaginable a few years ago. The many-to-many communication paradigm made possible by the Internet is creating a revolution in how people communicate, do business and spend their leisure time. In many of these revolutionary applications one gets the illusion of interacting with a community of other users in near real-time. As an example of how our system can be used in this context, we describe a video game application in which a user participates in a video game over the Internet. In this application lowering the transmission delay can enhance the quality of the game. In addition, if the game is played by several individuals located at different locations on the Internet, lower delay may also provide an advantage in playing the game because of a faster response time.
A preferred embodiment of the present invention can find overlay forwarding paths that reduce the total transmission delay. In this type of application the measurement of the quality of the end-to-end default-forwarding path is actively carried out. This type of application would most likely run over UDP, which lacks control-signaling messages that can be used to passively measure round trip delays. Furthermore, unlike the video streaming application, no predefined quality of service can be used in assessing the quality of the link.
In this application the routing daemon (located on the user private network) sends test packets to the destination which provoke a reply (for example an ICMP echo packet). The round-trip delay is therefore iteratively measured by the routing daemon in order to assess the delay to the destination. If the delay is measured to be too high (above a predefined threshold) the routing daemon queries the overlay network to see if a lower delay route can be found. If a lower delay route is found the routing daemon seamlessly switches the route to the overlay thus improving the quality of the transmission. In this case the user may or may not experience any discontinuity in the game depending on how the game is implemented.
E. Conclusion, Scope of the Invention
Thus the reader will see that preferred embodiments of on-demand overlay routing in accordance with the present invention can provide a practical, lightweight, economical mechanism for improving network performance. The mechanism is highly transparent, as well, and does not necessitate changes in underlying network protocols such as IP, or in client application programs that rely upon network communications.
While the above description includes many specifics and examples, these should not be construed as limitations on the scope of the invention, but rather as exemplification of a preferred embodiment thereof. Many other variations are possible. For example, while the previous examples were presented in terms of an IP network like the Internet, the present invention is applicable to networking protocols other than IP, and to other network layers and communication protocols including but by no means limited to http, ftp, TCP, and SSL. The invention is applicable as well to packet-switched networks other than the Internet, and to other static-topology networks (whether packet switched or connection-oriented). Also, the same mechanisms can be used where other network properties are optimized (e.g., security), and can be realized with software-only implementations such as by using active networks infrastructure, or other available computational resources).
Accordingly, the scope of the invention should be determined not by the embodiment illustrated, but by the appended claims and their legal equivalents.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4112488 | Smith, III | Sep 1978 | A |
4345116 | Ash et al. | Aug 1982 | A |
4495570 | Kitajima et al. | Jan 1985 | A |
4591983 | Bennett et al. | May 1986 | A |
4594704 | Ollivier | Jun 1986 | A |
4669113 | Ash et al. | May 1987 | A |
4679189 | Olson et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4726017 | Krum et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4788721 | Krishnan et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4803641 | Hardy et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4839798 | Eguchi et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4839892 | Sasaki | Jun 1989 | A |
4847784 | Clancey | Jul 1989 | A |
4905233 | Cain et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4920432 | Eggers | Apr 1990 | A |
4922417 | Churm et al. | May 1990 | A |
4943932 | Lark et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
4949187 | Cohen | Aug 1990 | A |
4949248 | Caro | Aug 1990 | A |
4985830 | Atac et al. | Jan 1991 | A |
4987536 | Humblet | Jan 1991 | A |
5029232 | Nall | Jul 1991 | A |
5048011 | Melen | Sep 1991 | A |
5058105 | Mansour et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5088032 | Bosack | Feb 1992 | A |
5115495 | Tsuchiya et al. | May 1992 | A |
5128926 | Perlman et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5130792 | Tindell et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5132992 | Yurt et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5136716 | Harvey | Aug 1992 | A |
5172413 | Bradley | Dec 1992 | A |
5191573 | Hair | Mar 1993 | A |
5218676 | Ben-Ayed et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5233604 | Ahmadi et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5253248 | Dravida et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5253275 | Yurt et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5253341 | Rozmanith | Oct 1993 | A |
5287499 | Nemes | Feb 1994 | A |
5287537 | Newmark et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5291554 | Morales | Mar 1994 | A |
5321815 | Bartolanzo, Jr. et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5341477 | Pitkin et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5371532 | Gelman | Dec 1994 | A |
5377262 | Bales et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5410343 | Coddington | Apr 1995 | A |
5414455 | Hooper | May 1995 | A |
5430729 | Rahnema | Jul 1995 | A |
5442389 | Blahut | Aug 1995 | A |
5442390 | Hooper | Aug 1995 | A |
5442749 | Northcutt | Aug 1995 | A |
5452294 | Natarajan | Sep 1995 | A |
5457680 | Kamm et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5471467 | Johann | Nov 1995 | A |
5471622 | Eadline | Nov 1995 | A |
5475615 | Lin | Dec 1995 | A |
5491690 | Alfonsi et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5508732 | Bottomley | Apr 1996 | A |
5515511 | Nguyen | May 1996 | A |
5519435 | Anderson | May 1996 | A |
5519836 | Gawlick et al. | May 1996 | A |
5526414 | Bédard et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5528281 | Grady | Jun 1996 | A |
5532939 | Psinakis et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5539621 | Kikinis | Jul 1996 | A |
5542087 | Neimat et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5544313 | Shachnai | Aug 1996 | A |
5544327 | Dan | Aug 1996 | A |
5550577 | Verbiest | Aug 1996 | A |
5550863 | Yurt | Aug 1996 | A |
5550982 | Long | Aug 1996 | A |
5557317 | Nishio | Sep 1996 | A |
5559877 | Ash et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5572643 | Judson | Nov 1996 | A |
5590288 | Castor | Dec 1996 | A |
5592611 | Midgely | Jan 1997 | A |
5594910 | Filepp et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5596722 | Rahnema | Jan 1997 | A |
5603026 | Demers et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5608721 | Natarajan et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5619648 | Canale | Apr 1997 | A |
5623656 | Lyons | Apr 1997 | A |
5625781 | Cline | Apr 1997 | A |
5627829 | Gleeson et al. | May 1997 | A |
5630067 | Kindell | May 1997 | A |
5633999 | Clowes | May 1997 | A |
5634006 | Baugher et al. | May 1997 | A |
5638443 | Stefik et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5644714 | Kikinis | Jul 1997 | A |
5646676 | Dewkett et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5649108 | Spiegel et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5649186 | Ferguson | Jul 1997 | A |
5659729 | Nielsen | Aug 1997 | A |
5666362 | Chen | Sep 1997 | A |
5671279 | Elgamai | Sep 1997 | A |
5675734 | Hair | Oct 1997 | A |
5682512 | Tetrick | Oct 1997 | A |
5699347 | Callon | Dec 1997 | A |
5699513 | Feigen et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5712979 | Graber et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5715453 | Stewart | Feb 1998 | A |
5721914 | DeVries | Feb 1998 | A |
5721916 | Pardikar | Feb 1998 | A |
5734831 | Sanders | Mar 1998 | A |
5740423 | Logan et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5742762 | Scholl | Apr 1998 | A |
5751961 | Smyk | May 1998 | A |
5754790 | France et al. | May 1998 | A |
5761507 | Govett | Jun 1998 | A |
5761663 | Lagarde et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5764906 | Edelstein et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5774526 | Propp et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5774660 | Brendel et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5774668 | Choquier et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5777989 | McGarvey | Jul 1998 | A |
5784058 | LaStrange et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787271 | Box et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787470 | DeSimone et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5790541 | Patrick et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796952 | Davis | Aug 1998 | A |
5799141 | Galipeau et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5802106 | Packer | Sep 1998 | A |
5802291 | Balick et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5802503 | Sansone | Sep 1998 | A |
5812769 | Graber et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5815664 | Asano | Sep 1998 | A |
5819092 | Ferguson | Oct 1998 | A |
5826031 | Nielsen | Oct 1998 | A |
5828847 | Gehr | Oct 1998 | A |
5832506 | Kuzma | Nov 1998 | A |
5832514 | Norin et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5835718 | Blewett | Nov 1998 | A |
5838906 | Doyle et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5845303 | Templeman | Dec 1998 | A |
5854899 | Callon et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5856974 | Gervais et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5862339 | Bonnaure | Jan 1999 | A |
5867706 | Martin et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5867799 | Lang et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5870546 | Kirsch | Feb 1999 | A |
5870559 | Leshem et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5878212 | Civanlar et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5884038 | Kapoor | Mar 1999 | A |
5890171 | Blumer et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5893116 | Simmonds et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5894554 | Lowery et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5896533 | Ramos et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5898668 | Shaffer | Apr 1999 | A |
5903723 | Beck et al. | May 1999 | A |
5907704 | Gudmundson et al. | May 1999 | A |
5913028 | Wang et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5913033 | Grout | Jun 1999 | A |
5918010 | Appleman et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5918021 | Aditya | Jun 1999 | A |
5919247 | Van Hoff et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5920701 | Miller et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5922049 | Radia et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5931904 | Banga | Aug 1999 | A |
5933832 | Suzuoka et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5935207 | Logue et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5944780 | Chase | Aug 1999 | A |
5945989 | Freishtat et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5956489 | San Andres et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956716 | Kenner | Sep 1999 | A |
5958008 | Pogrebisky et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5961596 | Takubo et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5966440 | Hair | Oct 1999 | A |
5968121 | Logan et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5978791 | Farber et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5983214 | Lang et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5983227 | Nazem et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987606 | Cirasole et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991809 | Kriegsman | Nov 1999 | A |
5996025 | Day | Nov 1999 | A |
6002720 | Yurt et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6003030 | Kenner et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6006264 | Colby et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6012090 | Chung et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6014686 | Elnozahy et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6014698 | Griffiths | Jan 2000 | A |
6016307 | Kaplan et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6018516 | Packer | Jan 2000 | A |
6021426 | Douglis | Feb 2000 | A |
6026440 | Sharder et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6029175 | Chow et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6029176 | Cannon | Feb 2000 | A |
6035332 | Ingrassia, Jr. et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6038216 | Packer | Mar 2000 | A |
6038310 | Hollywood et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6038610 | Belfiore et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6041324 | Earl et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6044405 | Driscoll, III et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6046980 | Packer | Apr 2000 | A |
6049831 | Gardell et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6052718 | Gifford | Apr 2000 | A |
6052730 | Feliciano et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6065051 | Steele et al. | May 2000 | A |
6065062 | Periasamy et al. | May 2000 | A |
6070191 | Narendran et al. | May 2000 | A |
6078943 | Yu | Jun 2000 | A |
6081829 | Sidana | Jun 2000 | A |
6081835 | Antcliff | Jun 2000 | A |
6084858 | Matthews et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6092112 | Fukushige | Jul 2000 | A |
6092204 | Baker | Jul 2000 | A |
6098078 | Gehani | Aug 2000 | A |
6105028 | Sullivan et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108673 | Brandt et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108703 | Leighton et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6112231 | DeSimone et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6112239 | Kenner et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6112240 | Pogue et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6115357 | Packer et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6115752 | Chauhan | Sep 2000 | A |
6119143 | Dias et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6125388 | Reisman | Sep 2000 | A |
6125394 | Rabinovich | Sep 2000 | A |
6128279 | O'Neil et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6128601 | Van Horne et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6128660 | Grimm et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6130890 | Leinwand et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6134583 | Herriot | Oct 2000 | A |
6137792 | Jonas et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6144375 | Jain et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6144702 | Yurt et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6144996 | Starnes et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6151624 | Teare et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6154738 | Call | Nov 2000 | A |
6154744 | Kenner et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6154753 | McFarland | Nov 2000 | A |
6154777 | Ebrahim | Nov 2000 | A |
6163779 | Mantha et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6167427 | Rabinovich et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6173311 | Hassett et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6173322 | Hu | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6178160 | Bolton et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6181867 | Kenner et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6185598 | Farber et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6185619 | Joffe et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6189030 | Kirsch et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6189039 | Harvey | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6195680 | Goldszmidt | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6205120 | Packer et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6226618 | Downs | May 2001 | B1 |
6226642 | Beranek et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6230196 | Guenthner et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6236642 | Shaffer et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6243752 | Butt | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6243760 | Armbruster et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6249810 | Kiraly | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6256675 | Rabinovich | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6263313 | Milsted | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266699 | Sevcik | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6269394 | Kenner et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272566 | Craft | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6275470 | Ricciulli | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282569 | Wallis et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282574 | Voit | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6286045 | Griffiths et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6298041 | Packer | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6310858 | Kano et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6311214 | Rhoads | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314565 | Kenner et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6330602 | Law et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6332195 | Green et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6338044 | Cook et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6347085 | Kelly | Feb 2002 | B2 |
6360256 | Lim | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363053 | Schuster et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6370571 | Medin, Jr. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6370580 | Kriegsman | Apr 2002 | B2 |
6398245 | Gruse | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6400681 | Bertin et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6405252 | Gupta et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6405257 | Gersht et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6412000 | Riddle et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6415280 | Farber et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6418421 | Hurtado | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6421726 | Kenner et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6430618 | Karger et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6442549 | Schneider | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6449259 | Allain et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6452922 | Ho | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6456630 | Packer et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6460082 | Lumelsky | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6460085 | Toporek et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6463454 | Lumelsky | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6463508 | Wolf | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6470389 | Chung et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6473405 | Ricciulli | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6480893 | Kriegsman | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6484143 | Swildens et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6484204 | Rabinovich | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6490580 | Dey et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6493707 | Dey et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6496477 | Perkins et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6496856 | Kenner et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6502125 | Kenner et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6502135 | Munger et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6502215 | Raad et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6505248 | Casper et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6507577 | Mauger et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6512761 | Schuster et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6529477 | Toporek et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6529499 | Doshi et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6542469 | Kelley et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6553413 | Leighton et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6553420 | Karger et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6557054 | Reisman | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6564251 | Katariya et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
6577595 | Counterman | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6577600 | Bare | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6581090 | Lindbo et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6584083 | Toporek et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6587837 | Spagna | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6591299 | Riddle et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6611812 | Hurtado et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6611862 | Reisman | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6611872 | McCanne | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6614781 | Elliott et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6625643 | Colby et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6654344 | Toporek et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6654807 | Farber et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6658464 | Reisman | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6658479 | Zaumen et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6665706 | Kenner et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6665726 | Leighton et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6690651 | Lamarque, III et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6691148 | Zinky et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6694358 | Swildens et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6697333 | Bawa et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6699418 | Okada et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6708137 | Carley | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6718328 | Norris | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6741563 | Packer | May 2004 | B2 |
6744767 | Chiu et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6751673 | Shaw | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6754219 | Cain et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6754699 | Swildens et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6754706 | Swildens et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6763377 | Belknap et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6763388 | Tsimelzon | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6778494 | Mauger | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6778502 | Ricciulli | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6799221 | Kenner et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6801576 | Haldeman et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6831895 | Ji et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6834306 | Tsimelzon | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6842604 | Cook et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6859791 | Spagna | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6870851 | Leinwand et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6874032 | Gersht et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6888797 | Cao et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6901604 | Kiraly | May 2005 | B1 |
6904017 | Meempat et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6915329 | Kriegsman | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6928442 | Farber et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6934255 | Toporek et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6950623 | Brown et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6954784 | Aiken, Jr. et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6963910 | Belknap | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6963980 | Mattsson | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6963981 | Bailey et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6965890 | Dey et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6970432 | Hankins et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6973485 | Ebata et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6973490 | Robertson et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6981050 | Tobias et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6981180 | Bailey et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6996616 | Leighton et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7003572 | Lownsbrough et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7007089 | Freedman | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7010578 | Lewin et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7012900 | Riddle | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7039633 | Dey et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7047300 | Oehrke et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7054935 | Farber et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7058706 | Iyer et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7069177 | Carley | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7096266 | Lewin et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7103564 | Ehnebuske | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7103645 | Leighton et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7110984 | Spagna | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7117259 | Rohwer | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7127513 | Karger et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7159035 | Garcia-Luna-Aceves et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7187658 | Koyanagi et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7188085 | Pelletier | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7206748 | Gruse | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7240100 | Wein et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7260060 | Abaye et al. | Aug 2007 | B1 |
7457233 | Gan et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
20010029525 | Lahr | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010056500 | Farber et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020018449 | Ricciulli | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020023164 | Lahr | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020023165 | Lahr | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020032029 | Angin | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020040404 | Lahr | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020042817 | Lahr | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020046273 | Lahr et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020046405 | Lahr | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020049857 | Farber et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020059592 | Kiraly | May 2002 | A1 |
20020062388 | Ogier et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020066038 | Mattsson | May 2002 | A1 |
20020073199 | Levine et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020082999 | Lee et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020083124 | Knox et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020099850 | Farber et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020124080 | Leighton et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020129134 | Leighton et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020131645 | Hamilton | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143798 | Lisiecki et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020143888 | Lisiecki et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020147774 | Lisiecki et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020147842 | Breitbart et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020163882 | Bornstein et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020163889 | Yemini et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020199016 | Freedman | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030009444 | Eidler et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030018966 | Cook et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030028623 | Hennessey et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030028626 | Hennessey et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030028777 | Hennessey et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030055972 | Fuller et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030061263 | Riddle | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030061280 | Bulson et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030078888 | Lee et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030078889 | Lee et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030105604 | Ash et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20040022194 | Ricciulli | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040139097 | Farber et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040177148 | Tsimelzon | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050033858 | Swildens et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050038851 | Kriegsman | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050100027 | Leinwand et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050114296 | Farber et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050262104 | Robertson et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060143293 | Freedman | Jun 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
763380 | Nov 2003 | AU |
2202572 | Oct 1998 | CA |
2335661 | Sep 2001 | CA |
2335662 | Sep 2001 | CA |
2467998 | Apr 2006 | CA |
ZL99810853.7 | Aug 2004 | CN |
0637153 | Jul 1993 | EP |
0637153 | Jul 1993 | EP |
0660569 | Dec 1993 | EP |
0343611 | Aug 1994 | EP |
0865180 | Sep 1998 | EP |
0660569 | Dec 1998 | EP |
1104555 | Jun 2001 | EP |
2353877 | Mar 2004 | GB |
140935 | Mar 2006 | IL |
5-130144 | May 1993 | JP |
10-70571 | Mar 1998 | JP |
2002522995 | Jul 2002 | JP |
3566626 | Jun 2004 | JP |
2005124165 | May 2005 | JP |
3762649 | Jan 2006 | JP |
176482 | Aug 2003 | NI |
WO 9857465 | Dec 1998 | WO |
WO 0033511 | Aug 2000 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040022194 A1 | Feb 2004 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09916628 | Jul 2001 | US |
Child | 10630559 | US | |
Parent | 09888966 | Jun 2001 | US |
Child | 09916628 | US | |
Parent | 09336487 | Jun 1999 | US |
Child | 09888966 | US |