Electrical computers and digital processing systems: multicomput – Computer-to-computer data modifying – Compressing/decompressing
Reexamination Certificate
1998-06-30
2003-01-14
Winder, Patrice (Department: 2766)
Electrical computers and digital processing systems: multicomput
Computer-to-computer data modifying
Compressing/decompressing
C709S238000, C380S262000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06507874
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to the translation of data from one format to another. In particular, the present invention relates to the efficient routing of data for translation.
Data translation is a common technique for converting data from one format to another so that it is better suited for a particular use. Examples of translations include encryption, compression and encoding. Encryption is typically used to secure data so that unauthorized users cannot access the data. Compression is used to reduce the number of bytes in the data by, for example, removing redundant bytes. Encoding is used to convert data from one set of representations to another set to overcome restrictions placed on the character set by a transmission channel. For example, encoding is used to convert 8-bit binary values into 7-bit ASCII values for transmission over channels that cannot handle 8-bit data.
In many applications, it is desirable to perform multiple translations on a single piece of data. Thus, data may be encrypted, encoded, and then compressed before being sent across a channel extending between two locations. With multiple translations, the system attempting to recover the data from the channel must be able to determine the types of translations that were performed on the data, and the order in which the translations were performed. Once the recovery system has this information, it can reverse the translations to recover the original data.
The simplest method for providing translation information to a recovery system is to use a fixed set of translations that are programmed into the recovery system. In this type of system, every piece of data is translated using the same set of translations in the same order. This method minimizes the amount of translation information that must be passed across the channel but lacks the flexibility that would allow translations to be selected dynamically as data or applications require.
In an alternative method, each translator on the production side creates a translation header that is attached to the translated data produced by the translator. Thus, an encryption translator attaches an encryption header to the encrypted data it produces, and a compression translator attaches a compression header to the compressed data it produces.
In this alternative method, each translator creates its header without reference to earlier translations. In fact, each translator treats existing headers that accompany the data as a portion of the data. Thus, if a piece of data is encrypted and then compressed, the compression translator will compress the encryption header in the same manner that it compresses the encrypted data. This obscures the encryption header in the compressed data so that it is not apparent to the recovery system that the data has been encrypted simply by looking at the compressed data or the compression header.
Since earlier headers are obscured by later translations, the recovery system is only able to identify the last translation performed on a piece of data it receives from the channel. Thus, the recovery system cannot determine from the channel data if it has all of the translation tools necessary to recover the original message. As such, it must begin to translate the data with the hope that it will have all of the necessary tools. If after performing a number of translations on the data, the recovery system encounters a translation it cannot handle, the recovery system must reject the data. If this occurs, any earlier translations performed by the recovery system needlessly wasted computer resources. For wireless devices, such as handheld computers, the wasting of computer resources reduces the performance of the device by drawing power and computing time away from other processes.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
A recovery system is capable of recovering a core set of data from an input set of data. The input set of data is accompanied by a translator identifier and both items are received by a receiver in the recovery system. The receiver passes the data to a message router that is capable of accessing a tag list based on the translator identifier before the recovery system has translated the input set of data. The message router is also capable of routing data based on the accessed tag list.
In some embodiments of the present invention, the receiver is a driver, which is part of a wireless system. The driver is able to reject the input set of data if the recovery system does not include a translator required to recover the core set of data. In further embodiments, the driver is capable of rejecting the input set of data before the message router has accessed the tag list. Thus, in wireless devices, these embodiments of the invention do not “wake-up” the device unless the device has all of the needed translators.
One embodiment of the invention uses macro-tags, which represent multiple translations. Based upon applications on the recovery system, translators available on the recovery system, or a macro-tag table, at least one translator on the recovery system is able to expand a macro-tag into a series of tag values.
In one embodiment of the invention, the tag list is simply assigned by the receiver based on the address on which the message was received. In such embodiments, tags do not need to be sent with the data, reducing the overhead associated with the transmission.
REFERENCES:
patent: 4593155 (1986-06-01), Hawkins
patent: 4916637 (1990-04-01), Allen et al.
patent: 5014345 (1991-05-01), Comroe et al.
patent: 5043721 (1991-08-01), May
patent: 5367667 (1994-11-01), Wahlquist et al.
patent: 5400331 (1995-03-01), Lucak et al.
patent: 5559800 (1996-09-01), Mousseau et al.
patent: 5603025 (1997-02-01), Tabb et al.
patent: 5619615 (1997-04-01), Pitchaikani et al.
patent: 5619694 (1997-04-01), Shimazu
patent: 5623656 (1997-04-01), Lyons
patent: 5640590 (1997-06-01), Luther
patent: 5675780 (1997-10-01), Plant-Mason et al.
patent: 5675831 (1997-10-01), Caputo
patent: 5680585 (1997-10-01), Bruell
patent: 5701451 (1997-12-01), Rogers et al.
patent: 5705995 (1998-01-01), Laflin et al.
patent: 5740549 (1998-04-01), Reilly et al.
patent: 5754242 (1998-05-01), Ohkami
patent: 5796952 (1998-08-01), Davis et al.
patent: 5799151 (1998-08-01), Hoffer
patent: 5809247 (1998-09-01), Richardson et al.
patent: 5861883 (1999-01-01), Cuomo et al.
patent: 5875306 (1999-02-01), Bereiter
patent: 5884097 (1999-03-01), Li et al.
patent: 5903262 (1999-05-01), Ichihashi et al.
patent: 5905856 (1999-05-01), Ottensooser
patent: 5920696 (1999-07-01), Brandt et al.
patent: 5923738 (1999-07-01), Cardillo, IV et al.
patent: 5933501 (1999-08-01), Leppek
patent: 5933826 (1999-08-01), Ferguson
patent: 5935060 (1999-08-01), Iliff
patent: 5937041 (1999-08-01), Cardillo, IV et al.
patent: 5943496 (1999-08-01), Li et al.
patent: 5946326 (1999-08-01), Rinne
patent: 5953423 (1999-09-01), Martinez et al.
patent: 5953524 (1999-09-01), Meng et al.
patent: 5963944 (1999-10-01), Adams
patent: 5974085 (1999-10-01), Smith
patent: 5974238 (1999-10-01), Chase, Jr.
patent: 5999941 (1999-12-01), Anderson
patent: 6005490 (1999-12-01), Higashihara
patent: 6009456 (1999-12-01), Frew et al.
patent: 6041183 (2000-03-01), Hayafune et al.
patent: 6061698 (2000-05-01), Chadha et al.
patent: 6067574 (2000-05-01), Tzeng
patent: 6078743 (2000-06-01), Apte et al.
patent: 6085224 (2000-07-01), Wagner
patent: 6112242 (2000-08-01), Jois et al.
patent: 6151610 (2000-11-01), Senn et al.
patent: 6233338 (2001-05-01), Leppek
patent: 6311058 (2001-10-01), Wecker et al.
patent: 0 434 231 (1991-06-01), None
patent: 0 653 736 (1995-05-01), None
patent: 0 704 827 (1996-04-01), None
patent: 0 803 825 (1997-10-01), None
patent: WO 90/13213 (1990-11-01), None
patent: WO 97/17682 (1997-05-01), None
patent: WO 97/35402 (1997-09-01), None
Y. Rekhter et al., RFC 2105: Cisco Systems' Tag Switching Architecture Overview, Network Working group, 10 pages, Feb. 1997.*
Xipeng Xiao et al., A Comprehensive Comparison of IP Switching and Tag Switching, Proc of 1997 Intl Conf on Parallel and Distributed
Deo Vinay
Kadyk Don
Tuniman David
Wecker Dave
Magee Theodore M.
Microsoft Corporation
Westman Champlin & Kelly P.A.
Winder Patrice
LandOfFree
System for efficient routing and translation of data does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with System for efficient routing and translation of data, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and System for efficient routing and translation of data will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3020623