Electrical computers and digital processing systems: multicomput – Computer conferencing – Demand based messaging
Reexamination Certificate
1999-01-11
2003-08-12
Harrell, Robert B. (Department: 2142)
Electrical computers and digital processing systems: multicomput
Computer conferencing
Demand based messaging
Reexamination Certificate
active
06606647
ABSTRACT:
TECHNICAL FIELD
The invention relates generally to communication networks that include computer hardware and software, and more particularly to a server, software run by the server, and a method implemented by the software for routing messages according to the message recipient's preferences.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Today, a person may have more than one personal message device such as a wireless pager (e.g. a Skytel pager) or an e-mail client (e.g. Microsoft Outlook) that provides access to the person's e-mail account. Often, these devices communicate to other message devices via a computer network such as a local intranet or the Internet.
FIG. 1
is a block diagram of a conventional computer network
10
, which allows communication between message devices. The network
10
includes a sender's computer
12
s
, which has an input device
13
s
(e.g. a keyboard or a mouse) coupled thereto and which includes a processor
14
s
coupled to a storage device
16
s
. The network
10
also includes a recipient's computer
12
r
, which has an input device
13
r
and which includes a processor
14
r
and a storage device
16
r
. For example, the storage devices
16
s
and
16
r
may include a hard drive, volatile electronic memory, or both. The computers
12
s
and
12
r
are connected to a communication path
18
by networking circuitry that is omitted for clarity. For example, the path
18
may represent the communication lines that tie into and form the Internet. The processor
14
s
can run messaging devices such as a desktop pager
20
s
, a web browser
22
s
(e.g. Netscape Navigator), and an e-mail client
24
s
, which allows the sender to send and receive e-mail messages via an e-mail server
26
s
. Although the processor
14
s
executes the software that runs these devices, it is common to state that the computer
12
s
runs these devices. The sender may also have a wireless pager
28
s
and a voicemail server
30
s
, which are also connected to the path
18
. The voicemail server
30
s
may allow the sender to send and receive voice messages via the computer
12
s
or via a telephone system (not shown). Similarly, the recipient's computer
12
r
can run a desktop pager
20
r
, a web browser
22
r
, and an e-mail client
24
r
, which allows the recipient to view e-mail received on an e-mail server
26
r
. Also, the recipient may have a wireless pager
28
r
and a voicemail server
30
r
. Although the computers and message devices are labeled as sending or receiving devices for description purposes, it is understood that these labels are arbitrary such that the sending computer and message devices can be used to receive messages and the receiving computer and message devices can be used to send messages.
The system
10
may also include a file server
32
, which is connected to the path
18
and which can assist with the transfer of messages between the sender's messaging devices and the recipient's messaging devices. For example, the server
32
may be a server of an internet service provider (ISP), which facilitates the transfer of messages between ISP account holders and between an account holder and a non-account holder. Or, the server
32
may be a paging company's server that transfers messages between the wireless pagers
28
s
and
28
r.
In operation, the network
10
typically allows two topologies for transferring messages from one device to another: the point-to-point (PTP) topology, and the star topology. With the PTP topology, a message is routed directly between the sending and receiving devices. For example, using a PTP topology, the desktop pager
20
s
sends a message directly to the desktop pager
20
r
via the computer
12
s
, the path
18
, and the computer
12
r
. In some applications, such as where it is an ISP server, the server
32
may open this direct path between the pagers
20
s
and
20
r
. Conversely, with a star topology, the message is routed through an intermediate node or device such as the server
32
. For example, using a star topology, the pager
28
s
sends a message intended for the pager
28
r
to the server
32
, which may be the paging company's server. The server
32
then processes the message and sends it to the pager
28
r
. This may occur for security or other reasons. Therefore, because the PTP topology eliminates the overhead of having the server receive and send the message, it is often faster and ties up fewer network resources than the star topology.
Unfortunately, if the environment of the network
10
does not allow all messages to be sent with a PTP topology, then the server
32
may be programmed to route all messages with a star topology to prevent messaging failure. This may create an unnecessary bottleneck at the server
32
, thus significantly increasing access times and aggravation for users of the server
32
. Alternatively, if the same type of server
32
is to be installed in a network
10
having an environment that does allow all messages to be sent with a PTP topology, then the server software will have to be modified to allow this. Thus, if the server
32
can be used in both network environments, then the server manufacturer will have to develop and offer two respective software packages, one for PTP and another for star. Furthermore, the customer will have to install new software if the network environment changes, or if he wishes to install the server
32
in another network
10
having a different environment.
Furthermore, a recipient is often unable to retrieve messages from some of his message devices for extended periods of time, and if a message device is unavailable to receive a message, the message may be lost. For example, suppose the sender sends an e-mail message from his e-mail client
24
s
to the recipient's e-mail server
26
r
. If the recipient is out of town and has no access to the server
26
r
other than through the e-mail client
24
r
, then he must wait until he returns before he learns of and can read the sender's e-mail message. Alternatively, if the sender sends a desktop page from his pager
20
s
and the recipient's desktop pager
20
r
is not running, then the message has nowhere to go and may be lost.
Additionally, a message transfer may be unsuccessful if the sending device is of a different type than the receiving device. For example, if the recipient's e-mail client
24
r
is Microsoft Outlook, it may be unable to read an e-mail message from e-mail clients other than those sold by Microsoft.
Moreover, in applications where the server
32
is common to the sending and receiving devices, such as when it is an ISP server, the server
32
may use polling to allow a sender to determine if an intended recipient's message device is available to receive a message. For example, if the sender wants to send a desktop page, he may first want to determine if the intended recipient's computer is logged onto the server
32
, and thus if the recipient is “online” and able to receive the page. To make this determination, the sender requests, via his computer
12
s
, the server
32
to poll all of the computers that are logged onto the server
32
and to notify the sender if one of these computer's is the recipient's computer
12
r
. Unfortunately, because the server
32
must communicate with each logged on computer, such polling requires a significant amount of processing time, and thus can significantly increase user access times, particularly during hours of peak use. For example, it is common during peak hours for the number of logged-on computers to exceed one million! Furthermore, if the computer
12
r
is not logged onto the server
32
at the time that it performs the polling, then the only way for the sender to determine if the computer
12
r
subsequently logs on is to subsequently request the server
32
to repeat the polling. Thus, this significantly burdens the sender, because he may have to request several polls before he either gives up or the computer
12
r
logs onto the server
32
.
S
Chestnut Kevin L.
Hugg Ethan B.
Shah Niraj A.
Harrell Robert B.
InfoSpace, Inc.
LandOfFree
Server and method for routing messages to achieve unified... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Server and method for routing messages to achieve unified..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Server and method for routing messages to achieve unified... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3085220