The following patent applications, commonly owned and filed Oct. 1, 1997, are hereby incorporated herein in their entirety by reference thereto:
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 or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent files or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever.
1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to communications between two computer systems. More particularly, the invention relates to providing communications between two servers in a server network, for monitoring the operational status of the servers, synchronizing events or actions initiated by the servers, and providing messaging capability between the two servers.
2. Description of the Related Technology
As computer systems and networks become more complex, various systems for promoting fault tolerance in these networks have been developed. One method of preventing network down-time due to the failure or removal of a fileserver from a server network, is to implement “server mirroring.” Server mirroring as it is currently implemented requires a primary server, a primary storage device, a backup server, a backup storage device and a unified operating system linking the two servers and storage devices. The purpose of the backup server is to resume the operations of the primary server should it become inoperational. An example of a mirrored server product is provided by Software Fault Tolerance Level 3 (SFT III) provided by NOVELL INC., 1555 North Technology Way, Orem, Utah, as an add-on to its NetWare®4.x product. SFT III maintains servers in an identical state of data update. It separates hardware-related operating system (OS) functions on the mirrored servers so that a fault on one hardware platform does not affect the other.
The server OS is designed to work in tandem with two servers. One server is designated as a primary server, and the other is a secondary server. The primary server is the main point of update; the secondary server is in a constant state of readiness to take over. Both servers receive all updates through a special link called a mirrored server link (MSL), which is dedicated to this purpose. The servers also communicate over the local area network (LAN) that they share in common, so that one knows if the other has failed even if the MSL has failed. When a failure occurs, the second server automatically takes over without interrupting communications in any user-detectable way. Each server monitors the other server's NetWare® Core Protocol (NCP) acknowledgments over the LAN to see that all requests for that server are serviced and that OSs are constantly maintained in a mirrored state.
When the primary server fails, the secondary server detects the failure and immediately takes over as the primary server. The failure is detected in one or both of two ways: the MSL link generates an error condition when no activity is noticed, or the servers communicate over the LAN, each one monitoring the other's NCP acknowledgment. The primary server is simply the first server of the pair that is brought up. It then becomes the server used at all times and it processes all requests. When the primary server fails, the secondary server is immediately substituted as the primary server with identical configurations. The switch-over is handled entirely at the server end, and work continues without any perceivable interruption.
Although server mirroring increases security against down-time caused by a failed server, it does so at a considerable cost. This method of providing fault tolerance requires the additional expense and complexity of standby hardware that is not used unless there is a failure in the primary server.
Another method of providing fault tolerance in a server network which does not require additional redundant (mirrored) hardware is referred to as “clustering” the servers in the network. Under one type of clustering method, a replicated Network Directory Database (NDD) operates in conjunction with server resident processes, running on a cooperating set of servers called a cluster, to remap a network resource to an alternate server, in the event of a primary server failure. A remappable resource is called a clustered resource. The records/objects in the replicated database contain for each clustered network resource, a primary and a secondary server affiliation. Initially, all users access a network resource through the server identified in the replicated database as being the primary server for the network resource. When server resident processes detect a failure of that primary server, the replicated database is updated to reflect the failure of the primary server, and to change the affiliation of that network resource from its primary to its backup server.
This remapping occurs transparently to whichever user/client is accessing the network resource.
As a result of the remapping, all users access the clustered network resource through the server identified in the replicated database as the backup server for the resource. When the primary server returns to service, the replicated resident processes detect a return to service of the primary server, the replicated database is again updated to reflect the resumed operation of the primary server. As a result of these latter updates to the replicated database, all users once again access the network resource through the server identified in the replicated database as the primary server for the clustered network resource. This remapping of clustered network resource affiliations also occurs transparently to whichever user/client is accessing the network resource, and returns the resource to its original fault tolerant state. A further discussion of the operation and theory of clustered networks is provided in a U.S. provisional patent application, entitled, “Clustering Of Computer Systems Using Uniform Object Naming And Distributed Software For Locating Objects,” which is listed above under the heading “Priority Claim.”
The clustering method of remapping the affiliation of a network resource, reduces the amount of hardware, software and processing overhead required to provide fault tolerance, when compared with the mirrored server technique. However, in both of these methods and systems, a rather inefficient and costly method of monitoring the status of each server in the network is utilized. In order to detect that a primary server has failed, for example, these methods require both a primary server and a secondary server to communicate messages and commands across a LAN line and to process received messages and commands in accordance with a specified monitoring protocol.
One drawback of this method of providing communications between two or more servers within a server network is that it relies on a dedicated communications line, the LAN line, to communicate messages between the servers in the network. The LAN line is a valuable system resource which should be allocated only when necessary. Additionally, communicating across the LAN line is not totally reliable. If the bandwidth capacity of the LAN line is reached, or if the LAN line becomes physically damaged, it will not be able to handle communications from one server to another. Therefore, in order to provide a reliable method of monitoring and/or communicating between servers, a secondary method of communicating in the event that the LAN line becomes disabled is typically required. One such prior art secondary method includes a first server writing data, commands or information to an intermediate hard drive connected to a SCSI bus and a second server which reads the data, commands or information from the hard drive. Therefore, the hard drive serves as an intermediate depository for communicating between the SCSI adapters of two or more servers. One problem with this approach is that it creates a dependency on that device which is often a central point of failure. For example, if the hard drive “crashes,” the two servers will not be able to communicate with each other.
A typical prior art LAN handshake protocol between two servers includes the following steps: a first adapter of a first server will send a NetWare® Core Protocol (NCP) packet to a second adapter card of a second server in order to check whether a second server is handling all its requests. The first adapter card must then wait for the second adapter card to receive the NCP signal, process it, and then send a response, which contains the intranetware address of the second adapter card. If the first adapter does not receive the intranetware address data in response to its NCP packet, the first adapter will wait for a specified amount of time after which the handshake protocol “times out” and ends, resulting in a failure to achieve a communications link with the first server.
This approach is time-consuming and requires much “overhead” in terms of processing time and logic circuitry to process and synchronize the series of commands and data transferred between the adapters of two servers trying to communicate with one another. Therefore, what is needed is a method and system for establishing communications between two or more servers within a server network such that the status of a server may be monitored, events and actions initiated by the servers may be synchronized with one another, and two or more servers may communicate with one another in a cost efficient and reliable manner. Additionally, such a method and system should reduce the amount of required “overhead”, in terms of processing time and system resources.
The invention addresses the above and other needs by providing a method and system of communicating between two servers of a server network so as to monitor the status of each server by the other, to time and/or synchronize the events and actions initiated by one server with respect to the other, and further to provide bi-directional messaging capability between the two servers.
In one embodiment of the invention, a method of monitoring an operational status of a first server with a second server, includes: successively transmitting first and second command signals to a device coupled to the first server, wherein the first command signal places the device in a first status condition and the second command signal places the device in a second status condition; and monitoring a status condition of the device with the second server, coupled to the device, wherein a change in the status condition of the device indicates that the first server is operational.
In another embodiment, a method of monitoring a status condition of a first server with a second server in a server network, includes: transmitting a software-generated pulse waveform from the first server to a device coupled to the first server, wherein the software-generated pulse waveform comprises a first command corresponding to a logic level low and a second command corresponding to a logic level high; setting the device to a first state during logic level lows of the pulse waveform and to a second state during logic level highs of the pulse waveform; receiving the software-generated pulse waveform with the second server by determining when the device is in the first state and when it is in the second state; and determining when the device no longer changes from the first state to the second state.
In a further embodiment, a method of monitoring a status condition of a first server by a second server, includes: transmitting SCSI Reserve and Release commands from the server to a SCSI device, coupled to the first server; and monitoring a released/reserved status of the SCSI device with the second server.
In yet a further embodiment, a method of assigning control over a network resource, includes: transmitting SCSI Reserve and Release commands from a first server to a SCSI device, coupled to the first server; monitoring a released/reserved status of the SCSI device with a second server; determining if the first server is operational; and if it is determined that the first server has failed, assigning control over the SCSI device to the second server.
In another embodiment, a method of synchronizing a first operation carried out by a first server with a second operation carried out by a second server, includes: ransmitting a software-generated pulse waveform, having a first frequency, from the first server to a device coupled to the first server; receiving the pulse waveform with the second server by monitoring a status condition of the device; transmitting from the first server a synchronization signal to the device by changing the frequency of the pulse waveform to a second frequency; detecting by the second server the synchronization signal by detecting a change in frequency of the pulse waveform; changing at the first server the frequency of the pulse waveform back to the first frequency; detecting by the second server a change in frequency from the second frequency back to the first frequency; and setting in both servers a reference point in time at a beginning of a first cycle of the pulse waveform after it has returned to the first frequency.
In yet another embodiment, a method of providing communications between a first server and a second server, includes: transmitting a first software-generated pulse waveform from the first server to a first device coupled to the first server, wherein the first pulse waveform changes a status condition of the first device between a first state and a second state; receiving the first software-generated pulse waveform with the second server by sampling the status condition of the first device; frequency modulating the first pulse waveform so as to encode a message into the pulse waveform; and reading the message with the second server by sampling the status condition of the first device at a predetermined first sampling rate.
In another embodiment, a method of providing communications between a first server and a second server, includes: executing a first pulse transmitter program in the first server so as to transmit a first software-generated pulse waveform from the first server to a first device coupled to the first server, wherein the pulse waveform changes a status condition of the first device between a first state and a second state; executing a first pulse receiver program in the second server so as to receive the first software-generated pulse waveform by sampling the status condition of the first device; frequency modulating the first pulse waveform so as to encode a first message into the first pulse waveform; reading the first message with the second server by sampling the status condition of the first device at a predetermined first sampling rate; executing a second pulse transmitter program in the second server for transmitting a second software-generated pulse waveform from the second server to a second device coupled to the second server, wherein the second pulse waveform changes a status condition of the second device between a third state and a fourth state; executing a second pulse receiver program in the first server for receiving the second software-generated pulse waveform with the first server by sampling the status condition of the second device; frequency modulating the second pulse waveform so as to encode a second message into the second pulse waveform; and reading the second message with the first server by sampling the status condition of the second device at a predetermined second sampling rate.
The invention is described in detail below with reference to the figures, wherein like elements are referenced with like numerals throughout.
The invention utilizes command signals sent from a SCSI adapter card to a SCSI device in order to reserve and release access time to that device by that server. Referring to
Typically, during normal operating conditions, only one server is allowed access and control of a single SCSI device at any one time. In order to arbitrate access and control over a SCSI device between multiple servers, a second SCSI host protocol is typically used in order to provide this function. In such a protocol, only one server is designated as a host server to the SCSI device and other servers may not access the device when the host server is accessing or desires to access the device. This protocol is accomplished by the SCSI commands of Reserve Unit, Release Unit, and Test Unit Ready, which are transmitted to the SCSI device by the servers connected to that device.
However, as described above, in a clustered server network, the assignment and control of host and backup status to each of the servers in the network is accomplished by means of a cluster data software program which maps and remaps the affiliation of a particular device to a particular server. Therefore, in a clustered network, the use of the SCSI Reserve and Release commands are not necessary to establish which server is the host server of a particular SCSI device. Therefore, the SCSI command protocol for establishing access rights to a SCSI device are no longer necessary and these command signals are free to be manipulated and utilized for other purposes.
Embodiments of the invention take advantage of these idle command signals and utilize the Reserve Unit, Release Unit and Test Unit Ready commands in order to communicate from one server to another. The Reserve Unit command and Release Unit command may serve as unique logic levels, while the Test Unit Ready command is used to read and monitor these “logic levels.” By manipulating the Reserve and Release commands a “software generated pulse waveform” may be created to communicate messages from one server to another.
In order to generate this software-generated pulse waveform, at least the host server is encoded with a “Pulse Transmitter” software program (hereinafter “pulse transmitter” or “pulse transmitter module”) which generates the Reserve and Release signals, or commands, and transmits them to a SCSI device. The processing time and circuitry overhead to create this pulse waveform is nominal. As used herein, the term “module” refers to any software program, subprogram, subroutine of a program, or software code capable of performing a specified function. Also, as used herein, the terms “command,” “signal” and “data” and any conjugations and combinations thereof, are used synonymously and interchangeably and refer to any information or value that may be transmitted, received or communicated between two electronic systems.
To further illustrate the concept of creating a software-generated pulse waveform, reference is made to FIG. 2. In this figure, the Reserve command is represented as a logic level high and the Release command is represented as a logic level low. However, it should be kept in mind that this is only a convenient way of “labelling” these commands for the purpose of using them as a signalling tool. These commands in actuality are streams of data which are transmitted to a SCSI device for the purpose of reserving or releasing access to the device. As shown in
In order to transmit this pulse waveform to the SCSI device, the pulse transmitter software code makes a call to a specified SCSI driver program contained within a hard drive that is currently loaded in memory and executed on the host server 101. The SCSI driver then utilizes the SCSI adapter card 103, otherwise known as the SCSI initiator or SCSI board, to send either a Reserve or Release command to the SCSI device.
Referring to
In order to communicate between the host server 101 and the secondary, or backup, server 109, a “Pulse Receiver” program (hereinafter “pulse receiver” or “pulse receiver module”) within the backup server 109 may listen to the pulse generated by the pulse transmitter of the host server. Similar to the pulse transmitter within the host server 101, the pulse receiver is a software program stored within a memory of the backup server 109 and executed by the backup server 109. To detect the state of the pulse, the pulse receiver may send a “Test Unit Ready” command to the device 105 (FIG. 1). Upon receiving the Test command, the device 105 may indicate whether it is reserved, indicating a failed test, or released, indicating a successful test by transmitting back to the pulse receiver, response data which contains information pertaining to its reserved/released status. The rate at which the “Test Unit Ready” command is transmitted to the SCSI device 105, otherwise known as the sample rate herein, is typically much faster than the rate at which the pulse waveform changes state. Therefore, the “Test Unit Ready” command in a sense “samples” the reservation time period (Rvt) and the release time period (Rlt) in order to ascertain the shape and frequency of the software pulse waveform.
Referring to
The foregoing describes one embodiment of a process for transmitting a software-generated pulse waveform by a first server 101 and receiving the software-generated pulse waveform by a second server 109, in accordance with the invention. Some useful applications of the software-generated pulse waveform are described below.
Pulse Waveform as “Heartbeat” of Primary Server
The pulse waveform can be monitored by a secondary server to determine if a primary server is present and operational. The primary server can send a pulse waveform to the secondary server as described above in order to tell the secondary server that it is “alive and well.” In this way, the pulse waveform serves as a kind of “heartbeat” of the first server which the second server listens for. If the pulse transmitter sends a constant pulse, the waveform can be determined and predicted. This does not mean that the reservation time Rvt must be equal to the release time Rlt, but rather all Rvt's are predictable and all Rlt's are predictable. A pulse with a smaller Rvt minimizes the amount of time a device is reserved, while still creating a heartbeat.
In order to determine the shape, or period, of the pulse waveform, the second server sends a Test Unit Ready command to a SCSI device in order to sample the waveform as described above. The second server can ascertain the cyclic period of the pulse waveform by noting the transition points (from S to F or F to S) of the waveform and recording the number of samples taken between the transition points after several successive cycles of the waveform. Once the waveform is known, there is no need to keep sampling the waveform at the previous sampling rate in order to monitor the presence of the waveform. Instead, samples can be taken out of phase from the transition points and less frequently based on the known period of the waveform in order to ascertain its presence. By taking samples less frequently, the processing time and circuitry overhead of this communication and monitoring method is significantly reduced. This concept is described in greater detail below with reference to
Referring to
To further decrease the overhead of monitoring the pulse waveform, samples can be taken several cycles apart on the pulse waveform as shown in FIG. 7.
By monitoring the pulse waveform as described above, the operational status of the first server can be determined by the second server. The first server is considered operational if the expected results of the monitoring process are obtained. However, if the results indicate a constant released state, either the monitoring mechanism (the reference points) are out of synchronization or the first server is dead and the heartbeat has flatlined. Going out of synchronization is possible, but not common. Therefore, in one embodiment, the monitoring process of the invention checks for this possibility by “recalibrating” the pulse receiving process. This is done by repeating the sampling process as described above with respect to
If in step 809, the expected results are not obtained, the process moves to step 813 in which the pulse waveform, or “heartbeat” is recalibrated as described above. In step 815, the second server determines whether the heartbeat has flatlined, i.e., whether the pulse waveform is still present. If it is determined that the heartbeat is still there, the process moves back to step 807 and once again proceeds from there. However, if in step 815 it is determined that the heartbeat has flatlined, the first server is deemed dead, and the process ends at step 817.
Pulse Waveform as Clock
Another use of the pulse generator is to provide a clock which may be used to synchronize time and events carried out by two or more servers.
Pulse Waveform as Messaging Device
In the embodiment described above, the communication between the two servers is unidirectional (from master to slave) and the slave does not acknowledge synchronization with the master. A bidirectional clock can be implemented as an enhancement to the above timing mechanism in which the slave can acknowledge the detection of Time 0 so that the master receives validation of synchronization. In a bidirectional clock system, both servers run both the pulse transmitter and the pulse receiver programs. Also, a second SCSI device to which the second server is the host server must be provided in order to implement bidirectional communications between the first and second servers. With this arrangement, the second server “owns” the second SCSI device and transmits Reserve and Release commands to the second SCSI device and the first server samples and monitors the status of the second SCSI device as described above.
With a bidirectional communication protocol as described above, the invention may also be utilized to provide not only timing and synchronization between two servers but also messaging between the two servers. Since the pulse waveform can be bi-directional and there are no restrictions on the waveform, a messaging protocol can be established between the two servers via the SCSI bus using frequency modulation. A simple Request/Acknowledge protocol, with session control (the ability for both sides to initiate communication) may be used.
Referring to
As mentioned above, to accommodate a bi-directional communication mechanism, both file servers must run the pulse transmitter and pulse receiver programs, and both servers must each “own” one device to which it can transmit Release and Reserve commands while the other server samples the status of that device at the sample rate.
The following is a summary of the messages/commands discussed above:
Referring to
In order to the simplify the discussion, the following description of the remaining portions of the flowchart is provided from the perspective of only one of the two servers, the first server. However, it is understood that the roles of the first and second servers are interchangeable in the following discussion. In step 1305, the first server determines whether it has a message to send to the second server. If the first server does not have a message queued to send to the second server, the process moves to step 1307 wherein the first server determines whether a Request to Send (RTS) command has been sent by the second server. If the first server has not received a RTS signal from the second server, the process returns to step 1305, wherein the first server continues to poll itself as to whether it has a message to send to the second server. If in step 1307, it is determined that the second server has sent a RTS signal to the first server, the process moves to step 1309 as shown in FIG. 13B. In step 1309, the first server sends back a Ready to Receive (RTR) signal to the second server, agreeing to accept a command from the second server. Thereafter, in step 1311, the first server receives the request (command) from the second server and decodes the request. In step 1313, the first server determines whether it can support or accommodate the request from the second server. If it is determined that the first server can support the request, in step 1315, the first server sends an acknowledgement (ACK) signal to the second server. In step 1317, the first server passes the request up to an application software program running on the first server to process the request. In step 1319, the first server sends the results of the application program to the second server. In step 1321, the first server waits for a relinquish (REL) signal from the second server which terminates communications between the two servers and sends the process back to step 1305 of
If in step 1313, the first server determines that it does not support the request sent by the second server, in step 1323, the first server sends a Not Acknowledge (NAK) signal to the second server which informs the second server that the first server does not support that command. The process then moves back to step 1305 wherein the first server continues to poll itself as to whether it has a message to send to the second server.
If in step 1305, the first server determines that it has a message queued to be sent to the second server, the process moves to step 1325 of FIG. 13C. In step 1325, the first server sends a Request to Send (RTS) signal to the second server which requests the second server to accept a command from the first server. In step 1327, the first server will wait for a Ready to Receive (RTR) from the second server. In step 1329, the first server determines if a timeout period has expired. If the timeout period has expired before a RTR signal is received from the second server, the process moves to step 1331 in which the first server passes an error message to application software indicating that the second server is not responding. The process then moves back to step 1305 of FIG. 13A.
If in step 1329, the first server receives a RTR signal from the second server before the timeout period expires, the process moves to step 1333 in which the first server will send a request, or command, to the second server. In step 1335, the first server determines whether an acknowledge (ACK) signal has been returned by the second server. If the second server does not send an ACK signal or, instead, sends back a Not Acknowledge (NAK) signal, the process moves back to step 1331 in which the first server sends an error signal to the application software indicating that the second server does not support the request. However, if in step 1335, the first server receives the ACK signal from the second server, the process moves to step 1337 in which the first server receives the response (RES) signal(s) from the second server and passes the response to application software for processing. Thereafter, in step 1339, the first server sends a relinquish (REL) signal to the second server thereby terminating communications with the second server. The process then moves back to step 1305 wherein the first server determines whether it has a message to send. If not, in step 1307, the first server determines if the second server wants to send it a message. This process may be recursive and continue to execute until it is terminated by each of the servers.
As described above, the invention provides an efficient and reliable method and system for communicating between two servers in a server network. Because the communication method and system does not transmit data to be stored in an intermediate device, such as a hard disk drive, it does not depend on the presence or operational status of such a device. Rather, some embodiments of the invention take advantage of an existing protocol for establishing control of a SCSI device, namely, the Reserve and Release commands sent by a host server to a SCSI device. By sampling and monitoring the Reserve and Release status of the SCSI device by a second server which is also coupled to the device, the second device can monitor the presence and operational status of the host server, without directly communicating to the host server via an intermediate disk drive as is done in prior art systems. The Reserve and Release status of the SCSI device is used to generate a software-generated pulse waveform which serves as a sort of “heartbeat” of the host server and which can be monitored by the second server. Because the Reserve and Release commands are already implemented in existing SCSI device protocols, the method and system of the invention, once established, requires very little overhead, in terms of processing time and system resources, and is inexpensive to implement.
Because there are no limitations as to the shape and frequency of the software generated pulse waveform, the waveform may be frequency modulated in order to provide timing and synchronization signals to two servers. Additionally, by implementing each server as both a sender of Reserve and Release commands to a respective SCSI device, and a monitor of a the respective SCSI device, bi-directional communications can be established between the two servers. This method and system of communication between two servers is further advantageous in that it may be implemented with existing resources and command protocols between a server and a SCSI device and, additionally, it can be turned on and off as desired.
The invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its spirit or essential characteristics. The described embodiments are to be considered in all respects only as illustrative and not restrictive. The scope of the invention is, therefore, indicated by the appended claims, rather than by the foregoing description. All changes which come within the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims are to be embraced within their scope.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/658,333, filed Sep. 8, 2000, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,523,131, which in turn is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/942,221, filed on Oct. 1, 1997, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,163,853, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/046,327 filed May 13, 1997. These applications are incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4057847 | Lowell et al. | Nov 1977 | A |
4100597 | Fleming et al. | Jul 1978 | A |
4449182 | Rubinson et al. | May 1984 | A |
4672535 | Katzman et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4692918 | Elliott et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
4695946 | Andreasen et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
4707803 | Anthony, Jr. et al. | Nov 1987 | A |
4769764 | Levanon | Sep 1988 | A |
4774502 | Kimura | Sep 1988 | A |
4821180 | Gerety et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4835737 | Herrig et al. | May 1989 | A |
4894792 | Mitchell et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
4949245 | Martin et al. | Aug 1990 | A |
4968977 | Chinnaswamy et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
4999787 | McNally et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5006961 | Monico | Apr 1991 | A |
5007431 | Donehoo, III | Apr 1991 | A |
5033048 | Pierce et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5051720 | Kittirutsunetorn | Sep 1991 | A |
5073932 | Yossifor et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5103391 | Barrett | Apr 1992 | A |
5118970 | Olson et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5121500 | Arlington et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5136708 | Lapourtre et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5136715 | Hirose et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5138619 | Fasang et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5157663 | Major et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5210855 | Bartol | May 1993 | A |
5222897 | Collins et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5245615 | Treu | Sep 1993 | A |
5247683 | Holmes et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5253348 | Scalise | Oct 1993 | A |
5265098 | Mattson et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5266838 | Gerner | Nov 1993 | A |
5269011 | Yanai et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5272382 | Heald et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5272584 | Austruy et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5276814 | Bourke et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5276863 | Heider | Jan 1994 | A |
5277615 | Hastings et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5280621 | Barnes et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5283905 | Saadeh et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5307354 | Cramer et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5311397 | Harshberger et al. | May 1994 | A |
5311451 | Barrett | May 1994 | A |
5317693 | Cuenod et al. | May 1994 | A |
5329625 | Kannan et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5337413 | Lui et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5351276 | Doll, Jr. et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5367670 | Ward et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5379184 | Barraza et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5386567 | Lien et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5388267 | Chan et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5402431 | Saadeh et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5404494 | Garney | Apr 1995 | A |
5423025 | Goldman et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5426740 | Bennett | Jun 1995 | A |
5430717 | Fowler et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5430845 | Rimmer et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5432715 | Shigematsu et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5432946 | Allard et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5438678 | Smith | Aug 1995 | A |
5440748 | Sekine et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5448723 | Rowett | Sep 1995 | A |
5455933 | Schieve et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5460441 | Hastings et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5463766 | Schieve et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5465349 | Geronimi et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5471617 | Farrand et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5471634 | Giorgio et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5473499 | Weir | Dec 1995 | A |
5483419 | Kaczeus, Sr. et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5485550 | Dalton | Jan 1996 | A |
5487148 | Komori et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5491791 | Glowny et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5493574 | McKinley | Feb 1996 | A |
5493666 | Fitch | Feb 1996 | A |
5513314 | Kandasamy et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5513339 | Agrawal et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5515515 | Kennedy et al. | May 1996 | A |
5517646 | Piccirillo et al. | May 1996 | A |
5519851 | Bender et al. | May 1996 | A |
5526289 | Dinh et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5528409 | Cucci et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5530810 | Bowman | Jun 1996 | A |
5533193 | Roscoe | Jul 1996 | A |
5533198 | Thorson | Jul 1996 | A |
5535326 | Baskey et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5539883 | Allon et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5542055 | Amini et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5546272 | Moss et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5548712 | Larson et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5555510 | Verseput et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5559764 | Chen et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5559958 | Farrand et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5559965 | Oztaskin et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5560022 | Dunstan et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5564024 | Pemberton | Oct 1996 | A |
5566299 | Billings et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5566339 | Perholtz et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5568610 | Brown | Oct 1996 | A |
5568619 | Blackledge et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5572403 | Mills | Nov 1996 | A |
5577205 | Hwang et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5579487 | Meyerson et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5579491 | Jeffries et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5579528 | Register | Nov 1996 | A |
5581712 | Herrman | Dec 1996 | A |
5581714 | Amini et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5584030 | Husak et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5586250 | Carbonneau et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5588121 | Reddin et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5588144 | Inoue et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5592610 | Chittor | Jan 1997 | A |
5592611 | Midgely et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5596711 | Burckhartt et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5598407 | Bud et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5602758 | Lincoln et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5606672 | Wade | Feb 1997 | A |
5608865 | Midgely et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5608876 | Cohen et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5615207 | Gephardt et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5621159 | Brown et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5621892 | Cook | Apr 1997 | A |
5622221 | Genga, Jr. et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5623625 | Thompson et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5625238 | Ady et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5627962 | Goodrum et al. | May 1997 | A |
5628028 | Michelson | May 1997 | A |
5629947 | Kellum et al. | May 1997 | A |
5630076 | Saulpaugh et al. | May 1997 | A |
5631847 | Kikinis | May 1997 | A |
5632021 | Jennings et al. | May 1997 | A |
5636341 | Matsushita et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5638289 | Yamada et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5644470 | Benedict et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5644731 | Liencres et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5651006 | Fujino et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5652832 | Kane et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5652833 | Takizawa et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5652839 | Giorgio et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5652892 | Ugajin | Jul 1997 | A |
5652908 | Douglas et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5655081 | Bonnell et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5655083 | Bagley | Aug 1997 | A |
5655148 | Richman et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5659682 | Devarakonda et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5664118 | Nishigaki et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5664119 | Jeffries et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5666538 | DeNicola | Sep 1997 | A |
5668943 | Attanasio et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5668992 | Hammer et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5669009 | Buktenica et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5671371 | Kondo et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5675723 | Ekrot et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5680288 | Carey et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5682328 | Roeber et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5684671 | Hobbs et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5689637 | Johnson et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5696895 | Hemphill et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5696899 | Kalwitz | Dec 1997 | A |
5696949 | Young | Dec 1997 | A |
5696970 | Sandage et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5701417 | Lewis et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5704031 | Mikami et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5708775 | Nakamura | Jan 1998 | A |
5708776 | Kikinis | Jan 1998 | A |
5712754 | Sides et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5715456 | Bennett et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5717570 | Kikinis | Feb 1998 | A |
5721935 | DeSchepper et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5724529 | Smith et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5726506 | Wood | Mar 1998 | A |
5727207 | Gates et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5732266 | Moore et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5737708 | Grob et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5737747 | Vishlitzky et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5740378 | Rehl et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5742514 | Bonola | Apr 1998 | A |
5742833 | Dea et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5747889 | Raynham et al. | May 1998 | A |
5748426 | Bedingfield et al. | May 1998 | A |
5752164 | Jones | May 1998 | A |
5754396 | Felcman et al. | May 1998 | A |
5754449 | Hoshal et al. | May 1998 | A |
5754797 | Takahashi | May 1998 | A |
5758165 | Shuff | May 1998 | A |
5758352 | Reynolds et al. | May 1998 | A |
5761033 | Wilhelm | Jun 1998 | A |
5761045 | Olson et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5761085 | Giorgio | Jun 1998 | A |
5761462 | Neal et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5761707 | Aiken et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5764924 | Hong | Jun 1998 | A |
5764968 | Ninomiya | Jun 1998 | A |
5765008 | Desai et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5765198 | McCrocklin et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5767844 | Stoye | Jun 1998 | A |
5768541 | Pan-Ratzlaff | Jun 1998 | A |
5768542 | Enstrom et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5771343 | Hafner et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5774640 | Kurio | Jun 1998 | A |
5774645 | Beaujard et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5774741 | Choi | Jun 1998 | A |
5777897 | Giorgio | Jul 1998 | A |
5778197 | Dunham | Jul 1998 | A |
5781703 | Desai et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5781716 | Hemphill et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5781744 | Johnson et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5781767 | Inoue et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5781798 | Beatty et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5784555 | Stone | Jul 1998 | A |
5784576 | Guthrie et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787019 | Knight et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787459 | Stallmo et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787491 | Merkin et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5790775 | Marks et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5790831 | Lin et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5793948 | Asahi et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5793987 | Quackenbush et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5793992 | Steele et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5794035 | Golub et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796185 | Takata et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796580 | Komatsu et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796934 | Bhanot et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5797023 | Berman et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5798828 | Thomas et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5799036 | Staples | Aug 1998 | A |
5799196 | Flannery | Aug 1998 | A |
5801921 | Miller | Sep 1998 | A |
5802269 | Poisner et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5802298 | Imai et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5802305 | McKaughan et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5802324 | Wunderlich et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5802393 | Begun et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5802552 | Fandrich et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5802592 | Chess et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5803357 | Lakin | Sep 1998 | A |
5805804 | Laursen et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5805834 | McKinley et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5809224 | Schultz et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5809256 | Najemy | Sep 1998 | A |
5809287 | Stupek, Jr. et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5809311 | Jones | Sep 1998 | A |
5809555 | Hobson | Sep 1998 | A |
5812748 | Ohran et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5812750 | Dev et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5812751 | Ekrot et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5812757 | Okamoto et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5812858 | Nookala et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5815117 | Kolanek | Sep 1998 | A |
5815647 | Buckland et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5815651 | Litt | Sep 1998 | A |
5815652 | Ote et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5821596 | Miu et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5822547 | Boesch et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5826043 | Smith et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5829046 | Tzelnic et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5835719 | Gibson et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5835738 | Blackledge, Jr. et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838932 | Alzien | Nov 1998 | A |
5838935 | Davis et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5841964 | Yamaguchi | Nov 1998 | A |
5841991 | Russell | Nov 1998 | A |
5845061 | Miyamoto et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5845095 | Reed et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5850546 | Kim | Dec 1998 | A |
5852720 | Gready et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5852724 | Glenn, II et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5857074 | Johnson | Jan 1999 | A |
5857102 | McChesney et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864653 | Tavellaei et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864654 | Marchant | Jan 1999 | A |
5864713 | Terry | Jan 1999 | A |
5867730 | Leyda | Feb 1999 | A |
5875307 | Ma et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5875308 | Egan et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5875310 | Buckland et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5878237 | Olarig | Mar 1999 | A |
5878238 | Gan et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5881311 | Woods | Mar 1999 | A |
5884027 | Garbus et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5884049 | Atkinson | Mar 1999 | A |
5886424 | Kim | Mar 1999 | A |
5889965 | Wallach et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5892898 | Fujii et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5892915 | Duso et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5892928 | Wallach et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5893140 | Vahalia et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5898846 | Kelly | Apr 1999 | A |
5898888 | Guthrie et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5905867 | Giorgio | May 1999 | A |
5907672 | Matze et al. | May 1999 | A |
5909568 | Nason | Jun 1999 | A |
5911779 | Stallmo et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5913034 | Malcolm | Jun 1999 | A |
5918057 | Chou et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5922060 | Goodrum | Jul 1999 | A |
5930358 | Rao | Jul 1999 | A |
5935262 | Barrett et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5936960 | Stewart | Aug 1999 | A |
5938751 | Tavallaei et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5941996 | Smith et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5964855 | Bass et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5983349 | Kodama et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987554 | Liu et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987621 | Duso et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987627 | Rawlings, III | Nov 1999 | A |
6009535 | Halligan et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6012130 | Beyda et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6038624 | Chan et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6145089 | Le et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6163853 | Findlay et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6170028 | Wallach et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6173346 | Wallach et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6179486 | Wallach et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6192434 | Wallach et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6219734 | Wallach et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6247080 | Wallach et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6247099 | Skazinski et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6272648 | Findlay et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6304929 | Wallach et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 866 403 | Sep 1998 | EP |
04 333 118 | Nov 1992 | JP |
05 233 110 | Sep 1993 | JP |
07 093 064 | Apr 1995 | JP |
07 261 874 | Oct 1995 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20030126496 A1 | Jul 2003 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60046327 | May 1997 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 08942221 | Oct 1997 | US |
Child | 09658333 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09658333 | Sep 2000 | US |
Child | 10287554 | US |