The present invention relates generally to improved data transmission over computer networks, and more particularly to a string matching method and device.
The Internet has experienced explosive growth in recent years. The emergence of the World Wide Web has enabled millions of users around the world to download easily web resources such as text, graphics, video, and sound data while at home, work, or from remote locations via wireless devices. This is achieved primarily through the use of Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), a standardized way for computers to communicate with each other.
To request a web resource, a client web browser sends an HTTP request for the web resource to a server. The HTTP request often includes lengthy HTTP header information that must be processed by the server. In order to process the header information, the server must perform string matching, to identify whether known strings exist in the HTTP header. Further, according to the HTTP specification (HTTP/1.1, Internet RFC 2616, Fielding et al.), the disclosure of which is herein incorporated by reference, HTTP headers are case insensitive. Thus, not only must string matching be performed for HTTP headers, but the string matching must be performed in a case-insensitive manner. This case-insensitive string matching requires additional processor calculations, and thereby contributes significantly to server delay, or latency, in responding to requests from the client.
It would be desirable to provide a system, method, and device capable of quickly and efficiently performing case-insensitive string matching on header information to increase processor efficiency and thereby reduce latency.
A method and device for string matching HTTP headers are provided. The method typically includes identifying a predefined string, identifying an unknown string to compare with the predefined string, performing a bitwise exclusive OR operation on an ASCII binary representation of at least one segment of the unknown string and an ASCII binary representation of at least one segment of the predefined string, and identifying a case-insensitive string match based on the exclusive OR operation. The method may further include performing a bitwise operation with a predefined flag to determine the case-insensitive segment match.
The device for improving data transfer via a computer network, the device including a processor to compare an unknown header with a predefined header by performing a bitwise exclusive OR operation on the binary representations of the headers, wherein a header match is identified based on the exclusive OR operation.
Referring initially to
Remote client 12 typically is a personal computer including a processor coupled to a communications bus. A mass storage device, such as a hard drive, CD-ROM (compact disk, read-only memory) drive, tape drive, etc., and a memory are also typically linked to the communications bus. The memory typically includes random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), and L1 and L2 cache. Remote client 12 typically is configured to access computer network 16 via a network interface and browser software. Alternatively, remote client 12 may be a portable data assistant, web-enabled wireless device, mainframe computer, or other suitable computing device.
Server 14 typically is a computer similar to the personal computer described above. Server 14 includes a server program that serves web resources to and otherwise communicates with remote clients 12. The server program typically is configured to receive Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) requests for network resources from remote clients 12, and in response, send HTTP responses with the requested network resources to remote clients 12 via computer network 16, as further described below.
Computer network 16 may be a wide area network (WAN) such as the Internet, although computer network 16 may be a LAN or a metropolitan area network (MAN). Computer network 16 operates using TCP(Transfer Control Protocol)/IP(Internet Protocol), although other protocols suitable for carrying HTTP requests and responses may be used.
Referring to
Networking devices 18, 18′ are more fully described in co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 09/680,675, 09/680,997, and 09/680,998, filed Oct. 6, 2000, Nos. 60/239,552 and 60/239,071, filed Oct. 10, 2000, No. 60/287,188, filed Apr. 27, 2002, and No. 60/308,234 filed Jul. 26, 2001, and No. 60/313,006 filed Aug. 16, 2001, the disclosures of each of which are herein incorporated by reference.
String matching module 24 typically is configured to reduce the time it takes to transfer data between remote clients 12 and servers 14. Remote clients 12 and servers 14 communicate through the use of Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), an Internet standard based on the exchange of HTTP messages in the forms of requests and responses. HTTP requests and responses include header fields, referred to simply “headers,” at the beginning of each HTTP message. These headers require processing or “parsing” by the server, so that the server can appropriately respond to the request.
Headers typically are composed of alphabetic characters. According to the HTTP specification (HTTP/1.1, Internet RFC 2616, Fielding et al.), all headers are case-insensitive, meaning that the HTTP protocol does not differentiate between uppercase and lowercase alphabetic characters. The embodiments of the present invention are typically configured to recognize headers from HTTP versions 0.9, 1.0, and 1.1 Examples of these headers include “Cache-control”, “Connection”, “Date”, “MIME-version”, “Pragma”, “Trailer”, “Transfer-coding”, “Upgrade”, “Via”, “Warning”, “Accept”, “Accept-charset”, “Accept-Encoding”, “Accept-language”, “Authorization”, “Expect”, “From”, “Host”, “If-modified-since”, “If-match”, “If-none-match”, “If-range”, “If-Unmodified-Since”, “Max-forwards”, “Proxy-authorization”, “Range”, “Referer”, “Referer TE”, “User-Agent”, “Allow”, “Content-encoding”, “Content-language”, “Content-length”, “Content-location”, “Content-md5”, “Content-range”, “Content-type”, “Expires”, “Last-modified”, “Accept-Ranges”, “Age”, “Etag”, “Location”, “Proxy-authenticate”, “Retry-after”, “Server”, “Vary”, and “WWW-Authenticate”. It should be understood that this list is not exhaustive and that other presently used HTTP headers, as well as new headers included in future versions of HTTP, are within the scope of the present invention.
An exemplary request message (or simply “request”) 26 from a client to a server is shown in
An exemplary response message (or simply “response”) 38 from server to client in response to a received request 26 is shown in
To process HTTP requests efficiently, string matching module 24 is configured to parse headers by using a string matching method, described in more detail below. String matching module 24 identifies case-insensitive header or string matches based on results of performing one or more bitwise operations between a predefined (known) string and a corresponding unknown string, typically incoming data from remote client 12. The predefined string may be from a record or a hash table created from previous known headers, and may be stored in memory and/or accessed from a linked database. A case-insensitive string match occurs when all of the characters of an unknown string are found to match all of the corresponding characters of a predefined string. Hereinafter, “strings” will be used to refer both to the predefined string and the unknown string.
Characters in strings are typically represented using ASCII (American Standard Code for Information Interchange). String matching module 24 uses the ASCII values, specifically the ASCII binary representations or forms of these characters, in bitwise operations to determine whether a string match exists. In ASCII, uppercase and lowercase alphabetic characters differ by 32 (differing in exactly the fifth bit position when the characters are in binary form). The string matching module is configured to detect this difference to identify case-insensitive string matches, as described in more detail below. Because two characters are not required to be in the same case to match, string matching module 24 may save computational steps by avoiding a step of checking for the counterpart lowercase or uppercase character separately.
String matching module 24 typically divides the strings into segments of one or more characters. The length of each character is one byte, which takes up 8 bits in a register. According to one embodiment of the invention, the strings are divided into segment that are 4 bytes (32 bits) long, however, it will be understood that the segments may be longer or shorter depending on the size of the registers and/or the configuration of networking device 18. String matching module 24 loads the bitwise value of the segments into separate registers and performs bitwise operations on the segments.
One of the bitwise operations used is the exclusive OR (XOR, ^) operator. The XOR operator operates on corresponding bits from each loaded register. If the bits are identical (such as a 0-0 or 1-1), the result of the comparison is 0, and if the bits are different (such as a 1-0 or 0-1), the result of the comparison is 1. Registers may be loaded with ASCII binary representations of segments of strings, predefined flags, etc. and the XOR operator will perform the function in the same manner.
Another bitwise operation that may be used is the AND (&) operator, which also operates on corresponding bits from each loaded register. Both bits have to be 1 in order to yield a result of 1, otherwise, the result will be 0. The OR (|) operator yields a 1 if either bit is 1 and a 0 if both bits are 0. Other bitwise operations may also be used.
As described in more detail below, string matching module 24 performs bitwise operations on string segments, on results from prior bitwise operations, and on predefined values or flags, in order to obtain an indication of a case-insensitive match. Oftentimes, a predefined flag is used to determine the differences in values compared and to determine boundaries of acceptable ASCII values. For the sake of brevity, hexadecimal notation is used herein to represent the binary representations of predefined flags.
String matching module 24 typically checks that characters of strings are alphabetic in order to determine case-insensitive matches. Because string matching module 24 has a record of predefined strings that contain valid characters, false string matches resulting from ASCII characters located within the predetermined boundaries of ASCII values are prevented. An example of a false match may be finding ‘{’ and ‘[’ to be a positive string match.
String matching module 24 may be used to match strings from two header values having alphabetic characters. That is, string matching module 24 may compare unknown header values to predefined header values. For example, an unknown header value such as one located after header “Content-Type” may be compared to predefined header values “JavaScript” or “image”.
Turning to
Referring now to
If at step 204, str1_sgmt and str2_sgmt contain less than four characters, method 200 includes left-shifting the binary value of each segment by eight bits for each character less than four at step 210. Registers holding str1_sgmt and str2_sgmt each shift to the left by eight bits and replace empty bits on the right caused by shifting with zeros. Method 200 continues to step 212, where the method includes performing comparisons to determine if the segments match, in a similar manner to step 206. If the segments match, method 200 returns an indication of a string match at step 214. If segments do not match at step 206, the method goes to step 216 to return a negative string match.
As shown in
Turning to
If at step 306, the result of the XOR operation is equal to zero, method 300 proceeds to step 312 to check if the ends of str1 and str2 have been reached. If the ends of the strings have been reached, method 300 goes to step 314, to return an indication of a string match, meaning all of the characters of each string match. If the ends of str1 and str2 have not been reached, method 300 includes a step 316 of assigning the next character of str1 to char_str1 and assigning the next character of str2 to char_str2. Method 300 further includes returning to step 304. Method 300 cycles until the ends of the strings have been reached or until characters do not match. If at step 308, a case-insensitive character match is found, method 300 continues to step 312 to determine whether the ends of the strings have been reached.
Turning to
At step 318, if the result of the operation is not equal to the 1-byte flag, step 308 proceeds to step 310 and identifies a negative string match. At step 320, if the characters of str1 and str2 are not within the predefined ASCII range, step 308 goes to step 310.
While the present invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to the foregoing preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art will understand that many variations may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the following claims. The description of the invention should be understood to include all novel and nonobvious combinations of elements described herein, and claims may be presented in this or a later application to any novel and nonobvious combination of these elements. Where the claims recite “a” or “a first” element or the equivalent thereof, such claims should be understood to include incorporation of one or more such elements, neither requiring nor excluding two or more such elements.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5329598 | Geist | Jul 1994 | A |
| 5381127 | Khieu | Jan 1995 | A |
| 5740361 | Brown | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5953503 | Mitzenmacher et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5966663 | Gleason | Oct 1999 | A |
| 6085235 | Clarke et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6092196 | Reiche | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6098125 | Fiacco et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6178204 | Hazra | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6314095 | Loa | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6321265 | Najork et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6359911 | Movshovich et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6377991 | Smith et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6381616 | Larson et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6449269 | Edholm | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6523108 | James et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6532493 | Aviani et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6546021 | Slane | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6564255 | Mobini et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6631466 | Chopra et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6654796 | Slater et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6711164 | Le et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6751209 | Hamiti et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6758403 | Keys et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6842860 | Branstad et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
| 6986047 | Giles et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7017162 | Smith et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7240100 | Wein et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
| 7249369 | Knouse et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 20020091755 | Narin | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020101989 | Markandey et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020118671 | Staples et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20030016673 | Pendakur et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030037237 | Abgrall et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20040222878 | Juels | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20050004875 | Kontio et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050060752 | Pendakur et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050240943 | Smith et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050246716 | Smith et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20030069941 A1 | Apr 2003 | US |