Source: http://www.google.es/patents/US9088628
Timestamp: 2017-12-11 11:48:20
Document Index: 138522397

Matched Legal Cases: ['§120', 'arty 104', 'arty 118', 'arty 104', 'arty 104', 'arty 118', 'arty 104', 'arty 104', 'arty 118', 'arty 104']

Patente US9088628 - Architectures for clearing and settlement services between internet ... - Google Patentes
A system for routing voice telephone calls over IP networks as opposed to traditional switched circuit networks. The voice communications during the telephone call are packaged as digital data and access the Internet through gateways. The system supports the linking of a source gateway in a first clearinghouse...http://www.google.es/patents/US9088628?utm_source=gb-gplus-sharePatente US9088628 - Architectures for clearing and settlement services between internet telephony clearinghouses
Número de publicación US9088628 B2
Número de solicitud US 13/646,731
Fecha de presentación 7 Oct 2012
También publicado como US7525956, US8306020, US20060067307, US20090245237, US20130148647
Número de publicación 13646731, 646731, US 9088628 B2, US 9088628B2, US-B2-9088628, US9088628 B2, US9088628B2
Inventores James P. G. Dalton, Jr., Stephen A. Thomas
Citas de patentes (130), Otras citas (16), Clasificaciones (4)
US 9088628 B2
1. A method for routing communications between gateways of different clearinghouses, comprising the steps of:
tracking communications of first gateways with a first clearinghouse;
tracking communications of second gateways with a second clearinghouse;
receiving a destination gateway request from a source gateway of the first clearinghouse; and
generating a list of available destination gateways of the second clearinghouse based upon the received gateway information and by creating a combined routing table, the combined routing table comprises gateway information from the first clearinghouse and the one or more second clearinghouses.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the communications comprise internet protocol transactions.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising selecting a destination gateway from the list based on one or more business rules.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein the business rules further consider at least one of speed and quality of data transmission for completing a internet protocol transaction.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the business rules further consider at least one of speed and quality of data transmission for completing a internet protocol transaction.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising completing the internet protocol transaction between the source gateway of the first clearinghouse and the selected destination gateway of the second clearinghouse, the internet protocol transaction comprising an internet telephony call.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of selecting a destination gateway further comprises the step of sorting destination gateways based upon the one or more business rules.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the business rules further consider at least one of speed and quality of data transmission for completing a internet protocol transaction.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the linking clearinghouse performs the step of selecting a destination gateway from the list.
10. A system for routing communications between gateways of different clearinghouses, comprising the steps of:
means for tracking communications of first gateways with a first clearinghouse;
means for tracking communications of second gateways with a second clearinghouse;
means for receiving gateway information associated with the first clearinghouse;
means for receiving gateway information associated with the second clearinghouse;
means for storing the received gateway information in a database of a linking clearinghouse prior to a call;
means for receiving a destination gateway request from a source gateway of the first clearinghouse; and
means for generating a list of available destination gateways of the second clearinghouse based upon the received gateway information and by creating a combined routing table, the combined routing table comprises gateway information from the first clearinghouse and the one or more second clearinghouses.
11. The system of claim 10, wherein the communications comprise internet protocol transactions.
12. The system of claim 11, further comprising means for selecting a destination gateway from the list based on one or more business rules.
13. The system of claim 11, wherein the internet protocol transactions of the first gateways being tracked by the first clearinghouse and the internet protocol transactions of the second gateways being tracked by the second clearinghouse comprise internet telephony type calls.
15. The system of claim 10, further comprising means for completing the internet protocol transaction between the source gateway of the first clearinghouse and the selected destination gateway of the second clearinghouse, the internet protocol transaction comprising an internet telephony call.
16. The system of claim 10, wherein the means for selecting the destination gateway further comprises means for sorting destination gateways based upon the one or more business rules.
17. The system of claim 16, wherein the business rules further consider at least one of speed and quality of data transmission for completing a internet protocol transaction.
18. The system of claim 10, wherein the business rules further consider at least one of speed and quality of data transmission for completing a internet protocol transaction.
19. The system of claim 10, wherein the linking clearinghouse comprises means for selecting a destination gateway from the list.
20. The system of claim 19, wherein the gateway information received by said linking clearinghouse comprises destination gateway IP address information.
The present application claims priority under 35U.S.C. §120to U.S. Non-provisional patent application entitled, “ARCHITECTURES FOR CLEARING AND SETTLEMENT SERVICES BETWEEN INTERNET TELEPHONY CLEARINGHOUSES,” filed on Mar. 17, 2009 and assigned U.S. application Ser. No. 12/381,900. The entire contents of this application are hereby incorporated by reference.
FIG. 10 is a logic flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process for muting a communication using the compressed hierarchy architecture.
IP telephony clearinghouses greatly simplify the interconnection of individual IP Telephony Service Providers (ITSPs). ITSPs are the providers that operate gateways, for IP Telephony. By joining a single clearinghouse, an ITSP can exchange traffic with many other service providers. And more traffic, of course, brings more revenue. As the IP telephony market has matured, providers have begun to recognize that interconnections among separate IP telephony clearinghouses presents a new opportunity for additional revenue. With such interconnection, an ITSP joining a single clearinghouse gains access not just to other ITSPs belonging to that clearinghouse, but also to ITSPs that are members of the other, interconnected clearinghouses.
FIG. 2 provides an overview of an Internet telephony call in the exemplary operating environment. At step 201, an Internet telephony call is initiated when the calling party 104 dials a telephone number, which is transmitted to the source gateway 108 for processing. The goal of the source gateway 108 is to locate a destination gateway 114a-c that is able to terminate the phone call. The source gateway 108 relies on the service point 112 for routing assistance.
At step 202, the source gateway 108 makes an authorization request to a service point 112. The authorization request indicates, among other things, the telephone number of the called party 118. At the service point 112, the routing engine 110 uses information in the authorization request, as well as preferences established for the source gateway's 108 cost and quality requirements, to determine which of the destination gateways 114a-c are eligible to complete the call.
Communication between the service point 112, the source gateway 108 and the destination gateways 114 does not require the use of standard protocols for any aspect of the Internet telephony calls themselves, including call setup. If the source gateway 108 and destination gateways 114 use a signaling protocol other than Q.931 (which is specified by H.323 and H.225.0), then that protocol need only be capable of including the authorization ticket in the initial setup message. The exemplary authorization ticket is approximately 2000 octets in length. Destination gateways 114a-c may accept or reject Internet telephony calls based on the presence and contents of this authorization ticket.
Referring to FIG. 5, this is a block diagram representing an exemplary shared service architecture 500 of a linking clearinghouse 50L. This shared service architecture can represent the greatest sharing of information among two clearinghouses. In this example, clearinghouse 50A and clearinghouse 50B provide business and technical information about its member gateways to the linking clearinghouse 50L. A combined routing table 510 is created by the linking clearinghouse 50L. The routing table can include pricing and billing information as well as source and destination gateway information provided by clearinghouse 50A and clearinghouse 50B. All the information necessary to select the destination gateway can be contained in the combined routing table. In the shared service architecture, the calling party 104 of a first clearinghouse, such as clearinghouse 50A, accesses the IP network 102 through its source gateway 108. The source gateway 108 contacts the linking clearinghouse 50L, represented as the combined potential gateways of clearinghouse 50A and clearinghouse 50B. The destination gateway information is returned to the source gateway 108. A connection is then established between the source gateway 108 of the first clearinghouse 50A and the destination gateway 114 of a second clearinghouse, such as clearinghouse 50B over the IP network 102. Once the call signaling is completed the data, such as voice data, can be transferred between the calling party 104 of first clearinghouse 50A and the called party 118 of a second clearinghouse SOB.
Referring to FIG. 6, this is a flow chart outlining an exemplary process that occurs in the shared service architecture. In the first step, 605, clearinghouse 50A and clearinghouse SOB provide their gateway and business information to the linking clearinghouse 50L. After this information is provided, in step 610, gateway sorting rules can be set up for the linking clearinghouse 50L. The gateway sorting rules determine how particular destination gateways are selected by considering factors such as cost, speed, and quality of data transmission. In step 615 the linking clearinghouse 50L creates the combined routing table 510. The combined routing table contains all of the information provided by clearinghouse 50A and clearinghouse 50B. All of the information contained in the routing table can be sufficient enough to determine a destination gateway 114.
In step 810, the calling party 104 accesses the IP network 102 through a source gateway 108 in a first clearinghouse, such as clearinghouse 50A. In step 815, the source gateway 108 queries clearinghouse 50A for a destination. The operator of clearinghouse A ensures that the source gateway 108 is in fact a member of the clearinghouse. In step 820, clearinghouse 50A identifies the proxy system 710 of the linking clearinghouse SOL as a destination gateway. In step 825, the source gateway 108 establishes call signaling with the proxy system 710 of the linking clearinghouse SOL via the IP network 102. As noted above, the proxy system 710 of linking clearinghouse SOL appears to be a destination gateway to the source gateway 108 of the first clearinghouse 50A.
The proxy system 710 of the linking clearinghouse SOL then contacts a second clearinghouse, such as clearinghouse 50B, as a source gateway in step 830 and queries clearinghouse 50B for a destination. Essentially the linking clearinghouse SOL operating the proxy system 710 appears as a customer to clearinghouse 50A and clearinghouse 50B. In step 835, clearinghouse 50B identifies destination gateways for the proxy system 710. In step 840, call signaling is established between the proxy system 710 of the linking clearinghouse 50L and the destination gateway 114 of the second clearinghouse 50B via the IP network 102. In step 845, once call signaling is established, data, such as voice data, can be transferred between the calling party 104 of the first clearinghouse 50A and the called party 118 of the second clearinghouse 50B. The proxy signaling architecture allows the individual clearinghouses to remain in control of much of the routing process. However, this architecture can increase call setup delay and lose the function of evaluating end-to-end quality of routing service.
FIG. 10 illustrates an exemplary process for call signaling in a compressed hierarchy architecture 900. In step 1010, the destination gateway information is provided from clearinghouse 50B to the super-clearinghouse system 910 of the linking clearinghouse 50L.
By providing this information to the super-clearinghouse system 910, it can eliminate any additional steps of contacting clearinghouse 50B when an actual call is made. In step 1015, a call is initiated and the calling party 104 accesses the IP network 102 by contacting the source gateway 108. In step 1020, the source gateway queries clearinghouse 50A for a destination gateway. In step 1025, clearinghouse 50A decides whether this call will be an inter-clearinghouse call based on predetermined criteria agreed to by the source gateway 108. If it is not an inter-clearinghouse call, the “No” branch is followed to step 1030 where the call is routed within clearinghouse 50A.
If this call can be routed to other clearinghouses, the “Yes” branch is followed to step 1035 where clearinghouse A will send a query to the super-clearinghouse system 910 of the linking clearinghouse SOL for a destination gateway. In step 1040, the super-clearinghouse system 910 will identify available destination gateways from the information provided by clearinghouse 50B. In step 1045, the super-clearinghouse system 910 provides potential destination gateways to clearinghouse 50A. In step 1050, clearinghouse 50A will select a destination gateway based on predetermined criteria established by the gateways belonging to clearinghouse A. In an alternative embodiment, the super-clearinghouse system 910 may contain criteria for performing an initial evaluation of destination gateways before forwarding information to clearinghouse 50A. In step 1055, clearinghouse 50A provides the destination gateway information to the source gateway 108. In step 1060, the source gateway 108 of clearinghouse 50A sets up a connection with the destination gateway 114 of clearinghouse 50B via the IP network 102. Finally, in step 1065, data, such as voice data, may be exchanged between the gateways. Relative to the share service architecture illustrated in FIG. 5, the compressed hierarchy architecture 900 of FIG. 9 can result in a longer setup delay than the shared service architecture 500. However, compressed hierarchy may offer added security to clearinghouses that do not wish to disclose much of their business information.
Inter-Clearinghouse Traffic Originating
with ITSP Belonging to Clearinghouse A
1. Termination fee billed to originating ITSP by $30.00
3. Linking Clearinghouse originating price (1 less 2) $27.00
4. Linking Clearinghouse terminating price $12.00
5. Rated price for linking service (average of 3 and 4) $19.50
6. Linking Clearinghouse service fee $1.00
7. Clearinghouse A cost (5 plus 6) $20.50
8. Clearinghouse A profit (1 less 7) $9.50
Inter-Clearinghouse Traffic Terminating at
ITSP Belonging to Clearinghouse B
1. Termination fee paid to terminating ITSP by Clearinghouse B $10.00
3. Linking Clearinghouse terminating price (1 plus 2) $12.00
4. Linking Clearinghouse originating price $27.00
6. Linking Clearinghouse service fee $2.00
7. Clearinghouse B revenue (5 less 6) $17.50
8. Clearinghouse B profit (7 less 1) $7.50
Originating $30.00 Originating $20.50 Linking Service $17.50 Terminating $10.00 Terminating
ITSP Clearinghouse (retains $3.00 ) Clearinghouse ITSP
(retains $9.50) (retains $7.50 )
US6937598 20 Sep 1999 30 Ago 2005 Lucent Technologies Inc. Method and apparatus for transporting ATM cell traffic over IP networks
US7225269 12 May 2003 29 May 2007 Hitachi, Ltd. Network gateway system having rules for exchanging packet, network gateway method, and network gateway device therefor
US7293080 4 Feb 2003 6 Nov 2007 Cisco Technology, Inc. Automatically discovering management information about services in a communication network
US7664495 * 5 Dic 2005 16 Feb 2010 At&T Mobility Ii Llc Voice call redirection for enterprise hosted dual mode service
US7865621 * 31 May 2002 4 Ene 2011 Spice I2I Limited Open settlement protocol bridge for multi-network voice connections
US7899167 * 15 Ago 2003 1 Mar 2011 Securus Technologies, Inc. Centralized call processing
US8290137 * 22 Ene 2009 16 Oct 2012 Ibasis, Inc. System and method for using exception routing tables in an internet based telephone call routing system
US8306020 * 17 Mar 2009 6 Nov 2012 Transnexus, Inc. Architectures for clearing and settlement services between Internet telephony clearinghouses
US20020041588 10 Ago 2001 11 Abr 2002 Gleneck Daniel L. Method and apparatus for network dialing for voice switching
US20040174880 22 Mar 2004 9 Sep 2004 White Patrick E. Internet telephone service
US20060067286 * 30 Sep 2004 30 Mar 2006 Motorola, Inc. Wireless asset monitoring system and method having designations of logical place
US20090138828 * 11 Oct 2006 28 May 2009 Aol Llc Ordering of conversations based on monitored recipient user interaction with corresponding electronic messages
US20090292806 * 22 May 2008 26 Nov 2009 Microsoft Corporation Management of Remotely Hosted Services
1 AT&T Communications, Adm. Rates and Tariffs, Tariff FCC No. 1, 3rd 6 Revised, p. 178.69.1, Jan. 1993.
2 AT&T Communications, Adm. Rates and Tariffs, Tariff FCC No. 1, 3rd Revised p. 178.69.1.
3 Chaniotakis et al., "Parlay and Mobile Agents in a Homogenized Service Provision Architecture," IEEE; Universal Multiservice Networks; ECUMN 2002; 2nd European Conference on Apr. 8-10, 2002; pp. 150-154.
4 ETSI, "Telecommunications and Internet Protocol Harmonization Over Networks (TIPHON) Release 4; Open Settlement Protocol (OSP) for Inter-Domain pricing, authorization and usage exchange," ETSI TS 101 321, V4.1.1 (Nov. 2003) Technical Specification, pp. 49.
5 Hansson et al., "Phone Doubler-A step towards integrated Internet and telephone communities," Ericsson Review No. 4, 1997, pp. 142-151.
6 Johannesson, Nils Olof, "The ETSI Computation Model: A Tool or Transmission Planning of Telephone Networks," IEEE Communications Magazine, Jan. 1997, pp. 70-79.
7 Liao, Warjiiun; "Mobile Internet Telephony Protocol: An application layer protocol for mobile Internet telephony services," Communications, 1999; ICC '99; 1999 IEEE International Conference; vol. 1; Jun. 6-10, 1999; pp. 39-343.
11 Rudkin et al, "Real-time applications on the Internet," Apr. 1997, pp. 209-225, BT Technol J vol. 15, No. 2.
12 Sin, Sam-Kit et al, "A New Design Methodology for Optimal Interpolative Neural Networks with Application to the Localization and Classification of Acousiic Transients," IEEE Conference on Neural Networks for Ocean Engineering, 1991, pp. 329-340.
13 The Ascend Max Gateway, XP-002096239, "The asnet pipeline," ; www.asnet.co.nz/pipeline/sum97/tamvg.html, Mar. 11, 1999.
14 Thom, Gary A.,"H.323: The Multimedia Communications Standard for Local Area Networks," Dec. 1996, pp. 52-56, IEEE Communications Magazine.
15 TransNexus Press Release, "Agis and Popstar Introduce Profit-Generating Internet Fax Services to ISP Partners and Customers Worldwide," Abstract XP-002193408, Jun. 24, 1999 www.transnexus.com, 3 pp.
16 TransNexus. Home Page, Printed May 17, 2005, www.transnexus.com, 2 pp.
Clasificación internacional H04L29/06, H04L12/66
Clasificación cooperativa H04L65/40, H04L69/08