Electrical computers and digital processing systems: support – Reconfiguration
Reexamination Certificate
2000-04-04
2003-12-23
Lee, Thomas (Department: 2185)
Electrical computers and digital processing systems: support
Reconfiguration
C370S466000, C709S230000, C710S011000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06668319
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a method for correlating or matching the features supported by a device with the features that may be requested by other devices communicating with that device through one or more versions of a protocol for communication between the devices.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
A common feature of contemporary computer and communications systems is that the systems are comprised of a plurality of cooperatively functioning but separate units, or devices, each of which may perform specific tasks or a range of generalized tasks. The devices are interconnected, either directly or through a network, and exchange requests for operations by means of common protocols, or communications languages, each of which is designed for inter-device communication with respect to the tasks or range of tasks performed by the devices. A given protocol will include the commands, responses and information formats necessary to support requests by a requesting device, such as a processor unit, for the execution of functions or operations by a responding device with which it is communicating, such as a printer. The functions and operations that may be performed, or supported, by a responding device are commonly referred to as the “features” of the responding device. A requesting device is correspondingly referred to as supporting a “feature” when it is capable of issuing a request for that feature of a responding device, and a protocol is referred to as supporting a “feature” when it includes the commands, responses and information formats necessary to communicate a request for that “feature” from the requesting device to the responding device, and the corresponding responses from the responding device to the requesting device.
It is commonly understood and accepted that the use of such protocols has been of significant advantage to the users and manufacturers of such systems and the devices used in such systems and the use of such protocols has become a standard practice, with many such protocols becoming industry standards. For example, a personal computer system is typically comprised of a central processing unit with an associated monitor and keyboard and one or more peripheral devices, such as printers, scanners, and modems. The central processing unit communicates with the peripheral devices to request operations, or features, that are specific to each of the peripheral devices and, in each instance, does so using a protocol that is appropriate to the type or range of features supported by each device. The use of common protocols by central processing units and peripheral devices from different sources or manufacturers has been of significant advantage to both the users of personal computers and the manufacturers of personal computers and peripheral devices in allowing the free combination of central processing units and peripherals devices from different sources and in different system configurations.
In further example, such protocols are also commonly used in larger systems comprised of one or more requesting devices, such as personal computers, workstations or shared processing units, and a number of responding devices, such as shared printers, file servers and communications servers, that are interconnected through a network and serve a number of users. In such larger systems the shared devices are typically more complex than in, for example, a personal computer system, and typically support a wider range of features, so that the protocols are correspondingly more extensive and complex. The use of such protocols, however, have provided advantages similar to those accruing in personal computer systems in allowing the free combination of devices from different sources and of different types in a wide range of system configurations.
To illustrate the uses of such protocols further, a personal computer system will commonly include one or more printers to generate printed copies of electronic documents of various types and the personal computer will communicate with the printers through a printer protocol that will typically be used in common by a range of printers from different manufacturers and having different features. In larger systems, such as a system serving a corporate department or facility, the printing facilities will be provided by a device of the type referred to as a “paper handling controller” and other devices in the system, such as servers, processors, workstations and personal computers, will communicate with the “paper handling controller” through a “paper handling protocol”. In this regard, a paper handling controller may be, for example, a printer, a multi-function device such as a Hewlett-Packard Mopier, which performs the functions of a networked printer, a copier and a scanner, a printer controller connected from a network and controlling a number of individual printers to form a printer complex or node, or a facsimile device. It will be understood, therefore, that the devices and protocols appearing in a large system may be analogous to those appearing in a smaller system, the term “paper handling controller” as opposed to “printer” denotes the wider range of features that may appear in the devices of a large system and the term “paper handling protocol” denotes the expansion or extension of the protocol or protocols to accommodate the wider range of features, and the adaptations necessary for communication in a large system, networked environment. For example, in a large system, or in a more complex small system, a paper handling controller may be a printer controller having access to and controlling a complex of printers or other devices that may provide a wide range of features. The devices of the system, such as the processors, workstations or personal computers, will communicate with the paper handling controlling through a paper handling protocol supporting the range of features supported by the devices available to the paper handling controller and adapted to a networked environment. The paper handling controller will, in turn, communicate with the individual printers or other devices using the same or a similar paper handling protocol or protocols, depending upon the printers or other types of paper handling devices connected from or accessible to the paper handling controller.
The use of such protocols, however, results in certain problems in the systems and protocols of the prior art. As described, a given protocol or version of a protocol will support a given set of features that may be requested by a first device, such as a processor unit, and that are supported by a second device with which it is communicating, such as a paper handling controller. It is known and intended, however, that the features supported by the devices of a system, such as printers, will change with time as devices are added or removed or updated, so that previously supported features are no longer available or are modified while new features become available and are supported. A change in the features supported by the devices, and particularly the addition of new features or modifications to existing features, in turn requires the addition of corresponding features to the protocol or the modification of existing features of the protocol.
In the prior art, changes to protocols are implemented by the creation and distribution of updated or new versions of the protocols, or of new protocols, as required. The methods of the prior art, however, result in numerous problems because the features supported by a protocol are dependent upon and determined by the version of that protocol that is used. For example, a device that uses a particular version of a protocol because of a feature in that version of the protocol generally must, as a result, support all features of that version of the protocol to avoid errors or fault conditions in the system operation arising from requests for features that are supported by the portal but not supported by the device. In addition, if a device supports features that are not supported by the version of a protocol
Becerra Carlos F.
Leyva Ricardo Osuna
Newell, Jr. Lawrence Bert
Lee Thomas
Wang Albert
LandOfFree
Method and mechanism for correlating and matching mutually... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Method and mechanism for correlating and matching mutually..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method and mechanism for correlating and matching mutually... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3163489