Source: http://www.google.es/patents/US9003035
Timestamp: 2017-09-22 17:20:12
Document Index: 667607194

Matched Legal Cases: ['Application No. 2011', 'Application No. 201006874', 'Application No. 201103333', 'Application No. 2011', 'Application No. 2011', 'Application No. 2013', 'Application No. 2011307319', 'Application No. 2726915', 'Application No. 2741895', 'Application No. 2741895', 'Application No. 200780020255', 'Application No. 200980119993', 'Application No. 200980119995', 'Application No. 3742', 'Application No. 2011', 'Application No. 2011', 'Application No. 2013', 'Application No. 10', 'Application No. 201180053405', 'Application No. 201310717573', 'Application No. 201103333', 'Application No. 201301573', 'Application No. 201006873', 'Application No. 200980111426', 'Application No. 200980119993', 'Application No. 2011', 'Application No. 201006837', 'Application No. 201006836', 'Application No. 201006836', 'Application No. 200980111426', 'Application No. 201303521']

Patente US9003035 - Point of presence management in request routing - Google Patentes
A system and method for the management of client computing device DNS queries and subsequent resource requests within a content delivery network service provider domain are provided. The management of the DNS queries can include the selection of computing devices corresponding to various Point of Presence...http://www.google.es/patents/US9003035?utm_source=gb-gplus-sharePatente US9003035 - Point of presence management in request routing
Número de publicación US9003035 B1
Número de solicitud US 12/892,818
Fecha de prioridad 28 Sep 2010
También publicado como US20150172379
Número de publicación 12892818, 892818, US 9003035 B1, US 9003035B1, US-B1-9003035, US9003035 B1, US9003035B1
Inventores David R. Richardson, John Cormie, Colm MacCarthaigh, Benjamin W. S. Redman
Citas de patentes (638), Otras citas (110), Citada por (40), Clasificaciones (11), Eventos legales (1)
US 9003035 B1
A system and method for the management of client computing device DNS queries and subsequent resource requests within a content delivery network service provider domain are provided. The management of the DNS queries can include the selection of computing devices corresponding to various Point of Presence locations for processing DNS queries. Additionally, the management of the content requests can include the selection of computing devices corresponding to resource cache components corresponding to various Point of Presence locations for providing requested content. The selection of the computing devices can incorporate logic related to geographic criteria, testing criteria, and the like.
1. A computer-implemented method for processing content requests comprising:
obtaining, by a content delivery network (CDN) service provider, at a first DNS server a DNS query from a client computing device, wherein the DNS query corresponds to a requested resource, wherein the DNS query is associated with an original resource identifier which corresponds to a uniform resource locator such that the DNS query resolves to a domain corresponding to the CDN service provider;
dynamically identifying two or more alternative DNS servers operative to receive DNS queries;
determining a calculated maximum distance for individual ones of the two or more alternative DNS servers, the calculated maximum distance determined as a product of a latency time between respective individual ones of the two or more alternative DNS servers and a reference node in the communication network;
selecting an alternative DNS server from the identified two or more alternative DNS servers, the alternative DNS server being selected as a function of at least a comparison between a threshold maximum distance and the calculated maximum distance associated with individual ones of the two or more alternative DNS servers;
transmitting an alternative resource identifier corresponding to the selected alternative DNS server to the client computing device;
obtaining a subsequent DNS query from the client computing device at the selected alternative DNS server, wherein the subsequent DNS query corresponds to the alternative resource identifier provided by the CDN service provider;
determining whether the selected alternative DNS server is authoritative to the subsequent DNS query;
selecting a cache component for providing content associated with the original resource identifier if the selected alternative DNS server is authoritative to the subsequent DNS query; and
transmitting information identifying the selected cache component if the selected alternative DNS server is determined to be authoritative.
2. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the selected alternative DNS server corresponds to the CDN service provider.
3. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the original resource identifier is provided by a content provider and wherein the content provider is different from the CDN service provider.
5. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the original resource identifier and the alternative resource identifier include information identifying a same domain corresponding to the CDN service provider.
6. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the original resource identifier includes information identifying a first domain corresponding to the CDN service provider and wherein the alternative resource identifier includes information identifying a second domain corresponding to the CDN service provider.
7. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the original resource identifier is provided by at least one of a content provider or a CDN service provider, the CDN service provider different from the content provider.
8. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the reference node corresponds to the client computing device.
9. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the reference node corresponds to a communication network node.
10. The method as recited in claim 9, wherein the reference node corresponds to at least one of mobile network infrastructure equipment, a DNS server, a DNS resolver component, or a router.
11. A system for request routing comprising:
a first network point of presence associated with a content delivery network (CDN) service provider, wherein the first network point of presence includes a DNS server that receives a DNS query from a client computing device, wherein the DNS query corresponds to requested content associated with an original resource identifier, and wherein the DNS server in the first network point of presence includes a hardware component and is operative to:
identify two or more alternative DNS servers operative to receive DNS queries;
determine a calculated maximum distance for individual ones of the two or more alternative DNS servers, the calculated maximum distance determined as a product of a latency time and a speed of transmission, the latency time being between respective individual ones of the two or more alternative DNS servers and a reference node;
select an alternative DNS server from the identified two or more alternative DNS servers, the alternative DNS server being selected as a function of at least a comparison between a threshold maximum distance and the calculated maximum distance associated with individual ones of the two or more alternative DNS servers; and
transmit an alternative resource identifier corresponding to the selected alternative DNS server to the client computing device; and
a second network point of presence, wherein the second network point of presence includes the selected alternative DNS server and wherein the selected alternative DNS server includes a hardware component and is operative to:
obtain a subsequent DNS query from the client computing device, wherein the subsequent DNS query corresponds to the alternative resource identifier provided by the CDN service provider;
determine whether the selected alternative DNS server is authoritative to the subsequent DNS query;
select a cache component for providing content associated with the original resource identifier if the selected alternative DNS server is authoritative to the subsequent DNS query; and
transmit information identifying the selected cache component if the selected alternative DNS server is determined to be authoritative.
12. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein the second network point of presence is associated with the CDN service provider.
13. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein the original resource identifier is provided by a content provider and wherein the content provider is different from the CDN service provider.
14. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein the alternative resource identifier corresponds to a canonical name record identifier.
15. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein information identifying the identified cache component to the client computing device includes a network address of a cache component in the second network point of presence.
16. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein information identifying the identified cache component to the client computing device includes a network address of a cache component in another network point of presence.
17. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein the original resource identifier and the alternative resource identifier include information identifying a same domain corresponding to the CDN service provider.
18. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein the original resource identifier includes information identifying a first domain corresponding to the CDN service provider and wherein the alternative resource identifier includes information identifying a second domain corresponding to the CDN service provider.
19. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein the original resource identifier is provided by at least one of a content provider or a CDN service provider, the CDN service provider different from the content provider.
20. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein the reference node corresponds to the client computing device.
21. The system as recited in claim 11, wherein the reference node corresponds to a communication network node.
22. The system as recited in claim 21, wherein the reference node corresponds to at least one of mobile network infrastructure equipment, a DNS server, a DNS resolver component, or a router.
FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrative of content delivery environment 100 for the management and processing of content requests. As illustrated in FIG. 1, the content delivery environment 100 includes a number of client computing devices 102 (generally referred to as clients) for requesting content from a content provider, a CDN service provider, or other service provider. In an illustrative embodiment, the client computing devices 102 can correspond to a wide variety of computing devices, including personal computing devices, laptop computing devices, hand-held computing devices, terminal computing devices, mobile devices, wireless devices, various electronic devices and appliances and the like. In an illustrative embodiment, the client computing devices 102 include necessary hardware and software components for establishing communications over a communication network 108, such as a wide area network or local area network. For example, the client computing devices 102 may be equipped with networking equipment and browser software applications that facilitate communications via the Internet or an intranet.
Illustratively, the CDN service provider 106 returns an identification of applicable domains for the CDN service provider (unless it has been previously provided) and any additional information to the content provider 104. In turn, the content provider 104 can then process the stored content with content provider specific information. In one example, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the content provider 104 translates resource identifiers originally directed toward a domain of the origin server 112 to a domain corresponding to the CDN service provider. The translated URLs are embedded into requested content in a manner such that DNS queries for the translated URLs will resolve to a DNS sever server corresponding to the CDN service provider 106 and not a DNS server corresponding to the content provider 104. Although the translation process is illustrated in FIG. 2, in some embodiments, the translation process may be omitted in a manner described in greater detail below.
Upon receipt of the requested content, the client computing device 102, such as through a browser software application, begins processing any of the markup code included in the content and attempts to acquire the resources identified by the embedded resource identifiers. Accordingly, the first step in acquiring the content corresponds to the issuance, by the client computing device 102 (through its local DNS resolver), a DNS query for the original URL resource identifier that results in the identification of a DNS server authoritative to the “.” and the “com” portions of the translated URL. After resolving the “.” and “com” portions of the embedded URL, the client computing device 102 then issues a DNS query for the resource URL that results in the identification of a DNS server authoritative to the “.cdnprovider” portion of the embedded URL. The issuance of DNS queries corresponding to the “.” and the “com” portions of a URL are well known and have not been illustrated.
If at decision block 804 the DNS server is not authoritative, at block 806, the DNS server component selects an alternative DNS server. As described above, in one embodiment, the receiving DNS server can select an alternative DNS server by utilizing an alternative resource identifier, such as a CNAME. In this embodiment, the receiving DNS server component can utilize a data store to identify an appropriate CNAME as a function of the current DNS query. Additionally, the DNS server component can also implement additional logical processing to select from a set of potential CNAMEs. In another embodiment, the receiving DNS server can forward the DNS query via the communication network to another DNS sever server component. Two example sub-routines for selection of the alternative DNS server will be described with regard to FIGS. 9 and 10. The routine 800 returns to block 802 where another DNS server component of the CDN service provider 106 receives the forwarded DNS query or a subsequent DNS query corresponding to a returned CNAME.
In one embodiment, a receiving DNS server component may be authoritative because it can resolve the DNS query. However, the CDN service provider 106 may wish to have another authoritative server resolve the request. For example, the CDN service provider 106 may wish to balance the request requests among several DNS servers. In another example, the CDN service provider 106 may wish to test the performance of the DNS server component associated with other POPs in the CDN service providers domain. If the DNS server component is determined to select an alternative server, at block 810, the receiving DNS server selects an alternative DNS servers. As described above, in one embodiment, the receiving DNS server can select an alternative DNS server by utilizing an alternative resource identifier, such as a CNAME. In this embodiment, the receiving DNS server component can utilize a data store to identify an appropriate CNAME as a function of the current DNS query. Additionally, the DNS server component can also implement additional logical processing to select from a set of potential CNAMEs. In another embodiment, the receiving DNS server can forward the DNS query via the communication network to another DNS server component. Two example sub-routines for selection of the alternative DNS server will be described with regard to FIGS. 9 and 10. The routine 800 returns to block 802 where another DNS server component of the CDN service provider 106 receives the forwarded DNS query or a subsequent DNS query corresponding to a returned CNAME.
At block 1002, the DNS server obtains performance measurement information for a set of target POPs in the CDN service provider domain. In an illustrative embodiment, the set of target POPs can correspond to all the POPs within a CDN service provider 106 domain or a subset of POPs identified by other criteria, such as service level plans, geographic limitations, and the like. In one embodiment, the performance measurement information can correspond to values related to latency measurement information for providing resources. The latency information can be associated with the requesting client computing device 102, such as latency information from previous interactions with the specific client computing device. The latency information can also be associated with groupings of client computing devices 102, such as by ISP, geographic location, enterprise networks, DNS resolver components, and the like. One skilled in the relevant art will appreciate that additional or alternative performance measurement information may also be utilized or combined.
With reference to FIG. 11, assume that a portion of the communication network 108 includes a number of nodes 1102-1128. Assume that the client computing device 102 corresponds to node 1102 and that CDN service provider's domain includes POPs corresponding to nodes 1116, 1118 and 1124. As also illustrated in FIG. 11, the actual path of communications between node 1102 and 1116, path 1130, corresponds to network intermediate communications through nodes 1110, 1112 and 1114. Likewise, the actual path of communications between node 1102 and 1118, path 1134, corresponds to network intermediate communications through node 1110. Still further, the actual path of communications between node 1102 and 1124, path 1134, corresponds to network intermediate communications through nodes 1108, 1120, and 1122. With reference now to FIG. 12, it can be assumed that the maximum distance between node 1102 and nodes 1116, 1118 and 1124, respectively paths 1130, 1132 and 1134 is a straight line between the two nodes the distance of which is the product of the latency in communications and the maximum speed of communications (e.g., the speed of light). In this embodiment, the latency caused by the intermediate nodes in the actual network paths is ignored for purposes of determining the maximum geographic distance between the starting nodes and the POPs.
At decision block 1008, a test is conducted to determine whether the maximum distance associated with the currently selected POP is above the maximum geographic threshold allowed for a POP. If not, the POP is added to a set of POPs available for selection at block 1010. FIG. 13 illustrates the three calculated maximum distances for paths 1130, 1132, 1134 between node 1102 and nodes 1116, 1118, and 1124, respectively. Additionally, the maximum geographic threshold is illustrated as a circle 1136 having a radius corresponding to the calculated maximum geographic threshold from the central node in any direction. As illustrated in FIG. 13, the calculated maximum geographic distance for path 1130 and 1132 is within the maximum geographic threshold 1136, while the calculated maximum geographic distance for path 1134 is above the maximum geographic threshold 1136. One skilled in the relevant art will appreciate that alternative geographic shapes or multiple geographic maximums may be implemented.
Any process descriptions, elements, or blocks in the flow diagrams described herein and/or depicted in the attached figures should be understood as potentially representing modules, segments, or portions of code which include one or more executable instructions for implementing specific logical functions or steps in the process. Alternate implementations are included within the scope of the embodiments described herein in which elements or functions may be deleted, executed out of order from that shown or discussed, including substantially concurrently or in reverse order, depending on the functionality involved, as would be understood by those skilled in the art. It will further be appreciated that the data and/or components described above may be stored on a computer-readable medium and loaded into memory of the computing device using a drive mechanism associated with a computer-readable medium storing the computer executable components, such as a CD-ROM, DVD-ROM, or network interface; further, the component and/or data can be included in a single device or distributed in any manner. Accordingly, general purpose computing devices may be configured to implement the processes, algorithms and methodology of the present disclosure with the processing and/or execution of the various data and/or components described above.
US7065587 * 29 Ago 2001 20 Jun 2006 Microsoft Corporation Peer-to-peer name resolution protocol (PNRP) and multilevel cache for use therewith
US7152118 * 25 Feb 2002 19 Dic 2006 Broadcom Corporation System, method and computer program product for caching domain name system information on a network gateway
US7653700 * 16 Nov 2000 26 Ene 2010 Microsoft Corporation System and method for performing client-centric load balancing of multiple globally-dispersed servers
US20010025305 27 Dic 2000 27 Sep 2001 Masahiro Yoshiasa Contents acquiring device, contents acquiring method, contents server and contents acquiring system
US20050163168 * 8 Dic 2004 28 Jul 2005 Sheth Samir S. Apparatus and method for fibre channel distance extension embedded within an optical transport system
US20060227740 * 29 Mar 2006 12 Oct 2006 Stephen Mclaughlin Method of operating a telecommunications network
US20080162821 27 Dic 2006 3 Jul 2008 Duran Louis A Hard disk caching with automated discovery of cacheable files
US20100088405 * 8 Oct 2008 8 Abr 2010 Microsoft Corporation Determining Network Delay and CDN Deployment
US20100161799 18 Dic 2008 24 Jun 2010 At&T Corp. System and Method for Obtaining Content from a Content Delivery Network
US20140143320 27 Ene 2014 22 May 2014 Amazon Technologies, Inc. Content management
JP2002044137A Título no disponible
JP2005537687A Título no disponible
JP2005537687T5 Título no disponible
JP2012209623A Título no disponible
JP20010506093A Título no disponible
2 "Grid Computing Solutions," Sun Microsystems, Inc., retrieved May 3, 2008, from http://www.sun.com/software/grid, 3 pages.
30 Decision of Rejection in Japanese Application No. 2011-502139 dated Jun. 30, 2014.
31 Deleuze, C., et al., A DNS Based Mapping Peering System for Peering CDNs, draft-deleuze-cdnp-dnsmap-peer-00.txt, Nov. 20, 2000, 20 pages.
32 Demers, A., "Epidemic Algorithms for Replicated Database Maintenance," 1987, Proceedings of the sixth annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, Aug. 10-12, 1987, 12 pages.
33 Examination Report in Singapore Application No. 201006874-0 dated May 16, 2012.
34 Examination Report in Singapore Application No. 201103333-9 dated Aug. 13, 2013.
40 First Office Action in Japanese Application No. 2011-502139 dated Nov. 5, 2013.
41 First Office Action in Japanese Application No. 2011-503091 dated Nov. 18, 2013.
42 First Office Action in Japanese Application No. 2013-529454 mailed Feb. 3, 2014 in 6 pages.
43 First Office Action issued in Australian Application No. 2011307319 mailed Mar. 6, 2014 in 5 pages.
44 Gruener, J., "A Vision of Togetherness," May 24, 2004, NetworkWorld, retrieved May 3, 2006, from, http://www.networkworld.com/supp/2004/ndc3/0524virt.html, 9 pages.
45 * Gunther et al, "Measuring Round Trip Times to determine the Distance between WLAN Nodes", Dec. 18, 2004, Technical University Berlin, all pages.
46 International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion in PCT/US2010/060567 mailed on Jun. 19, 2012.
47 International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion in PCT/US2010/060569 mailed Jun. 19, 2012.
48 International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion in PCT/US2010/060573 mailed Jun. 19, 2012.
49 International Preliminary Report on Patentability in PCT/US2007/007601 mailed Sep. 30, 2008 in 8 pages.
50 International Preliminary Report on Patentability in PCT/US2011/053302 mailed Apr. 2, 2013.
51 International Preliminary Report on Patentability in PCT/US2011/061486 mailed May 22, 2013.
52 International Search Report and Written Opinion in PCT/US07/07601 mailed Jul. 18, 2008 in 11 pages.
53 International Search Report and Written Opinion in PCT/US2010/060567 mailed on Mar. 28, 2012.
54 International Search Report and Written Opinion in PCT/US2011/053302 mailed Nov. 28, 2011 in 11 pages.
55 International Search Report and Written Opinion in PCT/US2011/061486 mailed Mar. 30, 2012 in 11 pages.
56 Ioannidis, S., et al., "Implementing a Distributed Firewall," Nov. 2000, (ACM) Proceedings of the ACM Computer and Communications Security (CCS) 2000, Athens, Greece, pp. 190-199, retrieved from http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~dls/STRONGMAN/Papers/df.pdf, 10 pages.
57 Ioannidis, S., et al., "Implementing a Distributed Firewall," Nov. 2000, (ACM) Proceedings of the ACM Computer and Communications Security (CCS) 2000, Athens, Greece, pp. 190-199, retrieved from http://www.cis.upenn.edu/˜dls/STRONGMAN/Papers/df.pdf, 10 pages.
58 Joseph, Joshy, et al., "Introduction to Grid Computing," Apr. 16, 2004, retrieved Aug. 30, 2007, from http://www.informit.com/articles/printerfriendly.aspx?p=169508, 19 pages.
59 Kenshi, P., "Help File Library: Iptables Basics," Justlinux, retrieved Dec. 1, 2005, from http://www.justlinux.com/nhf/Security/Iptables-Basics.html, 4 pages.
60 Kenshi, P., "Help File Library: Iptables Basics," Justlinux, retrieved Dec. 1, 2005, from http://www.justlinux.com/nhf/Security/Iptables—Basics.html, 4 pages.
61 Kounev, S., et al., Autonomic QoS-Aware Resource Management in Grid Computing Using Online Performance Models, 2007, ICST, Valuetools, 2007, 10 pages.
62 Liu et al., "Combined mining of Web server logs and web contents for classifying user navigation patterns and predicting users' future requests," Data & Knowledge Engineering 61 (2007) pp. 304-330.
63 Maesono, et al., "A Local Scheduling Method considering Data Transfer in Data Grid," Technical Report of IEICE, vol. 104, No. 692, pp. 435-440, The Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers, Japan, Feb. 2005.
64 Office Action in Canadian Application No. 2726915 dated May 13, 2013.
65 Office Action in Canadian Application No. 2741895 dated Feb. 25, 2013.
66 Office Action in Candian Application No. 2741895 dated Feb. 25, 2013.
67 Office Action in Chinese Application No. 200780020255.2 dated Mar. 4, 2013.
68 Office Action in Chinese Application No. 200980119993.1 dated Oct. 21, 2013.
69 Office Action in Chinese Application No. 200980119995.0 dated Apr. 15, 2013.
70 Office Action in Indian Application No. 3742/KOLNP/2008 dated Nov. 22, 2013.
71 Office Action in Japanese Application No. 2011-502138 mailed Feb. 1, 2013.
72 Office Action in Japanese Application No. 2011-502140 mailed Dec. 7, 2012.
76 Office Action in Japanese Application No. 2013-540982 dated Jun. 2, 2014 English Translation Not Yet Received.
77 Office Action in Korean Application No. 10-2011-7002461 mailed May 29, 2013.
78 Preliminary Examination in Chinese Application No. 201180053405.6 dated May 28, 2013. English Translation Not Yet Received.
79 Preliminary Examination in Chinese Application No. 201310717573.1 dated Feb. 25, 2014. English Translation Not Yet Received.
80 Search Report and Written Opinion in Singapore Application No. 201103333-9 mailed Nov. 19, 2012.
81 Search Report and Written Opinion in Singapore Application No. 201301573-0 mailed Jul. 1, 2014.
82 Search Report and Written Opinion issued in Singapore Application No. 201006873-2 mailed Oct. 12, 2011.
83 Second Office Action in Chinese Application No. 200980111426.1 mailed Dec. 25, 2013.
84 Second Office Action in Chinese Application No. 200980119993.1 dated Mar. 12, 2013.
85 Second Office Action in Japanese Application No. 2011-516466 mailed Mar. 17, 2014.
86 Shankland, S., "Sun to buy start-up to bolster N1 ," Jul. 30, 2003, CNet News.com, retrieved May 3, 2006, http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513-22-5057752.html, 8 pages.
87 Shankland, S., "Sun to buy start-up to bolster N1 ," Jul. 30, 2003, CNet News.com, retrieved May 3, 2006, http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513—22-5057752.html, 8 pages.
88 Singapore Examination Report in Application No. 201006837-7 mailed May 16, 2012.
89 Singapore Written Opinion in Application No. 201006836-9, mailed Apr. 30, 2012 in 10 pages.
90 Singapore Written Opinion in Application No. 201006836-9, mailed Oct. 12, 2011 in 12 pages.
98 Takizawa, et al., "Scalable MultiReplication Framework on the Grid," Report of Study of Information Processing Society of Japan, Information Processing Society, vol. 2004, No. 81, pp. 247-252, Japan, Aug. 1, 2004.
99 Tan et al., "Classification: Basic Concepts, Decision Tree, and Model Evaluation", Introduction in Data Mining; http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~kumar/dmbook/ch4.pdf, 2005, pp. 245-205.
100 Tan et al., "Classification: Basic Concepts, Decision Tree, and Model Evaluation", Introduction in Data Mining; http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/˜kumar/dmbook/ch4.pdf, 2005, pp. 245-205.
101 Third Office Action in Chinese Application No. 200980111426.1 mailed Jul. 7, 2014.
102 Van Renesse, R., "Astrolabe: A Robust and Scalable Technology for Distributed System Monitoring, Management, and Data Mining," May 2003, ACM Transactions on Computer Systems (TOCS), 21 (2): 164-206, 43 pages.
103 Vijayan, J., "Terraspring Gives Sun's N1 a Boost," Nov. 25, 2002, Computerworld, retrieved May 3, 2006, from http://www.computerworld.com/printthis/2002/0,4814, 76159,00.html, 3 pages.
104 Virtual Iron Software Home, Virtual Iron, retrieved May 3, 2006, from http://www.virtualiron.com/, 1 page.
105 Waldspurger, CA., "Spawn: A Distributed Computational Economy," Feb. 1992, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 18(2): 103-117, l5 pages.
106 Watanabe, et al., "Remote Program Shipping System for GridRPC Systems," Report of Study of Information Processing Society of Japan, Information Processing Society, vol. 2003, No. 102, pp. 73-78, Japan, Oct. 16, 2003.
107 Written Opinion in Singapore Application No. 201303521-7 dated May 20, 2014.
108 Xu et al., "Decision tree regression for soft classification of remote sensing data", Remote Sensing of Environment 97 (2005) pp. 322-336.
109 Yamagata, et al., "A virtual-machine based fast deployment tool for Grid execution environment," Report of Study of information Processing Society of Japan, Information Processing Society, vol. 2006, No. 20, pp. 127-132, Japan, Feb. 28, 2006.
110 Zhu, Xiaoyun, et al., "Utility-Driven Workload Management Using Nested Control Design," Mar. 29, 2006, HP Laboratories Palo Alto, HPL-2005-193(R.1), retrieved Aug. 30, 2007, from http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2005/HPL-2005-193R1.pdf, 9 pages.
US9515981 * 20 May 2015 6 Dic 2016 Hola Networks Ltd. Method and system for increasing speed of domain name system resolution within a computing device
US9756124 * 1 Feb 2016 5 Sep 2017 Juniper Networks, Inc. Content delivery network referral
US20140149578 * 22 Ene 2013 29 May 2014 Go Daddy Operating Company, LLC Method For Testing Methods of Accelerating Content Delivery
Clasificación de EE.UU. 709/226, 709/245, 709/224, 709/243
Clasificación internacional G06F17/30, G06F15/173
Clasificación cooperativa H04L61/301, H04L61/1511, H04L67/10, G06F17/30023, H04L61/10
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:RICHARDSON, DAVID R.;CORMIE, JOHN;MACCARTHAIGH, COLM;ANDOTHERS;SIGNING DATES FROM 20100927 TO 20100928;REEL/FRAME:027738/0615