As known in the art, a “stackable switch” is a network switch that can operate independently as a standalone device or in concert with one or more other stackable switches in a “stack” or “stacking system.”
Some stackable switches support a feature known as “trunked stacking.” With this feature, multiple stacking ports can be grouped together to behave as a single logical port (referred to as a “stacking trunk”), thereby improving resiliency and bandwidth between units in a stacking system. By way of example,
Unfortunately, despite the advantages provided by trunked stacking, this feature can also significantly complicate stacking system administration and management. For instance, in order to configure stacking trunks 124 and 126 shown in
Further, the physical connections between units in a stacking system must correctly match the configuration entered via the trunk commands. If one or more of the physical connections are incorrect, the system administrator must generally inspect the cabling at each unit in order to find the incorrect connection(s), which again can be very difficult and time-consuming in a large/complex topology.
Techniques for simplifying stacking trunk creation and management are provided. In one embodiment, a switch in a stacking system can receive first and second control packets from one or more other switches in the stacking system, where the first and second control packets are received on first and second stacking ports of the switch respectively. The switch can then determine, based on the first and second control packets, whether the first and second stacking ports can be configured as a single stacking trunk.
The following detailed description and accompanying drawings provide a better understanding of the nature and advantages of particular embodiments.
In the following description, for purposes of explanation, numerous examples and details are set forth in order to provide an understanding of various embodiments. It will be evident, however, to one skilled in the art that certain embodiments can be practiced without some of these details, or can be practiced with modifications or equivalents thereof.
1. Overview
The present disclosure describes techniques for simplifying the creation and management of stacking trunks in a stacking system. In one set of embodiments, the physical topology of the stacking system can be discovered and stacking trunks can be created/configured automatically based on the discovered topology, thus eliminating the need for any manual trunk configuration.
In another set of embodiments, the discovered topology can be analyzed and erroneous physical connections between switches (e.g., links that do not allow for a valid trunk) can be determined. The location of the erroneous connections (e.g., unit ID/MAC address and port number) can then be reported to the system administrator so that he/she can adjust the cabling at the affected units, without having to inspect each and every unit in the stacking system.
In yet another set of embodiments, the techniques described herein can automatically make changes/corrections to an existing trunk configuration in view of the discovered topology. For example, consider a situation where stacking trunks are created/configured and the physical topology of the stacking system subsequently changes, thereby rendering the existing configuration obsolete. In this case, the errors in the existing configuration can be identified and automatically corrected. In scenarios where there is a non-critical conflict between the physical topology and the trunking configuration, certain rules may be applied to determine whether the configuration should be changed in view of the topology or left intact.
2. Exemplary Stacking System
To provide context for the embodiments described herein,
In the example of
Further, in
As noted in the Background section, one difficulty with managing a complex stacking system such as stacking system 200 of
To address the foregoing and other similar issues, embodiments of the present invention provide techniques for (1) automatically creating/configuring stacking trunks in a stacking system based on the system's physical topology; (2) automatically detecting and identifying incorrect physical connections; and (3) automatically modifying/correcting existing trunking configurations in view of topology changes. With these techniques (which are described in the sections that follow), many of the inefficiencies and burdens associated with manual stacking trunk configuration/management can be minimized or eliminated.
3. Automated Trunk Creation
At block 302, the receiving switch can receive a discovery packet on a stacking port from a given source switch in the stacking system. In response, the receiving switch can check whether a discovery packet was previously received from the same source switch (block 304). If not, flowchart 300 can loop back to block 302.
If the receiving switch did previously receive a discovery packet from the same source switch, the receiving switch can then check whether the ports on which the current discovery packet and the previous discovery packet were received are consecutive ports (i.e., numbered with consecutive port numbers) (block 306). If not, flowchart 300 can loop back to block 302.
On the other hand, if the current and previous discovery packets were received on consecutive ports, the receiving switch can finally check whether the current and previous discovery packets were sent from consecutive source ports (i.e., consecutively numbered ports on the source switch) (block 308). In one embodiment, the receiving switch can determine this by evaluating the content of the discovery packets (which should identify the source port number). If not, flowchart 300 can loop back to block 302. Otherwise, the receiving switch can determine that the ports on which the two discovery packets were received can be trunked, and can forward this information to the master switch in the stacking system (block 310).
Although not shown in
In some cases, there may be more than two stacking links connecting a source and a receiving switch, where the links use consecutive ports on both ends. In these situations, a deterministic rule may be used to determine which subset of the ports will be used to a form a stacking trunk. One such rule is to form a stacking trunk comprising two ports, where the first port of the trunk is an odd numbered port and the second port of the trunk is an even numbered port.
To better clarify the operation of flowchart 300, consider a scenario where switch 202 of
One important aspect of the discovery mechanism described with respect to
To ensure the foregoing behavior, each switch in the stacking system can enforce a number of rules at the point of determining whether to forward a received discovery packet. For instance, in one embodiment, if the switch is a core unit and has received a discovery packet from a peripheral unit, the switch will not propagate the packet any further. The logic for this rule is that the packet has received the “end” of the peripheral sub-stack in the topology.
In a further embodiment, each switch can enforce a rule where, if a port can form a trunk with the port on which the discovery packet is received, the packet is not forwarded on that “trunkable” port.
In yet a further embodiment, each switch can enforce a rule where discovery packets are not forwarded on user data ports.
In yet a further embodiment, each switch can enforce a rule where discovery packets are not forwarded on ports that lead back to the immediate source of the received packets. One exception to this rule is that discovery packets may be forwarded back to a source unit on ports that are different from (and not trunkable with) the port(s) on which the packets were received.
In some embodiments, the administrator of a stacking system may wish to exclude certain physically connected units from the system's “active” topology. In these cases, the administrator can define a policy for pruning one or more stacking links in the topology, and the system can take this policy in account to prevent the propagation of discovery packets across the pruned links.
4. Incorrect Physical Topology Detection/Reporting
In addition to automated trunk creation, the discovery mechanism described above may also be leveraged to automatically detect whether there are any incorrect physical connections in a stacking system topology (i.e., connections that prevent the formation of valid trunks). If one or more incorrect connections are found, the location of the connections can be reported to the system administrator for resolution.
At block 402, the receiving switch can receive two discovery packets on two consecutive ports (i.e., the ports are candidates for forming a trunk on the receiving side). In response, the receiving switch can check whether the source unit for the two discovery packets are the same (i.e., did the packets arrive from the same unit?) (block 404). If not, the receiving switch can determine there is likely an incorrect physical connection and can report an error to the system administrator (with information identifying, e.g., the receiving switch's ID and/or MAC address, the source switches' IDs and/or MAC addresses, and the receiving switch port numbers) (block 410). With this information, the system administrator can quick identify the problem and address the issue (by, e.g., rearranging one or more physical cables).
If the source unit for the two discovery packets is the same, the receiving switch can move on to checking whether the source ports for the two packets are consecutive (block 406). As noted with respect to
5. Automated Trunk Configuration Correction
As discussed previously, in certain cases the existing trunking configuration for a stacking system may become inconsistent with the system's physical topology over time. For example, one or more switch units may be swapped in from a different system with a different configuration/topology, or one or more units in the system may be rearranged. In these cases, it can be extremely difficult to manually correct the configuration, since it can be difficult to pinpoint the consistencies (particularly in large and/or complex topologies). To address this,
At block 502, the switch can create a bit mask of all of the existing ports and trunks in the switch's existing configuration. Further, at block 504, the switch can mask out, in the bit mask, all of the ports and trunks found for the switch during the topology discovery process. If there any remaining links in the bitmask, those links are added to the list of discovered links (block 506). Thus, blocks 502-506 essentially allow the switch to identify the discrepancies between the existing configuration and the discovered topology (i.e., which links are in the configuration but not in the topology, and vice versa).
At block 508, the switch can apply a set of rules to determine which of the determined discrepancies will result to a change in the switch's trunking configuration. In one set of embodiments, these rules can include the following:
Finally, at block 510, the switch can generate its new (i.e., final) trunking configuration based on the application of rules at block 508 and flowchart 500 can end.
6. Exemplary Network Switch
As shown, network switch 600 includes a management module 602, a switch fabric module 604, and a number of I/O modules 606(1)-606(N). Management module 602 represents the control plane of network switch 600 and thus includes one or more management CPUs 608 for managing/controlling the operation of the device. Each management CPU 608 can be a general purpose processor, such as a PowerPC, Intel, AMD, or ARM-based processor, that operates under the control of software stored in an associated memory (not shown).
Switch fabric module 604 and I/O modules 606(1)-606(N) collectively represent the data, or forwarding, plane of network switch 600. Switch fabric module 604 is configured to interconnect the various other modules of network switch 600. Each I/O module 606(1)-606(N) can include one or more input/output ports 610(1)-610(N) that are used by network switch 600 to send and receive data packets. As noted with respect to
It should be appreciated that network switch 600 is illustrative and not intended to limit embodiments of the present invention. Many other configurations having more or fewer components than switch 600 are possible.
The above description illustrates various embodiments of the present invention along with examples of how aspects of the present invention may be implemented. The above examples and embodiments should not be deemed to be the only embodiments, and are presented to illustrate the flexibility and advantages of the present invention as defined by the following claims. For example, although certain embodiments have been described with respect to particular process flows and steps, it should be apparent to those skilled in the art that the scope of the present invention is not strictly limited to the described flows and steps. Steps described as sequential may be executed in parallel, order of steps may be varied, and steps may be modified, combined, added, or omitted. As another example, although certain embodiments have been described using a particular combination of hardware and software, it should be recognized that other combinations of hardware and software are possible, and that specific operations described as being implemented in software can also be implemented in hardware and vice versa.
The specification and drawings are, accordingly, to be regarded in an illustrative rather than restrictive sense. Other arrangements, embodiments, implementations and equivalents will be evident to those skilled in the art and may be employed without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the following claims.
The present application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/268,507, filed May 2, 2014, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,185,049, issued Nov. 10, 2015, entitled “TECHNIQUES FOR SIMPLIFYING STACKING TRUNK CREATION AND MANAGEMENT”, which claims the benefit and priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/898,295, filed Oct. 31, 2013, entitled “TECHNIQUES FOR SIMPLIFYING STACKING TRUNK CREATION AND MANAGEMENT,” the entire contents of which are incorporated herein by reference for all purposes.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4625308 | Kim et al. | Nov 1986 | A |
5481073 | Singer et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5651003 | Pearce et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
6111672 | Davis et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6243756 | Whitmire et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6366582 | Nishikado | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6373840 | Chen | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6490276 | Salett et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6496502 | Fite, Jr. et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6516345 | Kracht | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6526345 | Ryoo | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6597658 | Simmons | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6725326 | Patra et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6765877 | Foschiano et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6807182 | Dolphin et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6839342 | Parham et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6839349 | Ambe et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6850542 | Tzeng | Feb 2005 | B2 |
7093027 | Shabtay et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7099315 | Ambe et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7106736 | Kalkunte | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7136289 | Vasavda et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7184441 | Kadambi | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7206283 | Chang et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7206309 | Pegrum et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7274694 | Cheng et al. | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7313667 | Pullela et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7327727 | Rich et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7336622 | Fallis et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7426179 | Harshavardhana et al. | Sep 2008 | B1 |
7480258 | Shuen et al. | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7496096 | Dong et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7523227 | Yager et al. | Apr 2009 | B1 |
7565343 | Watanabe | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7602787 | Cheriton | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7697419 | Donthi | Apr 2010 | B1 |
7933282 | Gupta et al. | Apr 2011 | B1 |
8209457 | Engel et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8307153 | Kishore | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8750144 | Zhou et al. | Jun 2014 | B1 |
8949574 | Slavin | Feb 2015 | B2 |
9032057 | Agarwal et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9038151 | Chua et al. | May 2015 | B1 |
9148387 | Lin et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9185049 | Agarwal et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9269439 | Levy et al. | Feb 2016 | B1 |
9282058 | Lin et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9313102 | Lin et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9559897 | Lin et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9577932 | Ravipati et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
20010042062 | Tenev et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020046271 | Huang | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020101867 | O'Callaghan et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20030005149 | Haas et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030169734 | Lu et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030174719 | Sampath et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030188065 | Golla | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20050063354 | Garnett et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050141513 | Oh et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050198453 | Osaki | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050243739 | Anderson et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050271044 | Hsu et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060013212 | Singh et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060023640 | Chang et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060072571 | Navada et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060077910 | Lundin et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060080498 | Shoham et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060092849 | Santoso et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060092853 | Santoso | May 2006 | A1 |
20060176721 | Kim et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060187900 | Akbar | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060253557 | Talayco et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060280125 | Ramanan et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060294297 | Gupta | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070081463 | Bohra | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070121673 | Hammer | May 2007 | A1 |
20070174537 | Kao et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20080137530 | Fallis et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080192754 | Ku et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080259555 | Bechtolsheim et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080275975 | Pandey | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080281947 | Kumar | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090125617 | Klessig et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090135715 | Bennah | May 2009 | A1 |
20090141641 | Akahane et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20100172365 | Baird et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100182933 | Hu | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100185893 | Wang et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100257283 | Agarwal | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100284414 | Agarwal et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100293200 | Assarpour | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100329111 | Wan et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110238923 | Hooker et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110268123 | Kopelman et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120020373 | Subramanian et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120087232 | Hanabe et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120155485 | Saha et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120246400 | Bhadra et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20130170495 | Suzuki et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130201984 | Wang | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130215791 | Lin et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130232193 | Ali et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130262377 | Agarwal | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20140003228 | Shah et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140006706 | Wang | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140071985 | Kompella et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140075108 | Dong et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140112190 | Chou et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140112192 | Chou et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140122791 | Fingerhut | May 2014 | A1 |
20140126354 | Hui et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140153573 | Ramesh et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140181275 | Lin et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140269402 | Vasseur et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140314082 | Korpinen et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140334494 | Lin et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140341079 | Lin et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140341080 | Lin et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140376361 | Hui et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150016277 | Smith | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150036479 | Gopalarathnam | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150055452 | Lee | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150117263 | Agarwal et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150124826 | Edsall et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150229565 | Ravipati et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150281055 | Lin et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150288567 | Lin et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20160173332 | Agarwal et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160173339 | Lin et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2924927 | Sep 2015 | EP |
2015026950 | Feb 2015 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Amendment to Carrier Multiple Access with Collision Detection (CSMA/CD Access Method and Physical Layer Specifications—Aggregation of Multi[ple Link Segments; IEEE Std. 802.3ad; 2000; 183 pages. |
Appeal Brief Dated Jan. 18, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 12/463,964 (23p.) |
Brocade: “FastIron Ethernet Switch”; Administration Guide; Supporting FastIron Software Release 08.0.00; Apr. 30, 2013; 400 pages. |
Brocade: “FastIron Ethernet Switch”; IP Multicast Configuration Guide; Supporting FastIron Software Release 08.0.00; Apr. 30, 2013; 212 pages. |
Brocade: “FastIron Ethernet Switch”; Stacking Configuration Guide; Supporting FastIron Software Release 08.0.00; Apr. 30, 2013; 170 pages. |
Brocade: “FastIron Ethernet Switch”; Traffic Management Guide; Supporting FastIron Software Release 08.0.00; Apr. 30, 2013; 76 pages. |
Cisco: “Cisco StackWise and StackWise Plus Technology”; technical white paper; C11-377239-01; Oct. 2010; Copyright 2010; 11 pages. |
Cisco: “Delivering High Availability in the Wiring Closet with Cisco Catalyst Switches”; technical white paper; C11-340384-01; Jan. 2007; Copyright 1992-2007; 8 pages. |
Configure, Verify, and Debug Link Aggregation Control Program (LACP); allied Telesyn; 2004; 10 pages. |
Dell: “Stacking Dell PowerConnect 7000 Series Switches”; A Dell Technical White Paper; Jul. 2011; 34 pages. |
DLDP Techology White Paper; H3C products and solutions; 2008; 8 pages; http://www.h3c.com/portal/Products—Solutions/Technology/LAN/Technology—White—Paper/200812/623012—57—0.htm. |
Examiner's Answer Dated May 7, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 12/463,964 (12 p.). |
Extreme Networks Technical Brief: “SummitStack Stacking Technology”; 1346—06; Dec. 2010; 8 pages. |
Final Office Action Dated Jan. 23, 2012; U.S. Appl. No. 12/463,964 (11 p.). |
Fischer et al.: “A Scalable ATM Switching System Architecture”; IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, IEEE Service Center, Piscataway, US, vol. 9, No. 8, Oct. 1, 1991; pp. 1299-1307. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Appln. No. PCT/US2013/076251 dated May 22, 2014, 11 pages. |
Juniper Networks datasheet entitled: “Juniper Networks EX 4200 Ethernet Switches with Virtual Chassis Technology”; Dated Aug. 2013 (12 p.). |
Link Aggregation According to IEEE Standard 802.3ad; SysKonnect GmbH; 2002; 22 pages. |
Link Aggregation; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link—aggregation; downloaded from Internet on Dec. 16, 2013; 9 pages. |
M. Foschiano; Cisco Systems UniDirectional Link Detection (UDLD) Protocol; Memo; Apr. 2008; 13 pages; Cisco Systems. |
Migration from Cisco UDLD to industry standard DLDP; technical white paper; Feb. 2012; 12 pages; Hewlett-Packard Development Company. |
Office Action dated Mar. 21, 2011; U.S. Appl. No. 12/463,964 (10 P.). |
Partial International Search Report for PCT/US2014/051903 dated Nov. 18, 2014. |
Reply Brief Dated Jul. 8, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 12/463,964 (14 p.). |
Response to Office Action Dated Mar. 21, 2011; U.S. Appl. No. 12/463,964; Response filed Sep. 21, 2011 (12 p.). |
Suckfuell: “Evolution of EWSD During the Eighties”; Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; Global Telecommunications Conference; San Diego; Nov. 28-Dec. 1, 1983; [Global Telecommunications Conference], New York, IEEE, US, vol. 2, Nov. 1, 1983; pp. 577-581. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/094,931, filed Dec. 3, 2013 by Lin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/106,302, filed Dec. 13, 2013 by Lin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/171,152, filed Feb. 3, 2014 by Lin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/207,146, filed Mar. 12, 2014 by Lin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/268,507, filed May 2, 2014 by Agarwal. (Unpublished.). |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/463,419, filed Aug. 19, 2014 by Lee (Unpublished.). |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/485,343, filed Sep. 12, 2014 by Lin et al. (Unpublished.). |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/506,943, filed Oct. 6, 2014 by Lin et al. (Unpublished.). |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/530,193, filed Oct. 31, 2014 by Ravipati et al. (Unpublished.). |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/745,396, filed Dec. 21, 2012 by Lin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/799,093, filed Mar. 15, 2013 by Lin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/822,216, filed May 10, 2013 by Lin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/825,449, filed May 20, 2013 by Lin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/825,451, filed May 20, 2013 by Lin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/868,982, filed Aug. 22, 2013 by Lee. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/898,295, filed Oct. 31, 2013 by Agarwal. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/938,805, filed Feb. 12, 2014 by Ravipati et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/971,429, filed Mar. 27, 2014 by Sinha et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/974,924, filed Apr. 3, 2014 by Lin et al. |
Understanding and Configuring the Undirectional Link Detection Protocol Feature; Cisco support communication; Jul. 9, 2007; Document ID No. 10591; 5 pages; http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/spanning-tree-protocol/10591-77.html. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Appln. No. PCT/US2014/051903 dated Jan. 27, 2015, 16 pages. |
Final Office Action Dated Feb. 13, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 13/850,118; (14 p.). |
Office Action Dated Jul. 16, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 14/094,931; (41 pgs.). |
Notice of Allowance dated Aug. 3, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 14/207,146 (38 pgs.). |
Pei et al.: “Putting Routing Tables in Silicon”, IEEE Network, IEEE Service Center, New York, NY; vol. 6, No. 1, Jan. 1, 1992; pp. 42-50. |
Hsiao et al.: “A High-Throughput and High-Capacity IPv6 Routing Lookup System”, Computer Networks, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam, NL, vol. 57, No. 3, Nov. 16, 2012, pp. 782-794. |
Extended European Search Report dated Jul. 30, 2015 for EP Appln. 15000834.0; 8 pages. |
Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 17, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 14/268,507 (15 pgs.). |
Final Office Action Dated Jun. 3, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/106,302; (35 pgs.). |
Office Action Dated Apr. 29, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/485,343; (72 pgs.). |
Notice of Allowance dated Dec. 14, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 14/094,931 (25 pgs.). |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/869,743, filed Sep. 29, 2015 by Agarwal et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 62/092,617, filed Dec. 16, 2014 by Agarwal et al. |
Office Action Dated Feb. 18, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/463,419; (74 pgs.). |
Office Action Dated Feb. 23, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/171,152; (61 pgs.). |
Final Office Action Dated Aug. 24, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/171,152; (39 pgs.). |
Notice of Allowance Dated Oct. 13, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/106,302; (23 pgs.). |
Final Office Action Dated Nov. 1, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/485,343; (31 pgs.). |
NonFinal Office Action Dated Nov. 9, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/506,943; (18 pgs.). |
Rooney et al: “Associative Ternary Cache for IP Routing”, IEEE, pp. 409-416, 2004. |
“Starburst: Building Next-Generation Internet Devices”, Sharp et al., Bell Labs Technical Journal, Lucent Technologies, Inc., pp. 6-17, 2002. |
NonFinal Office Action Dated Jun. 23, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/530,193; (73 pgs.). |
Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 30, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 13/850,118 (12 pgs.). |
Response to Office Action Dated Jul. 16, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 14/094,931; Response filed Nov. 12, 2015 (13 p.). |
Office Action Dated Nov. 20, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 14/106,302; (14 pgs.). |
Notice of Allowance Dated Jan. 6, 2017; U.S. Appl. No. 14/530,193; (18 pgs.). |
Final Office Action Dated Jan. 26, 2017; U.S. Appl. No. 14/463,419; (57 pgs.). |
NonFinal Office Action Dated Mar. 23, 2017; U.S. Appl. No. 14/171,152; (14 pgs.). |
Notice of Allowance Dated Mar. 22, 2017; U.S. Appl. No. 14/506,943; (22 pgs.). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160028652 A1 | Jan 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61898295 | Oct 2013 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14268507 | May 2014 | US |
Child | 14876639 | US |