Source: https://patents.justia.com/patent/10185554
Timestamp: 2019-05-22 07:10:02
Document Index: 622768756

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 119', 'Application No. 60', 'Application No. 200880009273', 'Application No. 2010', 'Application No. 2010', 'Application No. 200880009273', 'Application No. 200880009273', 'Application No. 08744157', 'Application No. 08744157']

US Patent for Unified service management Patent (Patent # 10,185,554 issued January 22, 2019) - Justia Patents Search
Justia Patents Network Computer ConfiguringUS Patent for Unified service management Patent (Patent # 10,185,554)
The present application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/940,545, entitled “Unified Service Management,” filed Nov. 15, 2007, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/940,545 claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/896,534 filed Mar. 23, 2007, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein.
1. A method performed by one or more management servers that are coupled to one or more managed nodes via a network, the method comprising:
creating, by one or more processors in at least one of the one or more management servers, a change order from a change template that is selected from a plurality of change templates based at least in part on a deployment profile that includes a configuration of an application model, the change order defining one or more actions to be performed with regard to an application deployed on at least one node of the one or more managed nodes to implement at least one selected change, the application being associated with one or more policies defined by the application model;
reviewing, by one or more processors in at least one of the one or more management servers, the change order to identify an action that is to be performed with regard to the application; and
performing, by one or more processors in at least one of the one or more management servers, a validation operation with regard to the change order using one or more rule checks, said performing the validation comprising: determining whether performance of the identified action with regard to the application will cause a conflict with at least one policy of the one or more policies by comparing one or more changes associated with the identified action and one or more pictures of the application model; and declaring the change order valid or invalid depending on whether the performance of the identified action with regard to the application will cause the conflict.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to at least one of (a) a constraint regarding capacity of a system in which the application is to execute or (b) configuration settings regarding the system in which the application is to execute.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to at least one of (a) a capacity constraint regarding the application or (b) a constraint regarding health of the application.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to a constraint regarding a number of transactions to be performed with regard to the application.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to an SLA constraint regarding the application.
presenting a plurality of criteria for each of a plurality of deployment profiles, each deployment profile including a respective configuration of the application model; and
receiving an indication that the deployment profile, based at least in part on which the change template is selected from the plurality of change templates, is selected from the plurality of deployment profiles, the one or more policies corresponding to the selected deployment profile.
providing a user interface that enables a user to author metadata associated with the application model.
registering the at least one selected change in a database; and
causing implementation of the at least one selected change based at least in part on the change order being declared valid and further based at least in part on the at least one selected change being registered in the database.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein determining whether the performance of the identified action will cause the conflict comprises:
determining that the performance of the identified action with regard to the application will cause the conflict;
wherein declaring the change order valid or invalid comprises: declaring the change order invalid based at least in part on a determination that the performance of the identified action with regard to the application will cause the conflict; and
wherein the method further comprises: instructing a user to create one or more activities that are capable of fixing the conflict.
10. One or more management servers coupled to one or more managed nodes via a network, the one or more management servers comprising:
one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to: create a change order from a change template that is selected from a plurality of change templates based at least in part on a deployment profile that includes a configuration of an application model, the change order defining one or more actions to be performed with regard to an application deployed on at least one node of the one or more managed nodes to implement at least one selected change, the application being associated with one or more policies defined by an application model; review the change order to identify an action that is to be performed with regard to the application; and perform a validation operation with regard to the change order using one or more rule checks to: determine whether performance of the identified action with regard to the application will cause a conflict with at least one policy of the one or more policies by comparing one or more changes associated with the identified action and one or more pictures of the application model; and declare the change order valid or invalid depending on whether the performance of the identified action with regard to the application will cause the conflict.
11. The one or more management servers of claim 10, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to a constraint regarding capacity of a system in which the application is to execute.
12. The one or more management servers of claim 10, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to a constraint regarding health of the application.
13. The one or more management servers of claim 10, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to a constraint regarding a number of transactions to be performed with regard to the application.
14. The one or more management servers of claim 10, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to an SLA constraint regarding the application.
15. The one or more management servers of claim 10, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to configuration settings regarding a system in which the application is to execute.
16. The one or more management servers of claim 10, wherein at least one policy of the one or more policies corresponds to a capacity constraint regarding the application.
17. The one or more management servers of claim 10, wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
present a plurality of criteria for each of a plurality of deployment profiles that correspond to the application model; and
set administration policies associated with the deployment profile, based at least in part on which the change template is selected from the plurality of change templates, in response to receipt of an indication that the deployment profile is selected from the plurality of deployment profiles, the one or more policies corresponding to the selected deployment profile.
18. The one or more management servers of claim 10, wherein the one or more processors are configured to provide a user interface that enables a user to author metadata associated with the application model.
19. One or more management servers coupled to one or more managed nodes via a network, the one or more management servers comprising:
means for creating a change order from a change template that is selected from a plurality of change templates based at least in part on a deployment profile that includes a configuration of an application model, the change order defining one or more actions to be performed with regard to an application deployed on at least one node of the one or more managed nodes to implement at least one selected change, the application being associated with one or more policies defined by an application model;
means for reviewing the change order to identify an action that is to be performed with regard to the application; and
means for performing a validation operation with regard to the change order using one or more rule checks, the means for performing the validation operation comprising: means for determining whether performance of the identified action with regard to the application will cause a conflict with at least one policy of the one or more policies by comparing one or more changes associated with the identified action and one or more pictures of the application model; and means for declaring the change order valid or invalid depending on whether the performance of the identified action with regard to the application will cause the conflict.
means for presenting a plurality of criteria for each of a plurality of deployment profiles that correspond to the application model; and
means for setting administration policies associated with the deployment profile, based at least in part on which the change template is selected from the plurality of change templates, in response to receiving an indication that the deployment profile is selected from the plurality of deployment profiles, the one or more policies corresponding to the selected deployment profile.
7017047 March 21, 2006 Vanska et al.
20060161444 July 20, 2006 Lubrecht
20060161879 July 20, 2006 Lubrecht
20060200816 September 7, 2006 Pramanick et al.
20080313595 December 18, 2008 Boulineau
20100005174 January 7, 2010 Naughton
H10-513325 December 1998 JP
2005-234705 September 2005 JP
2006-518080 August 2006 JP
20010016689 March 2001 KR
03058884 July 2003 WO
“Office Action Issued in Chinese Patent Application No. 200880009273.5”, dated Feb. 29, 2012, 9 Pages.
“Office Action Issued in Japanese Patent Application No. 2010-501115”, dated Jun. 15, 2012, 11 Pages.
“Office Action Issued in Japanese Patent Application No. 2010-501115”, dated Oct. 12, 2012, 6 Pages.
“Office Action Issued in Chinese Patent Application No. 200880009273.5”, dated Nov. 22, 2012, 7 Pages.
“Office Action Issued in Chinese Patent Application No. 200880009273.5”, dated Apr. 7, 2011, 10 Pages.
“International Search Report & Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US2008/057757”, dated Jul. 30, 2008, Filed Date: Mar. 20, 2008, 10 Pages.
“Non-final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 11/940,545”, dated Dec. 1, 2009, filed Nov. 15, 2007, 9 Pages.
“Final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 11/940,545”, dated Jul. 23, 2010, filed 15, 2007, 14 Pages.
“Non-final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 11/940,545”, dated Mar. 2, 2011, filed Nov. 15, 2007, 10 Pages.
“Final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 11/940,545”, dated Aug. 29, 2011, filed Nov. 15, 2007, 10 Pages.
“Non-final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 11/940,545”, dated Apr. 18, 2013, filed Nov. 15, 2007, 11 Pages.
“Final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 11/940,545”, dated Aug. 2, 2013, filed Nov. 15, 2007, 14 Pages.
“Notice of Allowance Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 11/940,545”, dated May 12, 2014, filed Nov. 15, 2007, 9 Pages.
“European Search Report Received for European Patent Application No. 08744157.2”, dated Nov. 20, 2014, 11 Pages.
“Non-Final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/485,891”, dated Mar. 11, 2016, 12 Pages.
“Office Action Issued in European Patent Application No. 08744157.2”, dated Feb. 6, 2017, 10 Pages.
“Final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/485,891”, dated Sep. 28, 2016, 17 Pages.
Patent Publication Number: 20150006688
Inventors: Ashvinkumar J. Sanghvi (Sammamish, WA), Shawn Bice (Sammamish, WA), Casey McKinnon (Seattle, WA), Vij Rajarajan (Issaquah, WA), Jens K. Jacobsen (Seattle, WA), Kristoffer S. Schultz (Redmond, WA), Thomas William Keane (Seattle, WA)
Application Number: 14/485,921
International Classification: G06F 15/16 (20060101); G06F 8/70 (20180101); H04L 12/24 (20060101); H04L 12/26 (20060101);