The invention relates to network protocols adapted to coexist with existing CSMA network protocols (e.g., with the HomePlug 1.0 protocol).
Higher data rates and better quality of service (QoS) are being sought for data communication over AC power lines. New protocols that offer such improvements will preferably be capable of coexisting with existing power line communication protocols such as HomePlug 1.0. Higher data rates and better quality of service (QoS) are typically important to both in-home and Internet-access communications (those between a home and an Internet service provider). One example of the latter is Broadband over Powerline (BPL), which is being proposed for Internet access using low voltage or medium voltage power lines.
In a first aspect, the invention features a method of operating in a network in which a plurality of stations communicate over a shared medium and contend for access during a priority resolution period, comprising providing a first CSMA network protocol in which at least some transmissions have a format that includes a start of frame delimiter (SOF), a payload, and an end of frame delimiter (EOF), wherein the SOF and EOF each contain sufficient information to permit a station receiving only one of the SOF and EOF to determine the start of a priority resolution period, providing a second network protocol capable of coexisting with the first protocol, so that stations may communicate using either the first or second protocol, wherein the second protocol includes transmissions that have a format that includes an SOF but not an EOF.
Preferred implementations of this aspect of the invention may incorporate one or more of the following features. The second network protocol may comprise a CSMA protocol. The second network protocol may comprise a TDMA protocol. The transmissions of the second protocol may have the effect of reserving a reserved time period during which stations following the first protocol will not transmit. The medium may comprise a power line medium. The medium may comprise a power line within a building. The medium may comprise a power line accessing a building. Stations following the second protocol use a preamble that is recognized as a preamble by the first protocol. The reserved time period may extend into the time normally occupied by the EOF according to the first CSMA network protocol. The station transmitting the SOFs without an EOF may use the reserved time period to transmit a payload. Stations other than the station transmitting the SOF without an EOF may transmit during the reserved time period. One or more stations operating in the second protocol may transmit a series of SOFs, each without an EOF, to reserve a series of reserved time periods during which stations following the first protocol will not transmit. The reserved time period may extend into a time gap between the EOF and the start of the priority resolution period. The transmissions using the first CSMA network protocol and the second network protocol may have a format that includes an SOF specifying that no response delimiter is expected. The transmissions using the first CSMA network protocol may have a format that includes an SOF capable of specifying that a response delimiter is expected, and the reserved time period may extend beyond the normal time period of the EOF into a time gap between the EOF and the response delimiter. Even though the SOF specifies that no response delimiter is expected, at least some transmissions using the second protocol may provide a response delimiter during approximately the time period normally occupied by the EOF. The transmissions using the first CSMA network protocol may have a format that includes an SOF with a contention control field for specifying that stations with a lower channel access priority than the transmitting channel should not contend during the next priority resolution period, and wherein the reserved time period may extend through the completion of the priority resolution period by using an SOF with a contention control field set to specify that stations with a lower channel access priority should not contend. The reserved time period may extend up to a maximum of about 1.695 milliseconds. The transmissions using the first CSMA network protocol may assume that the channel access priority of a transmission is the highest possible if an EOF specifying the channel access priority is not received. The transmissions using the first CSMA network protocol may have a format that includes an SOF capable of specifying that a response delimiter is expected, and by using an SOF that specifies a response delimiter the reserved time period may be further extended by the time associated with the expected response.
In a second aspect, the invention features a method of operating in a CSMA network in which a plurality of stations communicate over a shared medium and contend for access during a priority resolution period, comprising providing a first CSMA network protocol in which at least some transmissions comprise a response delimiter that includes one or more contention control parameters that can be set to specify that other stations should not contend during the next priority resolution period, providing a second network protocol capable of coexisting with the first protocol, so that stations may communicate using either the first or second protocol, wherein the second protocol includes transmissions that comprise a response delimiter in which the contention control parameters are set to specify that other stations should not contend during the next priority resolution period, wherein the transmissions of the second protocol have the effect of reserving a reserved time period during which stations following the first protocol will not transmit at least through the completion of the priority resolution period.
Preferred implementations of this aspect of the invention may incorporate one or more of the following features. The contention control parameters may comprise a contention control field and a channel access priority field, wherein the transmissions using the second protocol may have the channel access priority field set to the maximum possible value and the contention control field set to specify that only stations with a higher channel access priority field may contend during the next priority resolution period.
In a third aspect, the invention features a method of operating in a CSMA network in which a plurality of stations communicate over a shared medium and contend for access during a priority resolution period, comprising providing a first CSMA network protocol in which at least some transmissions comprise a response delimiter, followed by a period in which no information is transmitted, followed by the priority resolution period, providing a second network protocol capable of coexisting with the first protocol, so that stations may communicate using either the first or second protocol, wherein the second protocol includes transmissions that comprise a response delimiter followed by a short payload occupying the period during which no information is transmitted in the first protocol.
In a fourth aspect, the invention features a method of operating in a CSMA network in which a plurality of stations communicate over a shared medium and contend for access during a priority resolution period, comprising providing a first CSMA network protocol in which at least some transmissions have a format that includes a start of frame delimiter (SOF), a payload, and an end of frame delimiter (EOF), wherein the SOF and EOF each contain sufficient information to permit a station receiving only one of the SOF and EOF to determine the start of a priority resolution period, and wherein the SOF can specify that a response delimiter is expected, providing a second network protocol capable of coexisting with the first protocol, so that stations may communicate using either the first or second protocol, wherein the second protocol includes transmissions that have a format that includes an SOF but not an EOF, with the SOF specifying that a response delimiter is expected, wherein the transmissions of the second protocol have the effect of reserving a reserved time period during which stations following the first protocol will not transmit at least through the time normally occupied by the EOF and the response delimiter in the first protocol.
In a fifth aspect, the invention features a method of operating in a CSMA network in which a plurality of stations communicate over a shared medium and contend for access during a priority resolution period, comprising providing a first CSMA network protocol in which at least some transmissions comprise a start of frame delimiter (SOF), a payload, and an end of frame delimiter (EOF), wherein the EOF may specify whether a response delimiter is expected, providing a second network protocol capable of coexisting with the first protocol, so that stations may communicate using either the first or second protocol, wherein the second protocol includes transmissions that comprise an EOF without a preceding SOF and payload, wherein the transmissions of the second protocol have the effect of reserving a reserved time period following the EOF, during which stations following the first protocol will not transmit.
Preferred implementations of this aspect of the invention may incorporate one or more of the following features. The EOF may specify that a response delimiter is not expected, and the reserved time period following the EOF may extend to the start of the priority resolution period. The EOF may specify that a response delimiter is expected, and the reserved time period following the EOF may extend to the start of the response delimiter. The reserved time period following the EOF may extend to the start of the priority resolution period, and may include the period normally occupied by the response delimiter. The EOF of the first protocol may include one or more contention control parameters that can be set to specify that other stations should not contend during the next priority resolution period, and wherein the EOF used in the second protocol may be set to specify that other stations should not contend during the next priority resolution period, wherein the reserved time period following the EOF may be extended through the completion of the priority resolution period. The EOF may specify that a response delimiter is expected and the reserved time period following the EOF may include the time normally occupied by the response.
In a sixth aspect, the invention features a method of operating in a network in which a plurality of stations communicate over a shared medium and contend for access during a priority resolution period, comprising providing a first CSMA network protocol in which at least some transmissions have a format that includes at least one delimiter containing one or more fields in which one or more specific values are to appear, and wherein the first protocol calls for a station to wait for a period of time without transmitting if it receives a transmission in which information appearing in the one or more fields is not one of the specific values, providing a second network protocol capable of coexisting with the first protocol, so that stations may communicate using either the first or second protocol, wherein the second protocol includes certain transmissions that have a format that includes information other than the specific values in locations corresponding to the one or more fields of the first protocol, wherein the effect of the certain transmissions is to prevent stations following the first protocol from transmitting for at least the period of time.
Preferred implementations of this aspect of the invention may incorporate one or more of the following features. The at least one delimiter may comprise at least one frame control field. The at least one delimiter may comprise a start of frame (SOF) delimiter that contains at least one frame control field. The information other than the specific values may be information whose only function is to cause stations following the first protocol to wait for the time period. The information other than the specific values may be information that serves both to convey information to another station following the second protocol and to cause stations following the first protocol to wait for the time period. The effect of the certain transmissions may be to cause stations following the first protocol to behave as if they have received an invalid delimiter.
The invention provides a practical method for a second protocol to coexist with an existing CSMA network protocol (e.g. HomePlus 1.0).
Other features and advantages of the invention will be found in the detailed description, drawings, and claims.
An existing mechanism for multiple stations to exchange information over AC power lines is the HomePlug 1.0 protocol, which uses the well known carrier sense multiple access with collision avoidance (CSMA/CA) technique for medium sharing. Using this mechanism, a station senses the medium to determine if the medium is busy. If the medium is determined to be idle, the transmission may proceed. If the medium is busy, the station should defer until the end of the current transmission. After the end of the current transmission, stations go through a priority resolution process in the priority resolution slots. The result of the priority resolution process is that stations with the highest priority in the network will contend in the contention resolution slots while other stations defer from accessing the medium. Proper operation of the HomePlug 1.0 protocol requires that all station properly determine the start of the priority resolution period. This is achieved by using broadcast information contained in the MAC protocol data units.
MAC Protocol Data Units (MPDUs) are the basic entities that are exchanged between HomePlug 1.0 stations. MPDUs carry the higher layer data (for example, an Ethernet packet) as part of their payload. MPDUs also carry priority, Automatic Retransmission Request (ARQ), and medium timing information. The HomePlug 1.0 protocol defines two MPDU formats—a long MPDU and a short MPDU.
A long MPDU format comprises a start delimiter followed by a payload and an end delimiter (
A short MPDU consists of a response delimiter (
All HomePlug 1.0 delimiters are further composed of a Preamble and a Frame Control field (
The information contained in various delimiters along with the knowledge of various interframe spacing is used by HomePlug 1.0 stations to determine the start of the priority resolution slots.
If an invalid delimiter is detected when a HomePlug 1.0 station is searching for a delimiter to determine activity on the medium, the HomePlug 1.0 protocol calls for the station to refrain from transmitting for a duration of an Extended Interframe Spacing (EIFS). The EIFS is defined as the time it takes to transmit the longest MPDU with response expected, along with the corresponding Interframe Spacing and Priority Resolution Slots. An EIFS has a duration of 1695.02 microseconds. After an EIFS duration following the reception of an invalid delimiter, the station resumes searching for a delimiter. The process used by HomePlug 1.0 stations to determine whether they have detected an invalid delimiter includes using an error check sequence included in the delimiters to determine if there are any uncorrectable errors in the delimiters.
HomePlug 1.0 stations process packets received from higher layers and transfer them to the desired destination(s) using Long MPDUs. If a packet cannot fit in a single Long MPDU, the packet is segmented, and the segments are transmitted using Long MPDUs. One important aspect of the HomePlug 1.0 protocol is Segment Bursting, which allows a station to transmit MPDUs carrying segments of a packet in a single burst using a contention free access mechanism of HomePlug 1.0. Segmentation of higher layer packets is necessary when the packets do not fit in a single long MPDU. The contention free access mechanism can also be used to transmit multiple packets in a single burst. The contention free access mechanism uses the CC and CAP priority information broadcast in the delimiters. Using this mechanism, a station that has multiple segments pending sets the CC to 0b1 and the CAP to the packet priority in the first MPDU. For Long MPDUs that require a response, the receiver repeats the received CC and CAP in the Response delimiter. When stations detect a transmission with CC set to 0b1, they defer from priority resolution if their traffic has a priority that is less than or equal to the CAP. They will further refrain form accessing the medium for a duration of the EIFS following the priority resolution slots. Thus, the station can continue to transmit the remainder of the MPDUs with CC set to 0b1. The last MPDU in the burst is transmitted with CC set to 0b0, thus allowing other stations to access the medium.
Elimination of End of File (EOF) Delimiter
HomePlug 1.0 stations use a start of frame (SOF) delimiter and an end of frame (EOF) delimiter in the Long MPDU. The EOF delimiter provides information on channel access priority for stations that have already detected the corresponding start delimiter. For stations that have not detected the corresponding SOF, the EOF also provides information on the start time of the priority resolution slots. The performance of HomePlug 1.0 stations is not significantly affected by the absence of an EOF. This fact can be used by other protocols to reserve longer periods of time on the medium by not sending an EOF. The time that would have been used to send an EOF is instead added to the reserved time period, which can thereby be lengthened, e.g., by the sum of the end of frame gap (EFG) and the EOF duration. In some implementations (e.g.,
Transmitting Response during End of File (EOF) Delimiter
The HomePlug 1.0 protocol supports eight payload lengths with response expected (as specified by a three bit FL field). Greater granularity in the medium reservation can be obtained in other protocols coexisting with HomePlug 1.0, for transmissions that require a response, by transmitting a start delimiter with no response expected and receiving the response delimiter at the time when an end of frame delimiter is expected in HomePlug 1.0 (
Contention Free Start of Frame (SOF) Delimiter
The contention control delimiters of the HomePlug 1.0 protocol can be used by other protocols to reserve time periods on the medium. In the HomePlug 1.0 protocol, the start of frame (SOF) delimiter does not contain the channel access priority (CAP), and stations that receive an SOF with the contention control (CC) bit set to 1 (indicating contention free transmission) assume that the CAP is the maximum (CAP=3), and do not contend in the upcoming priority resolution slots, and defer from accessing the medium for an Extended Inter Frame Space (EIFS=1695.02 microseconds) following the priority resolution slots. Thus, by transmitting an SOF delimiter with CC=1, other protocols can reserve for a maximum of up to EIFS duration following the priority resolution slots.
Long Responses
The HomePlug 1.0 protocol contemplates transmission of Short MPDUs consisting of a Response delimiter. Other protocols coexisting with HomePlug 1.0 may reserve time periods on the medium by transmitting a Response delimiter with the contention control bit set to 1 and the channel access priority set to 3 (
Long End of File (EOF) Delimiter
When a HomePlug 1.0 station is searching for a delimiter in a contention window (in an idle or EIFS state), the station can properly receive and interpret all delimiters (SOF, Response, or EOF). The contention window extends for an EIFS duration after the end of the priority resolution slots. A station goes into idle state if it is searching for a delimiter and does not find one for an EIFS time. For example, if a station does not find a delimiter for EIFS time in the contention window, it goes into an idle state. The fact that an EOF can be properly received under these states can be taken advantage of in other protocols. An EOF can be transmitted to reserve the medium up to the start of priority resolution slots, and an EOF with contention control bits set appropriately can be transmitted to reserve the medium up to an EIFS duration of time following the end of the priority resolution slots.
The response delimiter can also be used in place of the EOF delimiter. For example, a response delimiter can be transmitted during the contention window to reserve the medium up to the start of the priority resolution slots. A response delimiter with the contention control bit set to 1 and the channel access priority equal to 3 can be transmitted during the contention window to reserve the medium up to an EIFS duration following the end of response delimiter.
Invalid Delimiters
The HomePlug 1.0 has various delimiters that have one or more fields that the protocol expects to have certain values and combinations of values. If these values or combinations of values are not what the protocol expects, it regards the delimiter as invalid. When a HomePlug 1.0 station detects an invalid delimiter, the station waits for an EIFS duration before accessing the medium. This behavior can be exploited to reserve the medium for an EIFS duration by intentionally transmitting values of one or more fields that are invalid in the HomePlug 1.0 protocol. Some example of invalid delimiters include: (1) Delimiter type set to 0b110 or 0b111. (2) Start of Frame (SOF) delimiter with Frame Length (FL) field set to a value in the range 0b000010000-0b11111111. (3) Start of Frame delimiter with Tone Map Index in the range 0b10000-0b11111. (4) Start of Frame with Tone Map Index set to 0b00000, and FL set to one of the following values {0b00000000, 0b00000010, 0b00000100, 0b00000110}. (5) End of Frame delimiter with INVALID field set to 0b1. (6) Delimiter with a CRC error.
When a HomePlug 1.0 preamble is transmitted without a frame control, HomePlug 1.0 stations will (with high probability) interpret it as an invalid delimiter as the result of a CRC error. This mechanism can also be exploited to reserve the medium for an EIFS duration. Thus, the medium may be reserved by transmitting an invalid HomePlug 1.0 delimiter, or by transmitting a HomePlug 1.0 preamble.
In one implementation, stations follow a new protocol that uses the start of frame (SOF) delimiter to reserve time periods for their own transmissions. Stations use the reserved time periods to transmit a broadcast frame control field (carrying new protocol specific information) followed by a payload field that can contain unicast/multicast/broadcast information (
In another implementation, the reserved time periods may contain a broadcast frame control followed by multiple payloads. In this case each payload can potentially be transmitted to different destinations (
For transmissions that require a response, stations may use the start delimiter with response expected. The EOF is eliminated, and the transmission duration is extended through the period normally occupied by the response. Eight different transmission granularities can be obtained using this approach. Further granularity in the transmissions can be obtained by using the start delimiter with no response. In this case, the information about the presence of a response can be transmitted in an out of band manner. For example it can be conveyed through the frame control information transmitted during the reserved interval (
The response for these transmissions can extend into the CIFS. In one implementation, the extended response carries broadcast information relevant to the new protocol. In another implementation, the contention control (CC) bit in the corresponding start delimiter is set to 1, and CC is set to 1 and CAP set to 3 in the response. This is capable of reserving the medium for a response. The information transmitted in the response has the same format as in
Transmissions that do not require a response can use an SOF with no response expected delimiter to reserve time periods extending up to the priority resolution slots. They can also use an SOF with response expected delimiter to reserve time periods extending up to the priority resolution slots. In this case, the absence of a response may be indicated in an out of band manner. For example, the frame control information (
Reservations of extra long time periods may be obtained by using the SOF with no response expected, with the contention control (CC) bit set to 1 and the channel access priority (CAP) set to 3. In this case transmission duration can extend up to the priority resolution slots and into the contention window. The SOF with response expected delimiter can also be used in a similar manner. In this case, the absence of response is conveyed in an out of band manner. For example, the frame control information transmitted can contain this information. It is advantageous to have the delimiters transmitted at least once every EIFS duration of time. Some implementations may restrict the choice of start delimiters to FL=7 with no response expected, and shorten the reserved time period to extend only to the priority resolution slots. This ensures that at least two delimiters are transmitted every EIFS duration. Note that EIFS is the time from the start of an SOF delimiter with FL=7 and response expected to the end of the priority resolution slots, i.e., it is the time taken to transmit the largest MPDU in HomePlug 1.0.
Other implementation can reserve short time periods using the end delimiter or the response delimiter during the contention window. For example, protocols that use orderly access of the medium (e.g., as described in U.S. application Ser. No. 10/695,371, entitled “Contention-Free Access Intervals on a CSMA Network,” filed on Oct. 21, 2003) can use an EOF delimiter with no response expected to hand over a session when there is no pending payload to be transmitted. The shorter time reservations achieved using these delimiters can reduce time wasted on the medium.
Another implementation is to use a series of start delimiters to prevent HomePlug 1.0 stations from accessing the medium during a reserved time period. In this case, the contention control bit is set to 1 for all intermediate start delimiters (
Prior to transmission of the series of start delimiters, the stations following the other protocol may need to contend with HomePlug 1.0 stations to ensure medium reservation is proper.
Many other implementations other than those described above are within the invention, which is defined by the following claims. As mentioned earlier, it is not possible to describe here all possible implementations of the invention, but a few possibilities not mentioned above include the following. Although some implementations are particularly well suited for communication over power lines, other implementations are applicable to communication over other media.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3806885 | Moore | Apr 1974 | A |
4569044 | Tao et al. | Feb 1986 | A |
4581734 | Olson et al. | Apr 1986 | A |
4630261 | Irvin | Dec 1986 | A |
4677612 | Olson et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4682324 | Ulug | Jul 1987 | A |
4720850 | Oberlander et al. | Jan 1988 | A |
4726018 | Bux et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4792947 | Takiyasu et al. | Dec 1988 | A |
4819229 | Pritty et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4881241 | Pommier et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
4943959 | Arnold | Jul 1990 | A |
5001472 | Fischer et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5003539 | Takemoto et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5046069 | Calvignac et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5081678 | Kaufman et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5105423 | Tanaka et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5121396 | Irvin et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5140584 | Suzuki | Aug 1992 | A |
5157659 | Schenkel | Oct 1992 | A |
5197061 | Halbert-Lassalle et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5214646 | Yacoby | May 1993 | A |
5228025 | Le Floch et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
5231634 | Giles et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
5274629 | Helard et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5280480 | Pitt et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5307376 | Castelain et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5339313 | Ben-Michael et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5343473 | Cidon et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5384777 | Ahmadi et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5416801 | Chouly et al. | May 1995 | A |
5426646 | Slack | Jun 1995 | A |
RE35001 | Grow | Jul 1995 | E |
5432848 | Butter et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5436905 | Li et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5448565 | Chang et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5452288 | Rahuel et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5452322 | Lauer | Sep 1995 | A |
5473602 | McKenna et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5481535 | Hershey | Jan 1996 | A |
5483529 | Baggen et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5488632 | Mason et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5504747 | Sweazey | Apr 1996 | A |
5515379 | Crisler et al. | May 1996 | A |
5524027 | Huisken | Jun 1996 | A |
5537414 | Takiyasu et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5541922 | Pyhalammi | Jul 1996 | A |
5548649 | Jacobson | Aug 1996 | A |
5555268 | Fattouche et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5563883 | Cheng | Oct 1996 | A |
5563897 | Pyndiah et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5568476 | Sherer et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5610908 | Shelswell et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5612975 | Becker et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5615212 | Ruszczyk et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5619651 | Young | Apr 1997 | A |
5623512 | Sasaki | Apr 1997 | A |
5627829 | Gleeson et al. | May 1997 | A |
5629948 | Hagiwara et al. | May 1997 | A |
5636230 | Marturano et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5644576 | Bauchot et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5651009 | Perreault et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5694389 | Seki et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5706348 | Gray et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5717689 | Ayanoglu | Feb 1998 | A |
5732113 | Schmidl et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5737330 | Fulthorp et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745769 | Choi | Apr 1998 | A |
5757766 | Sugita | May 1998 | A |
5757770 | Lagoutte et al. | May 1998 | A |
5764931 | Schmahl et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5771235 | Tang et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5787071 | Basso et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5790541 | Patrick et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5793307 | Perreault et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5799033 | Baggen | Aug 1998 | A |
5812599 | Van Kerckhove | Sep 1998 | A |
5818821 | Schurig | Oct 1998 | A |
5818826 | Gfeller et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5825807 | Kumar | Oct 1998 | A |
5828677 | Sayeed et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5841778 | Shaffer et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5841873 | Lockhart et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5884040 | Chung | Mar 1999 | A |
5886993 | Ruszczyk et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5892769 | Lee | Apr 1999 | A |
5896561 | Schrader et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5903614 | Suzuki et al. | May 1999 | A |
5914932 | Suzuki et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5914959 | Marchetto et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5940399 | Weizman | Aug 1999 | A |
5940438 | Poon et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5948060 | Gregg et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956338 | Ghaibeh | Sep 1999 | A |
5966412 | Ramaswamy | Oct 1999 | A |
5970062 | Bauchot | Oct 1999 | A |
5987011 | Toh | Nov 1999 | A |
6005894 | Kumar | Dec 1999 | A |
6006017 | Joshi et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6041063 | Povlsen et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6041358 | Huang et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6044154 | Kelly | Mar 2000 | A |
6044482 | Wong | Mar 2000 | A |
6052377 | Ohmi et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6076115 | Sambamurthy et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6092214 | Quoc et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6097703 | Larsen et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6098179 | Harter, Jr. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108713 | Sambamurthy et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6125150 | Wesel et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6130887 | Dutta | Oct 2000 | A |
6130894 | Ojard et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6151296 | Vijayan et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6169744 | Grabelsky et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6182147 | Farinacci | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6188717 | Kaiser et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192397 | Thompson | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6202082 | Tomizawa et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6215792 | Abi-Nassif | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6216244 | Myers et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6222851 | Petry | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6243386 | Chan et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6243449 | Margulis et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6246770 | Stratton et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6252849 | Rom et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6259696 | Yazaki et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6263445 | Blumenau | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6278685 | Yonge, III et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6278716 | Rubenstein et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6289000 | Yonge, III | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6295296 | Tappan | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6334185 | Hansson et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6343083 | Mendelson et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6363052 | Hosein | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6370156 | Spruyt et al. | Apr 2002 | B2 |
6385672 | Wang et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397368 | Yonge, III et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6421725 | Vermilyea et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6430192 | Creedon et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6430661 | Larson et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6434153 | Yazaki et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6442129 | Yonge, III et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6456649 | Isaksson et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6466580 | Leung | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6469992 | Schieder | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6473435 | Zhou et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6480489 | Muller et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6487212 | Erimli et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6501760 | Ohba et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6519263 | Huth | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6526451 | Kasper | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6538985 | Petry et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6553534 | Yonge, III et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6567914 | Just et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6577630 | Markwalter et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6654410 | Tzannes | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6667991 | Tzannes | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6671284 | Yonge, III et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6747976 | Bensaou et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6765885 | Jiang et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6778507 | Jalali | Aug 2004 | B1 |
7305009 | Gaskill | Dec 2007 | B2 |
20010012319 | Foley | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010043576 | Terry | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010048692 | Karner | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020001314 | Yi et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020012320 | Ogier et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020042836 | Mallory | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020048368 | Gardner | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020065047 | Moose | May 2002 | A1 |
20020131591 | Henson et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020191533 | Chini et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030006883 | Kim et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030079169 | Ho et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030174664 | Benveniste | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030217182 | Liu et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030231652 | Sprague et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030231658 | Liang et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040001499 | Patella et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040008728 | Lee | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040184481 | Lee | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050122994 | Mangin et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
3413144 | Oct 1985 | DE |
9857440 | Dec 1998 | WO |
0072495 | Nov 2000 | WO |
0241598 | May 2002 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20060198387 A1 | Sep 2006 | US |