A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document of the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever.
The following applications are cross-referenced and incorporated herein by reference:
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/404,552 filed Apr. 1, 2003, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,519,976, issued on Apr. 14, 2009, to Mike Blevins and entitled, “COLLABORATIVE BUSINESS PLUG-IN FRAMEWORK”;
(B) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/404,684 filed Apr. 1, 2003, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,424,717, issued on Sep. 9, 2008, to Mike Blevins and entitled, “SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR BUSINESS PROCESS PLUG-IN DEVELOPMENT”; and
(C) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/404,865 filed Apr. 1, 2003, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,257,645, issued on Aug. 14, 2007 to David Wiser and entitled, “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR STORING LARGE MESSAGES”.
The present invention relates to the routing of messages and events in a business-to-business messaging system.
Without clustering support, a Business-to-Business (B2B) component can have very limited failover and availability. The scalability of a B2B component can be further limited by the processing power of a single computer. Enterprises using an application integration system can require high availability as well as the ability to scale to large numbers of trading partners and messages.
B2B components presently use an endpoint or URL to identify each business partner, as well as to identify the business protocol being used. These differing URLs result in a servlet being dynamically registered for each URL when the trading partners are loaded. Deactivating a trading partner results in the servlet being destroyed. The registration and deactivation is accomplished by an internal call, which is not available in all B2B components. If there is no internal call available, the servlet cannot be removed. The result is a memory leak. Dynamic deployment of the servlets also has an impact on the way in which B2B is started when the system server starts. Finally, managing updates to these servlets across a cluster would be problematic.
Systems and methods in accordance with embodiments of the present invention can provide for improved request routing, such as to a business protocol specified in a client request. In one embodiment, servlets are used to process requests and generate responses. A default servlet is used to receive requests not handled by the servlets and to generate an error message. A business servlet can be used to process a request by routing the request to a destination for a specified business protocol, such as to a servlet or piece of code intended to handle that protocol. The business servlet can route the request to the default servlet if the business servlet does not recognize the destination of the request. The server receiving the request from the client is adapted to route the request to one of the servlets or default servlet, depending on whether the server recognizes the destination, or URL, of the request. The business servlet can be registered as the default such that it receives requests that the server does not recognize. If the business servlet does not recognize the destination of the request, the business servlet can redirect or forward the request to the default servlet.
In another embodiment, a server receiving a request can forward a request received from a client to a business servlet. If the business servlet recognizes the request, the business servlet can forward the request to the appropriate protocol destination. If the business servlet does not recognize the request, the business servlet can use a mechanism such as an internal API to determine the appropriate servlet to receive the response and can forward the request to that servlet. If the business servlet cannot determine the appropriate servlet, the business servlet forwards the request to the default servlet.
In another embodiment, the server receiving the request has a filter capable of determining whether an associated servlet should receive the request. There can be a filter for the business servlet and every other servlet except for the default servlet. The filters can use a lookup table containing address information for help in determining the destination of the request. The filters can act as a chain, with the default servlet at the end of the chain. Each filter can either forward the request to the associated servlet if the filter recognizes the request, or can forward to the next filter in the chain. This process can continue until one of the filters recognizes the request or the default filter receives the request.
Another embodiment occurs in a clustered environment. An administration server for a cluster can receive a request from a client and can use a load-balancing algorithm to select a cluster server to receive the request. A filter on the selected cluster server can determine the appropriate destination for the request using a lookup table and can forward the request appropriately. This can continue until the request is processed or is received by a default servlet.
Other features, aspects, and objects of the invention can be obtained from a review of the specification, the figures, and the claims.
Systems and methods in accordance with embodiments of the present invention can utilize a clusterable B2B component that can enable users to build B2B solutions with greatly improved levels of availability and scalability. A single servlet can be utilized for B2B in order to direct messages to different trading partners or business protocols. This can solve problems with servlet destruction, the B2B startup class, and servlet management in a cluster. The single servlet can use different file paths, with each file path being the part of a URL following the scheme, host, and port, for example. This can be managed across a cluster by local mapping tables, which can be updated via Managed JavaBeans (MBeans).
If the base of the file path is frozen per integration system deployment, a single servlet can process the different sub-paths quite easily. This could be the case for URLs such as, for example:
This flexibility can be recovered in one embodiment if the B2B servlet is made to be the “default” servlet of the system cluster. Any servlet request not found for processing by other servlets can be sent to the default servlet. The B2B servlet, as the default servlet, can lookup the specified file path in an appropriate mapping table or ‘hash’ table.
If the mapping exists, the servlet can activate the specified business protocol to process the message. If the mapping does not exist, the servlet can pass the request on to the normal default servlet, such as a FileServlet that can report “file not found” errors. One way to accomplish this is to subclass the default servlet to add the B2B functionality. Another way to accomplish this is through the use of a forward( ) method. A forward( ) method can be used to transfer control from a B2B servlet to a named servlet. The method can transfer to the previously installed default servlet, presuming that the name of the default servlet is available through an MBean API.
Another way is to take advantage of the new “filter” capability introduced with version 2.3 of the Java Servlet specification set forth by Sun Microsystems, Inc., of Santa Clara, Calif. A Java class can be provided that can intercept a servlet request and dynamically provide additional restrictions or information. This can be a preferred approach in certain embodiments.
In present messaging systems, a different URL is used to specify each location to which a message can be routed. Such locations can include functionality to process the messages using business protocols such as RosettaNet, ebXML, or XOCP. One problem with this approach is that a new servlet has to be created and deployed each time a new location or protocol is added to the system. Deploying additional servlets in a clustered environment can become problematic, as it is necessary to inform each node in the cluster to install this servlet everywhere so the system can handle the new protocol. It is then necessary to send out these messages, as well as to ensure that the servlets are properly loaded and deployed. Further, the issue of loading a servlet is not a straightforward task. When the need for a protocol ends, it can be desirable for the protocol to disappear. It is then necessary to undeploy each servlet and do away with each servlet URL.
It is therefore desirable to use a mechanism in accordance with one embodiment that provides for a single servlet to be deployed initially as the B2B environment is brought up. This mechanism can set up a “promiscuous” listener that will listen to everything coming into any servlet in the cluster. The listener can check where each message is bound, and if the listener does not recognize the destination, the listener can allow the message to pass to a default destination.
In a system in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention, each protocol can be pre-registered such that it appears as a URL. Once a protocol appears to the system as a URL, a filter or interceptor can pass the protocol to a hidden servlet that deals with such URLs. A filter is generally a piece of code that can transform the contents or requests and responses. Filters do not create responses as do servlets, but instead modify or adapt requests and responses. The servlet can stash the real address and forward it to the underlying address. A table can be used to hold the real and underlying addresses, such that subsequent messages can be routed more quickly. The table itself can be dynamically updated. There is then no need to install or uninstall additional servlets. When the addresses are removed from the table, the system will direct requests to the default servlet, which can return a normal “404” error of “file not found.”
There are at least three approaches that can be used in accordance with embodiments of the present invention. In one approach, which can be used with the system of
There can be various servlets installed at the front of the Web server 102. A client 100 can send a request to a URL that is received by the Web server 102. Based on the URL specified in the request, the Web server 102 knows which piece of code to activate in order to serve the request. There can be a default servlet 108 to which any request is directed if the URL is not recognized. Therefore, the Web server 102 can first try to send a request to one of the servlets 104, 106 hosted by the Web server 102, and if that send fails the Web server 102 can send the request to the default servlet 108. The default servlet then can be responsible for sending an error message such as “URL not Found”, or the HTML for a Web page that will provide a similar error message. A B2B servlet 110 can be registered as the “default” servlet, which could then pass the request to the “real” default servlet 108 if the B2B servlet 110 does not understand the URL. Again, this is a problem if a user can specify the default servlet, as the B2B servlet may not know where to direct requests that it does not recognize.
A second approach, which can be used with the system of
A client can submit a request to the Web server that can utilize prefixes. For example, a base request might specify:
A third approach can be used with the system of
When a request is received to one of the filters 302, 306, 310, the filter can determine whether it recognizes the URL in the request. If the URL is recognized by filter 302, for example, the request can be forwarded to the B2B servlet 304, which can be registered under an internal name that users will not see directly. If the request is not recognized, it can be forwarded to the filter 306 for the next servlet 308. A request can keep passing through filters 302, 306, 310 until it is either recognized or is forwarded to the default servlet 314. The filters can assume that there is going to be a chain of filters as well as the default servlet, such that if a filter does not recognize a URL it simply forwards the request to the next in the chain. If the URL is recognized, it can be forwarded to the servlet directly, using the internal name. It can still be necessary to retain the original URL, such that the URL is retrievable and the switch business protocol requested can be done.
The servlet infrastructure can know how to do chaining between the filters and the final destination of a particular servlet. To reach a specific servlet, such as the B2B servlet, a “virtual URL” can be specified in the request. This URL is called virtual because it does not correspond to an actual URL. If such URL is detected by a filter, the request can be bounced back by the server with a message indicating that the URL does not exist. Again, if the user replaces the default servlet with a user-specific servlet, it does not matter because the default servlet will still be in the chain. The transport servlet is independent of the default servlet in this embodiment.
The filter can use what effectively amounts to a lookup table, in which the filter can lookup any URL it receives to determine whether the filter recognizes that URL as belonging to the associated servlet. This is a quick lookup, as the table is a hash table and a query on the table involves a text string. If the URL is recognized, it is processed. If the URL is not recognized, the request is passed on to the next filter or the default servlet, whichever is next in the chain. If the URL is recognized, the filter can get the appropriate instance of various things to call and process the request to the servlet. The servlet has to receive not the current incoming destination but the original incoming destination. It can be necessary for the servlet to receive the original incoming destination because the URL was rewritten, and it specifies a transport servlet, for example, and a server receiving the request will not have a protocol for a transport servlet. Since the original URL is in a special header in the transport package, the server can simply extract the original URL and process the request as normal. Using this approach, protocols can be added and removed “on the fly” since the hash table can be populated and depopulated dynamically. Present systems require installing and uninstalling servlets on the fly, which can be problematic and unnecessarily resource intensive.
Once the request gets to the B2B servlet, the request can appear as a normal request to the servlet and the servlet can simply process the request. Once the transport servlet receives and decodes the URL, the URL can look like it always did, even internally to the system. After the processing is completed, a response will go back to the requester, or client, as a standard response. This approach can be desirable, as it is transparent on both sides. No filtering is done on the response, the only filtering done when incoming messages are intercepted.
The system can take advantage of objects such as HTTP servlet request objects and HTTP servlet response objects. A servlet request object can contain all the incoming information, and a servlet response object can be filled with the outgoing information. Servlets normally take both a request argument and a response argument. A filter can be set up the same way, so that as long as the underlying code reads from the request and sends information back in the response. The filter can ‘transparently’ bypass the filter. The response can be captured in the filter in some embodiments. This can be done to change or add outgoing information, for example, such as to add a copyright statement to the bottom of each response page. In some embodiments, only the destination is being changed, such that the system is being used purely for routing.
When a filter receives a request, it can be compared to the destination URL. Here, ‘destination’ is not the destination to which the request is being sent, but is the destination on which the request is received. The system is looking at the incoming URL. The filter can examine the path of the incoming URL, and can determine whether the associated business protocol is registered under that path. If the filter has a servlet for a protocol registered under that path, the filter can route the request to that servlet. Otherwise, the request passes to the next filter or servlet in the chain.
If the URL is recognized, the request can go to a transport servlet. In order to give the request to the transport servlet, the URL can be changed to the transport servlet. At this point the path can be stripped, such as to remove the protocol identification information. The system can utilize “transport” headers that can contain the information being sent, as well as any additional information. This additional information can include the original URL. The transport servlet can then check the transport header to determine whether to use the URL that the request came in on or the one identified in the header.
Advantages of such a system can be realized in a clustered environment, as shown in
In a system in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention, it still may be necessary to inform the individual nodes that the protocol has been added. In such a system, however, it is sufficient to inform the nodes 404, 408, 412, 418 that something has been added to the hash table 420 to which they should pay attention. When the protocol is to be removed, the appropriate information can simply be removed from the hash table 420. It is not necessary to go through the process of destroying the servlet. The request can come into the cluster 402 from a client 400 and get routed to one of the nodes 408, such as by doing load balancing using the admin server 404. A filter can be deployed on each node in the cluster. The admin server 404 can act as a cluster router to distribute the load. A distribution algorithm such as round robin can be used, which can be implemented either through hardware or software.
The protocols are then not added to the nodes themselves, but are instead distributed in a lighter form. It can be sufficient to inform the nodes that a new protocol exists in the cluster, and it is not necessary to add or install servlets, or change any existing servlets. Similarly, none of the filters needs to be changed. The only thing that may need to be changed is the value in the hash table 420 or lookup table. The server 400 receiving the request from the admin server 404 can examine the request with a filter 406 using the hash table 420. If the filter 406 recognizes the URL, the filter can route the request to a B2B servlet 420 or other servlet 422 hosting that protocol. If the filter 406 does not recognize the URL, the request can be routed to the default servlet 424.
The foregoing description of preferred embodiments of the present invention has been provided for the purposes of illustration and description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise forms disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. The embodiments were chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the invention and its practical application, thereby enabling others skilled in the art to understand the invention for various embodiments and with various modifications that are suited to the particular use contemplated. It is intended that the scope of the invention be defined by the following claims and their equivalence.
This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/376,932, filed May 1, 2002, entitled “SINGLE SERVLETS FOR B2B MESSAGE ROUTING,” which is hereby incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5321841 | East et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5469562 | Saether | Nov 1995 | A |
| 5604860 | McLaughlin et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5630131 | Palevich et al. | May 1997 | A |
| 5748975 | Van De Vanter | May 1998 | A |
| 5801958 | Dangelo et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5835769 | Jervis et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5836014 | Faiman | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5862327 | Kwang et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5867822 | Sankar | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5933838 | Lomet | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5944794 | Okamoto et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5950010 | Hesse et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5961593 | Gabber et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5966535 | Benedikt et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 6012083 | Savitzky et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6016495 | McKeehan et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6018730 | Nichols et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6023578 | Birsan et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6023722 | Colyer | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6028997 | Leymann et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6029000 | Woolsey et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6044217 | Brealey et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6067548 | Cheng | May 2000 | A |
| 6067623 | Blakley, III et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6070184 | Blount et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6085030 | Whitehead et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6092102 | Wagner | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6098093 | Bayeh et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6119149 | Notani | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6141686 | Jackowski et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6141701 | Whitney | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6148336 | Thomas et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6189044 | Thomson et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6212546 | Starkovich et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6222533 | Notani et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6226675 | Meltzer et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6230287 | Pinard et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6230309 | Turner et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6237135 | Timbol | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6243737 | Flanagan et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6282711 | Halpern et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6292932 | Baisley et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6311327 | O'Brien et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6324681 | Sebesta et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6330569 | Baisley et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6334114 | Jacobs et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6336122 | Lee et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6338064 | Ault et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6339832 | Bowman-Amuah | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6343265 | Glebov et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6345283 | Anderson | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6348970 | Marx | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6349408 | Smith | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6353923 | Bogle et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6360221 | Gough | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6360358 | Elsbree et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6367068 | Vaidyanathan et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6377939 | Young | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6393605 | Loomans | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6408311 | Baisley et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6411698 | Bauer et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6445711 | Scheel et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6463503 | Jones et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6470364 | Prinzing | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6516322 | Meredith | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6549949 | Bowman-Amuah | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6560769 | Moore et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6567738 | Gopp et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
| 6584454 | Hummel, Jr. et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6594693 | Borwankar | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6594700 | Graham et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6601113 | Koistinen et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6604198 | Beckman et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
| 6609115 | Mehring et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
| 6615258 | Barry et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6636491 | Kari et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6637020 | Hammond | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6643652 | Helgeson et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
| 6654932 | Bahrs et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6678518 | Eerola | Jan 2004 | B2 |
| 6684388 | Gupta et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
| 6687702 | Vaitheeswaran et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
| 6687848 | Najmi | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6721740 | Skinner et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6721747 | Lipkin | Apr 2004 | B2 |
| 6721779 | Maffeis | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6732237 | Jacobs et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6748420 | Quatrano et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6754884 | Lucas et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6757689 | Battas et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6789054 | Makhlouf | Sep 2004 | B1 |
| 6795967 | Evans et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
| 6799718 | Chan et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6802000 | Greene et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6804686 | Stone et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6823495 | Vedula et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
| 6832238 | Sharma et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6836883 | Abrams et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6847981 | Song et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6850979 | Saulpaugh et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
| 6874143 | Murray et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
| 6889244 | Gaither et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
| 6915519 | Williamson et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
| 6918084 | Slaughter et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
| 6922827 | Vasilik et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
| 6925482 | Gopal et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6950872 | Todd, II | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6959307 | Apte | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6959340 | Najmi | Oct 2005 | B1 |
| 6963914 | Breitbart et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
| 6971096 | Ankireddipally et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
| 6976086 | Sadeghi et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 6993743 | Crupi et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7000219 | Barrett et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7007088 | Najmi | Feb 2006 | B1 |
| 7017146 | Dellarocas et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7032005 | Mathon et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7051072 | Stewart et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7051316 | Charisius et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7054858 | Sutherland | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7062718 | Kodosky et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7069507 | Alcazar et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
| 7072934 | Helgeson et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7073167 | Iwashita | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7076772 | Zatloukal | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7089568 | Yoshida et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7089584 | Sharma | Aug 2006 | B1 |
| 7107578 | Alpern | Sep 2006 | B1 |
| 7111243 | Ballard et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
| 7117504 | Smith et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7127704 | Van De Vanter et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7143186 | Stewart et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7146422 | Marlatt et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
| 7150015 | Pace et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7155705 | Hershberg et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
| 7184967 | Mital et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
| 7240331 | Vion-Dury et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 20010016880 | Cai et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010032263 | Gopal et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20020004848 | Sudarshan et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020010781 | Tuatini | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020010803 | Oberstein et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020016759 | Marcready et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020035604 | Cohen et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020049788 | Lipkin et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020073080 | Lipkin | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020078365 | Burnett et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020083075 | Brummel et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020111922 | Young et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020120685 | Srivastava et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020143960 | Goren et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020152106 | Stoxen et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020161826 | Arteaga et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020165936 | Alston et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020174178 | Stawikowski | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020174241 | Beged-Dov et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184145 | Sijacic et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184610 | Chong et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020194244 | Raventos | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020194267 | Flesner et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020194495 | Gladstone et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030002526 | Dias et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030004746 | Kheirolomoom et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030005181 | Bau et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030014439 | Boughannam | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030018661 | Darugar | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030018665 | Dovin et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030018832 | Amierisetty et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030037153 | Ouchi | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030041198 | Exton et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030285759 | Kulkarni et al. | Feb 2003 | |
| 20030043191 | Tinsley et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030046266 | Mullins et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030055868 | Fletcher et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030055878 | Fletcher et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030074217 | Beisiegel et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030074467 | Oblak et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030079029 | Garimella et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030110117 | Saidenbereg et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030110446 | Nemer | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030126136 | Omoigui | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030149791 | Kane et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030167358 | Marvin et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030196168 | Hu | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030204559 | Nguyen | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030208374 | Mangtani et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030233631 | Curry | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040019645 | Goodman et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040040011 | Bosworth et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040068568 | Griffin | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040078373 | Ghoneimy et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133660 | Junghuber et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040148336 | Hubbard et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040204976 | Oyama et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040216086 | Bau | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225995 | Marvin et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040260715 | Mongeon et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20060206856 | Breeden et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060234678 | Juitt et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20070038500 | Hammitt et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 2 248 634 | Mar 2000 | CA |
| 9923558 | May 1999 | WO |
| 0029924 | May 2000 | WO |
| 0190884 | Nov 2001 | WO |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20040010611 A1 | Jan 2004 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60376932 | May 2002 | US |