US20020091833A1 - Network match maker - Google Patents
Network match maker Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20020091833A1 US20020091833A1 US09/997,194 US99719401A US2002091833A1 US 20020091833 A1 US20020091833 A1 US 20020091833A1 US 99719401 A US99719401 A US 99719401A US 2002091833 A1 US2002091833 A1 US 2002091833A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- match
- offer
- peer
- client
- attributes
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 121
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 34
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 13
- 230000000977 initiatory effect Effects 0.000 claims 1
- 230000000670 limiting effect Effects 0.000 description 12
- 238000004590 computer program Methods 0.000 description 5
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 description 5
- 238000013459 approach Methods 0.000 description 4
- 230000003993 interaction Effects 0.000 description 4
- 230000002452 interceptive effect Effects 0.000 description 4
- 230000005540 biological transmission Effects 0.000 description 3
- 244000141353 Prunus domestica Species 0.000 description 2
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000006855 networking Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000000717 retained effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000001960 triggered effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 241000699670 Mus sp. Species 0.000 description 1
- 230000009471 action Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000003795 chemical substances by application Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000001934 delay Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000000203 mixture Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000002085 persistent effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005293 physical law Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000002829 reductive effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000004044 response Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000003068 static effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000000638 stimulation Effects 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L43/00—Arrangements for monitoring or testing data switching networks
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F9/00—Arrangements for program control, e.g. control units
- G06F9/06—Arrangements for program control, e.g. control units using stored programs, i.e. using an internal store of processing equipment to receive or retain programs
- G06F9/46—Multiprogramming arrangements
- G06F9/50—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU]
- G06F9/5005—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU] to service a request
- G06F9/5027—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU] to service a request the resource being a machine, e.g. CPUs, Servers, Terminals
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F9/00—Arrangements for program control, e.g. control units
- G06F9/06—Arrangements for program control, e.g. control units using stored programs, i.e. using an internal store of processing equipment to receive or retain programs
- G06F9/46—Multiprogramming arrangements
- G06F9/50—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU]
- G06F9/5005—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU] to service a request
- G06F9/5027—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU] to service a request the resource being a machine, e.g. CPUs, Servers, Terminals
- G06F9/5044—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU] to service a request the resource being a machine, e.g. CPUs, Servers, Terminals considering hardware capabilities
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F9/00—Arrangements for program control, e.g. control units
- G06F9/06—Arrangements for program control, e.g. control units using stored programs, i.e. using an internal store of processing equipment to receive or retain programs
- G06F9/46—Multiprogramming arrangements
- G06F9/50—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU]
- G06F9/5005—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU] to service a request
- G06F9/5027—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU] to service a request the resource being a machine, e.g. CPUs, Servers, Terminals
- G06F9/5055—Allocation of resources, e.g. of the central processing unit [CPU] to service a request the resource being a machine, e.g. CPUs, Servers, Terminals considering software capabilities, i.e. software resources associated or available to the machine
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A63—SPORTS; GAMES; AMUSEMENTS
- A63F—CARD, BOARD, OR ROULETTE GAMES; INDOOR GAMES USING SMALL MOVING PLAYING BODIES; VIDEO GAMES; GAMES NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- A63F2300/00—Features of games using an electronically generated display having two or more dimensions, e.g. on a television screen, showing representations related to the game
- A63F2300/50—Features of games using an electronically generated display having two or more dimensions, e.g. on a television screen, showing representations related to the game characterized by details of game servers
- A63F2300/51—Server architecture
- A63F2300/513—Server architecture server hierarchy, e.g. local, regional, national or dedicated for different tasks, e.g. authenticating, billing
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A63—SPORTS; GAMES; AMUSEMENTS
- A63F—CARD, BOARD, OR ROULETTE GAMES; INDOOR GAMES USING SMALL MOVING PLAYING BODIES; VIDEO GAMES; GAMES NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- A63F2300/00—Features of games using an electronically generated display having two or more dimensions, e.g. on a television screen, showing representations related to the game
- A63F2300/50—Features of games using an electronically generated display having two or more dimensions, e.g. on a television screen, showing representations related to the game characterized by details of game servers
- A63F2300/55—Details of game data or player data management
- A63F2300/5546—Details of game data or player data management using player registration data, e.g. identification, account, preferences, game history
- A63F2300/5566—Details of game data or player data management using player registration data, e.g. identification, account, preferences, game history by matching opponents or finding partners to build a team, e.g. by skill level, geographical area, background, play style
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L43/00—Arrangements for monitoring or testing data switching networks
- H04L43/08—Monitoring or testing based on specific metrics, e.g. QoS, energy consumption or environmental parameters
- H04L43/0823—Errors, e.g. transmission errors
- H04L43/0829—Packet loss
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L43/00—Arrangements for monitoring or testing data switching networks
- H04L43/08—Monitoring or testing based on specific metrics, e.g. QoS, energy consumption or environmental parameters
- H04L43/0852—Delays
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L43/00—Arrangements for monitoring or testing data switching networks
- H04L43/08—Monitoring or testing based on specific metrics, e.g. QoS, energy consumption or environmental parameters
- H04L43/0852—Delays
- H04L43/0864—Round trip delays
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L43/00—Arrangements for monitoring or testing data switching networks
- H04L43/08—Monitoring or testing based on specific metrics, e.g. QoS, energy consumption or environmental parameters
- H04L43/0876—Network utilisation, e.g. volume of load or congestion level
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L43/00—Arrangements for monitoring or testing data switching networks
- H04L43/08—Monitoring or testing based on specific metrics, e.g. QoS, energy consumption or environmental parameters
- H04L43/0876—Network utilisation, e.g. volume of load or congestion level
- H04L43/0882—Utilisation of link capacity
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L43/00—Arrangements for monitoring or testing data switching networks
- H04L43/08—Monitoring or testing based on specific metrics, e.g. QoS, energy consumption or environmental parameters
- H04L43/0876—Network utilisation, e.g. volume of load or congestion level
- H04L43/0888—Throughput
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L43/00—Arrangements for monitoring or testing data switching networks
- H04L43/16—Threshold monitoring
Definitions
- Computer networks are widely used to connect multiple computer systems together for communicating and sharing information.
- Computer networks can also be used to implement multi-user applications that allow multiple users to share in the operation of a computer program.
- Common examples are video and teleconferencing applications, online multiplayer games which allow multiple users to play a game with one another and online chat environments.
- a problem common to all such multi-user network applications is providing an efficient way to bring together groups of users to join in the running of a multi-user application.
- Today, the known solutions deal only with the users requirements such as which other people they wish to be matched with. These solutions provide little more than manual methods for the users to select the other users that they wish to be matched with. This is workable only when there are reasonable numbers of users in the pool of all users. It becomes unworkable when there are large numbers of users and when the application has special requirements for network performance or capabilities of the client and/or server computer systems used to implement the application.
- Peer-to-peer applications are executed by multiple client computers with no server or servers required. All communication traffic during the execution of the application is directed between the clients.
- Other multiple client networked applications use a single server system.
- the server may execute some portion of the application that is to be shared by all of the clients while the remainder of the application is executed on the clients.
- the server can also act as a communications collection point. Some or all of the communication traffic is between each of the clients and the server.
- the clients may additionally communicate with one another as needed.
- multiple servers may be used in a multiple client application. Similar to the case of a single server, a portion of the application may be executed on the servers.
- the multiple servers can also provide communications collection points for the clients.
- a method for establishing a peer to peer match of clients for at least one application including: receiving at least one offer being indicative of at least one application for which an offer for matching is proposed from an offering peer client, and recording at least one attribute associated with the offer using at least one offer record; receiving a measurement of at least one communication link property between the offering peer client and an inquiring client; and comparing the offer record with the measured at least one link property to determine if a peer to peer match between the offering and the inquiring peer clients is to be permitted.
- FIG. 1 is a flow chart showing the interaction between a first client and a match maker in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 2 is a flow chart showing the interaction between a second client and a match maker in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 3 is a flow chart showing the interaction between clients and the match maker of FIGS. 1 and 2 in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 4 is a flow chart showing measurement of communication attributes in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 5 is a flow chart showing the steps in matching in accordance with the present invention.
- FIGS. 6 and 7 are flow charts showing termination methods in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 8 is a flow chart showing the interaction of clients, servers and a match maker in accordance with the present invention.
- FIGS. 9 - 10 are flow charts showing the use of communication attributes in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 11 is a flow chart showing the matching operation of the match maker in FIG. 8.
- a network match making system may be used to create matched sets of users of a multi-user networked application.
- Each user may be associated with a client computer connected to a network.
- a server computer on the network may execute a software process that is the network match maker.
- Clients may be selected into matched sets based on attributes of their users, the clients, application class and instance, the attributes of the servers and the properties of the client-to-client and client-to-server communications links.
- the network match maker may work with three forms of network application implementation: peer-to-peer, multiple clients to a single server and multiple clients to multiple servers.
- a network match making system that solves the above described problems in the prior art and provides an automated means for users to be matched with one another for a networked application may be provided.
- the network match maker may not only take into account user preferences and attributes, but attributes of the client computer, the application, any optional servers needed by the application and the properties of the communications links between the clients and the clients and any optional servers.
- a network match making process runs on a server system on a network that is used by clients to be matched into matched sets of clients for a multi-user application.
- the network match maker also matches a server to the matched set of clients.
- clients and the server are matched not only on the basis of user attributes, but also on the basis of client, server and application attributes and on network performance characteristics including bandwidth, latency and packet loss.
- the network match maker matches clients and a server into matched sets by comparing the attributes of the user, the client, the server and the properties of the network links between them to the requirements of the application.
- the user attributes include the obvious characteristics of the user that are relevant to the networked application. Some examples include things such as skill level, age, people the user doesn't want to be matched with. For the sake of a clearer discussion, the user and client attributes will be lumped into one group, and is referred to as “client attributes”. Client attributes describe the capabilities of the client computer system. The performance of the client computer, the type and performance of its network link and the types and versions of the networked applications that are installed on it are all reasonable examples of client attributes.
- the application attributes are the requirements of the networked application. Examples of these requirements include the type and performance of the client, the type and performance or any necessary server and the required properties of network links between the clients and between the clients and the server.
- Application attributes come in two forms, class and instance.
- the class attributes of an application apply to any instance of the application.
- the networked match maker operates in an environment where there will be multiple instances of each application. When an instance of an application is created, it inherits the class attributes while additional instance attributes may also be applied. These instance attributes may simply override some of the class attributes inherited by the instance, while others may be specific only to application instances.
- Example of static server attributes include the type and performance of the server system, types and versions of any networked application software that is installed on the server.
- Dynamic attributes include the current load on the server. Considering the current load on the server when assigning application instances to a server is a way to effect dynamic load balancing on the servers in a multiple server system.
- Communications attributes are the properties of the network link between two computer systems. These will include the links between clients and links between clients and a server. The properties of network links will include the available bandwidth, the latency and the packet loss rate. Many networked applications will have certain minimum requirements for bandwidth and maximum requirements for latency. There are other metrics of communication performance that may be valuable measures of the properties of a communications link between two computer systems that also can be used.
- the network match maker forms matched sets of users by either automatically matching users into matched sets or allowing users to create match offers that other users may browse and then choose to join until full matched sets are completed. In both of these cases, the match maker will choose a server for the matched set if multiple servers are available and the networked application requires it. Automatic matching is a simple variant of user created match offers, so the user created match offer case is discussed first.
- the moderator is the agent that chooses the instance attributes of a match offer.
- the match offer When the match offer is created, it inherits the class attributes of the application. The moderator may then modify the attributes to create the match offer instance attributes.
- the application When the application is launched for a match offer, it does so using the instance attributes of the match offer.
- the match maker In user created match offers, the most simple case is that the user that created the offer is the moderator.
- the match maker itself is the moderator. Other possibilities exist. It is possible for some or all of the users in a match offer to share powers of the moderator.
- match offers Users may create their own specific offers to other users to match with. These are called match offers.
- To create a match offer the user will choose one application for which to create a match offer. The offer will inherit the class attributes of the application, but the user may add additional instance attributes for their specific match offer. The user that created the original match offer will be considered the moderator of that offer and will be the only one that is able to select the instance attributes of the match offer.
- Other users will browse these match offers, examine their attributes, select an offer that they find acceptable and attempt to join that offer.
- the match maker will compare the client attributes and the communications attributes of any relevant communication links to the required instance attributes. If they do not match the required attributes of the match offer, the match maker will prevent the user from joining the match offer.
- the new client will join the offer and will be added to the matched set of clients associated with the offer.
- the match maker will also compare their attributes with those of the other clients to make sure that the user attributes are compatible before a client is allowed to join the match offer. Once enough clients have joined the match offer, the moderator can select to launch the application.
- the network match maker will ask the new client to measure the properties of the communications links between the new client and all of the existing clients that already are members of the match offer.
- the properties of the communications links between the new client and the existing clients that are members of the match offer will be returned to the match maker in a vector of network properties. These properties will be compared to the requirements of the instance attributes for the match offer.
- the application will have its own class attributes for communications properties of the network links between the peers needed to run the application. The creator of the match offer may override these attributes to create instance attributes for the properties of the communications links between the peers. If the client attributes and the attributes of the communication links match the requirements of the application instance, the new client will be joined into the match offer.
- the server is assumed to have all of the necessary properties to host the necessary portions of the application.
- the network match maker will ask the new client to measure the properties of the communications links between the new client and all of the existing clients that already are members of the match offer. These properties will be returned to the match maker as a vector of communications properties which will be compared to the requirements of the application instance attributes for communications properties of client-to-client links.
- the network match maker will also ask the new client to measure the properties of the communications link between the new client and the single server. The properties of this link are also matched to the instance attributes for communications properties of the client-to-server link.
- the network match maker When a client asks to join a match offer for a particular application, the network match maker asks the client to measure the properties of the communications links between itself, all of the other clients that are members of the matched set associated with the match offer and all of the server systems that are available for that application.
- the servers available for that application are a subset of all of the servers based on the attributes of the servers and the attributes for server requirements for the match offer instance.
- a client creates a match offer they may specify instance attributes for the application that override or add to the application class attributes. This may further limit the subset of server systems that can support the application.
- the network match maker When a new client requests to join the match offer, the network match maker will compare the client attributes to the required attributes of the match offer. If they match, the network match maker will then compare the properties of the relevant communications links to the requirements of the specific match offer.
- the network match maker chooses the server from the qualified subset of servers using only the properties of the communications links between the creator of the match offer and the qualified servers. If multiple servers have communications links to the creator of the match offer that meet the requirements of the match offer, the network match maker will choose one based on some defined criteria. A reasonable criterion would be the best performance, but other criteria would be possible.
- the match maker compares the client attributes, the properties of the communications links between the new client and the existing members of the match offer and from the new client to the selected server. If all of these attributes and communications properties meet the requirements of the match offer, the client is allowed to join.
- Server late binding eliminates this issue, but is more complex.
- the network match maker maintains a pruned list of qualified servers for a match offer.
- the clients join the match offer in the usual way.
- the attributes of the new client are first compared to those of the match offer. If they match, the properties of the network links are compared.
- the match maker compares the properties of the network links between the new client and the member clients of the match offer to the instance attributes of the match offer. If they match, the properties of the network links between the client and the pruned list of servers is compared to the instance attributes of the match offer. If one or more of the communications links between the new client and the pruned list of servers meet the requirements of the match offer the client is allowed to join it.
- the network match maker then prunes the list of servers associated with the match offer to eliminate any for which the properties of the communications link from the new client to the server did not meet the instance attributes of the match offer. This will guarantee that the existing clients that are members of the match offer will continue to meet the requirements of the match offer.
- the network match maker will select a final server using a selection criteria that it chooses. Typically this selection criteria will choose the server with the best overall communications properties to all of the client that are members of the match offer.
- Automatic matches are very similar to user created match offers except that the users ask the match maker to create automatic match offers to match them with.
- a user specifies an application to run and requests an automatic match.
- the network match maker looks at the users requesting an automatic match of the same application and attempts to organize them into matched sets.
- the match maker creates automatic match offers to which it matches the clients.
- the user may be given the ability to specify modifications to the attributes of the automatic match offer instance of an application. As an example a user might ask for an automatic match for a game with only expert players.
- match maker When a client requests an automatic match, match maker will compare the client attributes and communications properties of the requester as applicable to the attributes of the existing automatic match offers. If the client attributes and applicable communications properties of the client match an automatic match offer, the client will be entered into the matched set of clients associated with the match offer. If the attributes of a client and applicable communication properties do not match the instance attributes of the automatic match offer, the match maker will move on to the next automatic match offer. This continues until the client has been matched to an automatic match offer, or there are no more automatic match offers. If the new client has failed to match any of the automatic match offers, the network match maker creates a new automatic match offer and joins the new client with it. When a particular automatic match offer contains enough clients as required by the attributes, the match maker causes an instance of the application to be launched. The network match maker will also support a reasonable time-out period for the launching of automatic match offers.
- the most important communications attributes are bandwidth, latency and packet loss rate. Other attributes of communications networks may be important in some applications, but these are the most broadly important attributes. Below are examples of how these attributes would be used by the match maker for matching clients and servers to a match offer. For the purposes of these examples, the discussion here relates only to how the communications attributes are used in the match making process. The other client and server attributes will be ignored.
- Bandwidth is the data rate that can be supported by a particular network link.
- Networked applications will have requirements for the data rates that they need to send between clients or between clients and a server.
- an application that be operated with or without speech communications between the clients. When used with digital speech, the speech data consumes a significant amount of data bandwidth.
- the application is a peer-to-peer application with no need for a server.
- a user creates a match offer for this application and sets an instance attribute for this match offer to enable speech communications.
- the match maker will ask the new client to measure the bandwidth between the new client and all of the clients that are already members of the match offer.
- the match maker will see that the client attributes for communications bandwidth to one of the existing clients does not match the instance attributes of the match offer for client-to-client communication bandwidth. The new client will therefore be prevented from joining the match offer.
- the same client may be allowed to join a match offer for the same application when the match offer instance specifies that client-to-client speech is not enabled. This will be true if the match offer instance attributes for client-to-client bandwidth are equal to or lower to the bandwidth from the new client to each of the existing client members of the match offer.
- Latency is another important communications attribute. Latency is the time for a communications data to travel over a network link from one system to another. Many interactive applications will have strict requirements for communications latency that if not met will prevent the application from operating properly. Total latency on a communications link will be the sum of many factors including the propagation time of signals over long distances. The other factors can generally be minimized or reduced, but propagation delays are set by physical laws. Imagine a highly interactive game that is played between multiple clients through a server. Each client in a game instance sends and receives its communications data to the other clients through the server. In this example, also consider that the pool of potential clients to play the game are spread over a wide geographic area and that there are multiple servers also spread through the same area.
- the example game has strict latency requirements for the communications delay between the clients and a server used for a game instance. If the latency between a client and the server exceed this, the quality of the game play for the client or all of the clients in the game instance may be unacceptable.
- the match maker must not only match clients together into matched sets, but it also must match each matched set of clients to a specific server. As described earlier there are two methods of matching the server to a group of clients: early server binding and later server binding. With early server binding, the match maker will choose the server that has the lowest measured latency to the first client in the match offer. As each new client attempts to join the match offer, the match maker will ask the client to measure its latency to the server that has been selected for the match offer.
- the new client will be allowed to join.
- the end result is that all of the clients that join the match offer will meet the requirements for latency of the match offer instance.
- server late binding when the match offer is initially created, the match maker will create a list of all of the servers that match all of the instance attributes of the match offer. As clients join the match offer, the match maker will ask the clients to measure their latency to each of the servers in the list. The new client will provide this vector of measured latencies to the match maker. Each latency in the vector will be compared to the latency attribute requirements of the match offer. If one or more the latency vector elements meet the latency requirements of the match offer, the new client will be allowed to join it.
- the match maker will then prune from the server list associated with the match offer any servers whose corresponding latency vector elements for the new client did not meet the requirements of the match offer. Once all of the desired clients have joined the match offer, there may be more than one server that are in the pruned list. The match maker will then use some criteria to select a single server. One criteria would be to choose the server that minimized the average latency between that server and all of the clients. Another criteria would be to minimize the latency differences between each of the clients and the server.
- Packet loss rate is the rate at which data is lost during transmission in a network.
- Most networks transmit data in discrete units called packets or frames.
- Some networking protocols such as UDP do not provide guaranteed data delivery so it is up to the application to either be tolerant of transmission loss or provide a means to retransmit the data.
- Other networking protocols such as TCP/IP do provide guaranteed delivery.
- TCP/IP do provide guaranteed delivery.
- the application will require two servers, each with unique attributes. Since the game data and speech data will have different bandwidth, latency and packet loss requirements, the application will have separate requirements for each of the two data streams. This will mean that there will be two sets of application attributes for properties of the network links between the clients and the servers.
- the match maker will ask a client requesting to join a match offer to measure the properties of the network links from the client to each of the two servers. For the client to be allowed to join the match offer, both sets of network properties must match the instance attributes of the match offer for the application requirements for each of the network links from a client to the two servers.
- the attributes of the client are compared to the required attributes of the application.
- the properties of the appropriate network links are measured and matched to the required network attributes of the application. If all matches, the new client is allowed to join the running application. At a later time the client may leave the application. This situation is the same as clients joining a match offer with early server binding.
- the present embodiment relates to matchmaking for Peer to Peer games that is to say games that play without the use of any Servers even though the matchmaker is itself implemented as at least one Server.
- the network that this particular embodiment uses is the well known Internet which uses the also well known Internet Protocols (such as TCP/IP and UDP/IP).
- IP Internet Protocol
- the present embodiment is described only by way of illustration of the above described invention, only a relatively few of the possible alternatives are incorporated into this particular embodiment.
- the term computer program is commonly abbreviated to program.
- a matchmaker server program is used, an executing instance of this program (abbreviated to MM) resides on a server computer.
- the concepts of server computers and executing instances of programs are well known in the computing arts.
- Each computer user (abbreviated to user in this embodiment) launches an instance of a client computer program on his computer which computer is then a client computer for the time being.
- an instance of a client program (CL 1 ) sends a request to the MM
- the use of message exchanges by means of Internet communications to send requests is well known in the data communications and computing arts.
- the request asks the MM to create a game offer and the request includes attributes of the various game and match preferences chosen by the user together with intrinsic attributes of the requested type of game and attributes of the hardware and software installed on the user's computer.
- the intrinsic attributes of the game include limiting values for communications attributes of links between users' computers.
- the MM receives this request.
- IP Internet Protocol
- step 13 the MM creates a record to represent game offer (GOR 1 ) which contains the attributes from the request and the return unique network address of CL 1 . Records, sets of records and techniques for creating and maintaining them are well known in the computer programming art.
- step 14 the MM sends a reply back to CL 1 notifying CL 1 that the match is not yet complete (step 14 ′).
- step 15 CL 1 waits for a request from MM.
- CL 1 thus becomes the first member of a game match yet to be completed.
- step 16 the MM makes the contents of the game offer record available to other potential users.
- step 17 MM waits for further requests from other clients.
- step 21 another instance of a client program (CL 2 ) which is executing on a different user's computer from CL 1 and also a different computer from MM, sends a request for a list of game offers to the MM.
- the MM receives this request.
- the MM responds with information extracted from GOR 1 that was created in step 13 .
- CL 1 receives the response from MM which contains the game offer information from GOR 1 .
- step 31 CL 2 sends to MM a request to be matched into the offer represented by GOR 1 .
- the MM receives this request.
- step 33 the MM compares the attributes in the latest request sent by CL 2 with those in GOR 1 and if they do not match by whatever criteria the MM is programmed to use then CL 2 is sent a message from MM that informs CL 2 that it cannot join the offer represented by GOR 1 , at least not at this time (step 34 ).
- the use of programmed criteria to match requirements and sets of requirements is well known in the computer programming art.
- the MM sends to CL 2 a request to measure the communications attributes between CL 1 and CL 2 .
- step 41 CL 2 receives the latest described request from CL 2 .
- step 42 a determination is made by MM as to whether the request is a request to measure communications (comms.) attributes or is a rejection.
- step 43 CL 2 measures the communications attributes of the data communications link between CL 2 and CL 1 .
- Methods of measuring communications attributes are well known in the arts. Not all communications attributes are mutually orthogonal, though the especially important ones of latency, bandwidth and packet loss rate are indeed substantially orthogonal.
- CL 2 could measure a data throughput rate attribute directly or CL 2 could measure latency, bandwidth and packet loss rate separately and then calculate data throughput rate to a reasonable degree of accuracy (limited inter-alia by mensuration precision) from those three attributes by methods well known in the data communications arts.
- Another communications attribute is best case round trip time for a kilobyte sized message, this attribute is a function of latency, bandwidth and as a second order effect computer speed but is entirely independent of packet loss rate. Round trip times and methods of measuring them are also well known in the arts.
- step 44 reports the results of measuring the attributes of the data communications link between CL 2 and CL 1 back to MM.
- MM receives the message reporting the results of the comms. attribute measurement.
- step 51 the MM compares the communications attributes with the limiting values for communications attributes for the game recorded in GOR 1 (or some predetermined default values for any limiting values for communications attributes absent from GOR 1 ) and if (step 52 ) the communications attributes exceed any limiting values for communications attributes specified in GOR 1 (or, in their absence predetermined defaults) according to programmed criteria then in step 53 MM notifies CL 2 that it is allowed to join the game offer and a further game offer record (GOR 2 ) is created to record all the known attributes associated with CL 2 . Otherwise (step 54 ) CL 2 is sent a message from MM that informs CL 2 that it cannot join the offer represented by GOR 1 (step 55 ). If not allowed to join, CL 2 finishes. If allowed to join, CL 2 waits for completion of a game match (step 56 ).
- the MM must next determine whether or not the game match is complete.
- One vital criterion is whether sufficient players are joined into the game offer (step 61 ).
- This embodiment uses the automatic match approach, so if a sufficient number of instances of client programs are joined then a time-out timer is started (step 62 ) for a predetermined interval such as 30 seconds during which time further clients may join the game provided the maximum allowed number is players is not reached (step 63 ).
- Time-out timers are well known in the computer programming art. If a sufficient number of players is not yet joined then the time-out timer is not started yet and MM waits for more client (step 64 ).
- step 71 when and if the time-out timer expires MM deems the game matched and sends messages to each of the clients (CL 1 through CLn) to inform them of the successful completion of the game match. Otherwise MM takes no particular action in connection with the time-out timer (step 72 ).
- each player's computer Upon receipt of the message informing them of the successful completion of the game match, each player's computer starts executing the game program instructions and each makes game data message exchanges between each user computer upon a Peer to Peer basis. At this point communication between the clients and the MM (which is a server) is no longer essential and gameplay proceeds.
- the present embodiment is an example subset of the general description of the present invention, the subset being directed to matchmaking for a game that uses multiple clients to a single server with early server binding.
- the network that this particular embodiment uses is again the well known Internet.
- the above general description of the present invention is entirely enabling of the invention generally and of this embodiment in particular to a practitioner ordinarily skilled in the arts.
- a matchmaker server program is used, an executing instance of this program (abbreviated to MM) resides on a server computer.
- Each computer user (abbreviated to user in this embodiment) launches an instance of a client computer program on his computer which computer is then a client computer.
- an instance of a client program sends a request to the MM.
- the request asks the MM to create a game offer and the request includes attributes of the various game and match preferences chosen by the user together with intrinsic attributes of the requested type of game and attributes of the hardware and software installed on the user's computer.
- the intrinsic attributes of the game include limiting values for communications attributes of links between clients and game servers (GSs).
- the MM receives this request.
- the 103 creates a game offer record (GOR 10 ) which contains the attributes from the request and the return unique network address of CL 10 .
- step 104 MM matches the attributes recorded in GOR 10 with the attributes (if any) that game servers (GSs) have, at their own initiative, previously reported to MM and which MM retained in records created for this purpose.
- this matching of game server (GS) attributes to the attributes recorded in GOR 10 fails to identify a GS for which the attributes match GOR 10 adequately according to programmed criteria (step 105 ) then CL 10 is sent a message from MM that informs CL 10 that CL 10 cannot join the offer represented by GOR 10 (step 106 ).
- step 111 the MM sends to CL 10 a request to measure the communications attributes between CL 10 and each of a shortlist of computers identified by the unique network addresses of all of the potentially compatible GSs identified by MM in step 104 above.
- step 121 CL 10 receives one of the latest described requests from MM.
- step 122 a determination is made by CL 10 as to whether the requst is a request to measure communications attributes or is a rejection. If a rejection, then CL 10 finishes. Otherwise, in step 123 CL 10 measures the communications attributes of each of the data communications links between CL 10 and the shortlisted GSs. In step 124 CL 10 reports the results of measuring the various communications attributes back to MM. In step 125 the MM receives this report.
- step 131 the MM compares the communications attributes (for each path between CL 10 and each of the GSs reported on) with the limiting values in GOR 10 (or some predetermined default values for communications attributes absent from GOR 10 ) and if the communications attributes exceed the limiting values according to programmed criteria specified in GOR 10 or, in their absence predetermined defaults (step 132 ) then in step 133 CL 10 is allowed to create a valid game offer by recording the unique network address of one of the qualifying servers in GOR 10 . This is termed early server binding. The server so selected (in step 133 ) is termed the early bound game server (EBGS). If no qualifying server is found then CL 10 is sent a message from MM that informs CL 10 that MM cannot create a game offer (step 135 ) and GOR 10 is destroyed (step 136 ). Methods for destroying records are well known in the arts.
- This embodiment does not use the automatic match approach, so MM informs CL 10 of the progress of the match as each client joins.
- the user of CL 10 can stimulate CL 10 to send a message commanding MM to treat the match as completed.
- User stimulation of programs through means such as (for example) keyboards or computer mice is well known in the computer programming arts.
- the MM then sends each client a message informing the client of the completion of the match.
- the each player's computer Upon receipt of the message informing them of the successful completion of the game match, the each player's computer starts executing the game program instructions and makes game data message exchanges between the each users computer and EBGS. At this point communication between the clients and the MM is no longer essential and gameplay proceeds.
- the present embodiment is an example still further subset of the general description of the invention, this subset being directed to matchmaking for a game that uses multiple clients to multiple servers with late server binding.
- the network that this particular embodiment uses is again the well known Internet.
- the general description above is entirely enabling of the invention generally and of this embodiment in particular to a practitioner ordinarily skilled in the arts.
- MM Matchmaker server program
- an executing instance of this program resides on a server computer.
- Each computer user launches an instance of a client computer program on his computer which computer is then a client computer.
- An instance of a client program sends a request to the MM.
- the request asks the MM to create a game offer and the request includes attributes of the various game and match preferences chosen by the user together with intrinsic attributes of the requested type of game and attributes of the hardware and software installed on the user's computer.
- the intrinsic attributes of the game include limiting values for communications attributes of links between clients and game servers (GSs).
- GSs game servers
- the MM receives this request.
- the MM creates a game offer record (GOR 20 ) which contains the attributes from the request and the return unique network address of CL 20 .
- MM matches the attributes recorded in GOR 20 with the attributes (if any) that game servers (GSs) have, at their own initiative, previously reported to MM and which MM retained in records created for this purpose.
- this matching of game server (GS) attributes to the attributes recorded in GOR 20 fails to identify a sufficient number of GSs (the number required is one of the attributes passed by CL 20 to MM) for which the attributes match GOR 20 adequately according to programmed criteria then CL 20 is sent a message from MM that informs CL 20 that it cannot join the offer represented by GOR 20 .
- the MM sends to CL 20 a request to measure the communications attributes between CL 20 and each of a shortlist of computers identified by the unique network addresses of all of the potentially compatible GSs previously identified by MM.
- CL 20 receives the latest described request from MM.
- CL 20 measures the communications attributes of each of the data communications links between CL 20 and the shortlisted GSs.
- CL 20 reports the results of measuring the various communications attributes back to MM.
- the MM compares the communications attributes (for each path between CL 20 and each of the GSs reported on) with the limiting values in GOR 20 (or some predetermined default values for communications attributes absent from GOR 20 ) and if the communications attributes exceed the limiting values according to programmed criteria specified in GOR 20 (or, in their absence predetermined defaults) then MM creates for CL 20 a valid game offer by recording all the unique network addresses of all of the qualifying servers in GOR 20 .
- the network addresses in this list of unique network addresses is necessarily a subset of the shortlist referred to above.
- CL 20 is sent a message from MM that informs CL 20 that MM cannot create a game offer and GOR 20 is destroyed.
- This embodiment does not use the automatic match approach, so MM informs CL 20 of the progress of the match as each client joins.
- the user of CL 20 can stimulate CL 20 to send a message commanding MM to treat the match as completed.
- the MM selects the GSs to be bound into the match.
- the servers most likely to result in good gameplay are chosen according to programmed criteria and other factors including all the reported communications attributes. This is known as late server binding.
- the MM sends to each server a notification that the match is complete together with a list of the addresses of the servers selected.
- the each player's computer Upon receipt of the message informing them of the successful completion of the game match, the each player's computer starts executing the game program instructions and makes game data message exchanges between the each user's computer and each bound server. At this point communication between the clients and the MM is no longer essential and gameplay proceeds.
Abstract
A method for establishing a peer to peer match of clients for at least one application, the method including: receiving at least one offer being indicative of at least one application for which an offer for matching is proposed from an offering peer client, and recording at least one attribute associated with the offer using at least one offer record; receiving a measurement of at least one communication link property between the offering peer client and an inquiring client; and comparing the offer record with the measured at least one link property to determine if a peer to peer match between the offering and the inquiring peer clients is to be permitted.
Description
- The present application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/758,683, filed on May 26, 2000, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/821,279 filed Mar. 20, 1997, which claims priority of U.S. patent application Serial No. 60/013,812 filed Mar. 21, 1996.
- Computer networks are widely used to connect multiple computer systems together for communicating and sharing information. Computer networks can also be used to implement multi-user applications that allow multiple users to share in the operation of a computer program. Common examples are video and teleconferencing applications, online multiplayer games which allow multiple users to play a game with one another and online chat environments. A problem common to all such multi-user network applications is providing an efficient way to bring together groups of users to join in the running of a multi-user application. Today, the known solutions deal only with the users requirements such as which other people they wish to be matched with. These solutions provide little more than manual methods for the users to select the other users that they wish to be matched with. This is workable only when there are reasonable numbers of users in the pool of all users. It becomes unworkable when there are large numbers of users and when the application has special requirements for network performance or capabilities of the client and/or server computer systems used to implement the application.
- Networked applications for multiple clients exist in three forms. Peer-to-peer applications are executed by multiple client computers with no server or servers required. All communication traffic during the execution of the application is directed between the clients. Other multiple client networked applications use a single server system. The server may execute some portion of the application that is to be shared by all of the clients while the remainder of the application is executed on the clients. The server can also act as a communications collection point. Some or all of the communication traffic is between each of the clients and the server. The clients may additionally communicate with one another as needed. Finally, multiple servers may be used in a multiple client application. Similar to the case of a single server, a portion of the application may be executed on the servers. The multiple servers can also provide communications collection points for the clients.
- A method for establishing a peer to peer match of clients for at least one application, the method including: receiving at least one offer being indicative of at least one application for which an offer for matching is proposed from an offering peer client, and recording at least one attribute associated with the offer using at least one offer record; receiving a measurement of at least one communication link property between the offering peer client and an inquiring client; and comparing the offer record with the measured at least one link property to determine if a peer to peer match between the offering and the inquiring peer clients is to be permitted.
- FIG. 1 is a flow chart showing the interaction between a first client and a match maker in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 2 is a flow chart showing the interaction between a second client and a match maker in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 3 is a flow chart showing the interaction between clients and the match maker of FIGS. 1 and 2 in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 4 is a flow chart showing measurement of communication attributes in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 5 is a flow chart showing the steps in matching in accordance with the present invention.
- FIGS. 6 and 7 are flow charts showing termination methods in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 8 is a flow chart showing the interaction of clients, servers and a match maker in accordance with the present invention.
- FIGS.9-10 are flow charts showing the use of communication attributes in accordance with the present invention.
- FIG. 11 is a flow chart showing the matching operation of the match maker in FIG. 8.
- According to an aspect of the present invention, a network match making system may be used to create matched sets of users of a multi-user networked application. Each user may be associated with a client computer connected to a network. A server computer on the network may execute a software process that is the network match maker. In some implementations there may be one or more additional servers that are also used for supporting the networked application. Clients may be selected into matched sets based on attributes of their users, the clients, application class and instance, the attributes of the servers and the properties of the client-to-client and client-to-server communications links. The network match maker may work with three forms of network application implementation: peer-to-peer, multiple clients to a single server and multiple clients to multiple servers.
- According to an aspect of the present invention, a network match making system that solves the above described problems in the prior art and provides an automated means for users to be matched with one another for a networked application may be provided. The network match maker may not only take into account user preferences and attributes, but attributes of the client computer, the application, any optional servers needed by the application and the properties of the communications links between the clients and the clients and any optional servers.
- According to an aspect of the present invention, a network match making process runs on a server system on a network that is used by clients to be matched into matched sets of clients for a multi-user application. When the networked application operates in a networked system with multiple servers that may be used by the application, the network match maker also matches a server to the matched set of clients. A key idea behind the present invention is that clients and the server are matched not only on the basis of user attributes, but also on the basis of client, server and application attributes and on network performance characteristics including bandwidth, latency and packet loss.
- Attributes
- The network match maker matches clients and a server into matched sets by comparing the attributes of the user, the client, the server and the properties of the network links between them to the requirements of the application.
- Client and User Attributes
- The user attributes include the obvious characteristics of the user that are relevant to the networked application. Some examples include things such as skill level, age, people the user doesn't want to be matched with. For the sake of a clearer discussion, the user and client attributes will be lumped into one group, and is referred to as “client attributes”. Client attributes describe the capabilities of the client computer system. The performance of the client computer, the type and performance of its network link and the types and versions of the networked applications that are installed on it are all reasonable examples of client attributes.
- Application Attributes
- The application attributes are the requirements of the networked application. Examples of these requirements include the type and performance of the client, the type and performance or any necessary server and the required properties of network links between the clients and between the clients and the server. Application attributes come in two forms, class and instance. The class attributes of an application apply to any instance of the application. The networked match maker operates in an environment where there will be multiple instances of each application. When an instance of an application is created, it inherits the class attributes while additional instance attributes may also be applied. These instance attributes may simply override some of the class attributes inherited by the instance, while others may be specific only to application instances.
- Server Attributes
- Example of static server attributes include the type and performance of the server system, types and versions of any networked application software that is installed on the server. Dynamic attributes include the current load on the server. Considering the current load on the server when assigning application instances to a server is a way to effect dynamic load balancing on the servers in a multiple server system.
- Communications Attributes
- Communications attributes are the properties of the network link between two computer systems. These will include the links between clients and links between clients and a server. The properties of network links will include the available bandwidth, the latency and the packet loss rate. Many networked applications will have certain minimum requirements for bandwidth and maximum requirements for latency. There are other metrics of communication performance that may be valuable measures of the properties of a communications link between two computer systems that also can be used.
- Types of Matches
- The network match maker forms matched sets of users by either automatically matching users into matched sets or allowing users to create match offers that other users may browse and then choose to join until full matched sets are completed. In both of these cases, the match maker will choose a server for the matched set if multiple servers are available and the networked application requires it. Automatic matching is a simple variant of user created match offers, so the user created match offer case is discussed first.
- In both of these types of matches, there is the concept of a moderator. The moderator is the agent that chooses the instance attributes of a match offer. When the match offer is created, it inherits the class attributes of the application. The moderator may then modify the attributes to create the match offer instance attributes. When the application is launched for a match offer, it does so using the instance attributes of the match offer. In user created match offers, the most simple case is that the user that created the offer is the moderator. In automatic matches, the match maker itself is the moderator. Other possibilities exist. It is possible for some or all of the users in a match offer to share powers of the moderator. They may be able to override each others attribute choices so that the last setting of the attributes wins, or there may be a voting scheme between the users sharing moderator powers. It is also possible to imagine a mixture of match maker and user moderator powers. Some of the instance attributes might be set by the match maker and others by one or more users that join the match offer.
- User Created Match Offers
- Users may create their own specific offers to other users to match with. These are called match offers. To create a match offer, the user will choose one application for which to create a match offer. The offer will inherit the class attributes of the application, but the user may add additional instance attributes for their specific match offer. The user that created the original match offer will be considered the moderator of that offer and will be the only one that is able to select the instance attributes of the match offer. Other users will browse these match offers, examine their attributes, select an offer that they find acceptable and attempt to join that offer. The match maker will compare the client attributes and the communications attributes of any relevant communication links to the required instance attributes. If they do not match the required attributes of the match offer, the match maker will prevent the user from joining the match offer. If they do match, the new client will join the offer and will be added to the matched set of clients associated with the offer. As clients attempt to join the match offer, the match maker will also compare their attributes with those of the other clients to make sure that the user attributes are compatible before a client is allowed to join the match offer. Once enough clients have joined the match offer, the moderator can select to launch the application.
- How the network match maker determines how the properties of any relevant communications links affect which clients can join a match offer depends on the architecture of the networked application and is described in the following sections.
- Peer-to-Peer
- When the client requests to join a match offer, the network match maker will ask the new client to measure the properties of the communications links between the new client and all of the existing clients that already are members of the match offer. The properties of the communications links between the new client and the existing clients that are members of the match offer will be returned to the match maker in a vector of network properties. These properties will be compared to the requirements of the instance attributes for the match offer. The application will have its own class attributes for communications properties of the network links between the peers needed to run the application. The creator of the match offer may override these attributes to create instance attributes for the properties of the communications links between the peers. If the client attributes and the attributes of the communication links match the requirements of the application instance, the new client will be joined into the match offer.
- Multiple Clients to a Single Server
- In this case, the server is assumed to have all of the necessary properties to host the necessary portions of the application. As with the peer-to-peer case when a client requests to join a match offer the network match maker will ask the new client to measure the properties of the communications links between the new client and all of the existing clients that already are members of the match offer. These properties will be returned to the match maker as a vector of communications properties which will be compared to the requirements of the application instance attributes for communications properties of client-to-client links. In this case the network match maker will also ask the new client to measure the properties of the communications link between the new client and the single server. The properties of this link are also matched to the instance attributes for communications properties of the client-to-server link. If all matches properly, the new client is allowed to join the match offer. In many multi-user networked applications that use a single server all client-to-client communications will be through the server, so there will be no direct client-to-client communications. In these cases, only the properties of the communications links from the clients to the server will be relevant.
- Multiple Clients to Multiple Servers
- With multiple server systems, the situation becomes more complex. Not only must the system consider the properties of the communications links between the clients and the multiple servers, but additionally the attributes of the server systems. Not only must the network match maker match the clients into matched sets, it also must determine which of multiple server systems is to be associated with each matched set of clients. In the discussion here, it is assumed that the match maker will ultimately choose a single server to be matched with each matched set of clients associated with a match offer. The approach outlined here can be easily generalized to support applications that required multiple servers to be used when running a multi-user application. However, there are two server selection policies that the network match maker can use to select a specific server for a match offer called early server binding and late server binding.
- When a client asks to join a match offer for a particular application, the network match maker asks the client to measure the properties of the communications links between itself, all of the other clients that are members of the matched set associated with the match offer and all of the server systems that are available for that application. The servers available for that application are a subset of all of the servers based on the attributes of the servers and the attributes for server requirements for the match offer instance. When a client creates a match offer they may specify instance attributes for the application that override or add to the application class attributes. This may further limit the subset of server systems that can support the application. When a new client requests to join the match offer, the network match maker will compare the client attributes to the required attributes of the match offer. If they match, the network match maker will then compare the properties of the relevant communications links to the requirements of the specific match offer.
- With early server binding, the network match maker chooses the server from the qualified subset of servers using only the properties of the communications links between the creator of the match offer and the qualified servers. If multiple servers have communications links to the creator of the match offer that meet the requirements of the match offer, the network match maker will choose one based on some defined criteria. A reasonable criterion would be the best performance, but other criteria would be possible. As a new client attempts to join the match offer, the match maker compares the client attributes, the properties of the communications links between the new client and the existing members of the match offer and from the new client to the selected server. If all of these attributes and communications properties meet the requirements of the match offer, the client is allowed to join. While early server binding is the simplest server selection policy, it may not always result in the best server selection for all of the clients and it may prevent some clients from joining a match offer that they could have joined if a different server had been selected. This is clearly the case if network latency is one of the important properties of a network link. With early binding, a qualified server with the lowest communications latency to the client creating the match offer will be chosen. This latency may be far lower than the latency required by the match offer. The latency requirement of the match offer creates a virtual “sphere” around the chosen server. Clients that match the attributes of the match offer that are within the latency sphere centered around the chosen server will be able to join the match offer. Depending on the location in latency “space” of other qualified servers and other clients, another server may be a better choice that will not only allow the creator of the match offer, but more clients than the original server choice.
- Server late binding eliminates this issue, but is more complex. With server late binding the network match maker maintains a pruned list of qualified servers for a match offer. The clients join the match offer in the usual way. The attributes of the new client are first compared to those of the match offer. If they match, the properties of the network links are compared. The match maker compares the properties of the network links between the new client and the member clients of the match offer to the instance attributes of the match offer. If they match, the properties of the network links between the client and the pruned list of servers is compared to the instance attributes of the match offer. If one or more of the communications links between the new client and the pruned list of servers meet the requirements of the match offer the client is allowed to join it. The network match maker then prunes the list of servers associated with the match offer to eliminate any for which the properties of the communications link from the new client to the server did not meet the instance attributes of the match offer. This will guarantee that the existing clients that are members of the match offer will continue to meet the requirements of the match offer. When the moderator finally chooses to launch the game, there may be more than one server in the pruned server list. The network match maker will select a final server using a selection criteria that it chooses. Typically this selection criteria will choose the server with the best overall communications properties to all of the client that are members of the match offer. In many network applications, there will be no direct communications between the clients. There will only be communications between the clients and a server. In this case there will be no need to measure properties of the communications links between the clients and so this will not be part of the match making process.
- Automatic Matches
- Automatic matches are very similar to user created match offers except that the users ask the match maker to create automatic match offers to match them with. A user specifies an application to run and requests an automatic match. The network match maker looks at the users requesting an automatic match of the same application and attempts to organize them into matched sets. The match maker creates automatic match offers to which it matches the clients. As part of creating an automatic match, the user may be given the ability to specify modifications to the attributes of the automatic match offer instance of an application. As an example a user might ask for an automatic match for a game with only expert players.
- When a client requests an automatic match, match maker will compare the client attributes and communications properties of the requester as applicable to the attributes of the existing automatic match offers. If the client attributes and applicable communications properties of the client match an automatic match offer, the client will be entered into the matched set of clients associated with the match offer. If the attributes of a client and applicable communication properties do not match the instance attributes of the automatic match offer, the match maker will move on to the next automatic match offer. This continues until the client has been matched to an automatic match offer, or there are no more automatic match offers. If the new client has failed to match any of the automatic match offers, the network match maker creates a new automatic match offer and joins the new client with it. When a particular automatic match offer contains enough clients as required by the attributes, the match maker causes an instance of the application to be launched. The network match maker will also support a reasonable time-out period for the launching of automatic match offers.
- The particular cases of peer-to-peer, multiple clients to single server and multiple clients to multiple servers are all handled in this frame work as they would with user created match offers. A final detail of automatic match offers is that users that are manually browsing match offers will also see and be able to join the automatic match offers.
- Examples of Communications Attributes
- The most important communications attributes are bandwidth, latency and packet loss rate. Other attributes of communications networks may be important in some applications, but these are the most broadly important attributes. Below are examples of how these attributes would be used by the match maker for matching clients and servers to a match offer. For the purposes of these examples, the discussion here relates only to how the communications attributes are used in the match making process. The other client and server attributes will be ignored.
- Bandwidth is the data rate that can be supported by a particular network link. Networked applications will have requirements for the data rates that they need to send between clients or between clients and a server. Consider as an example an application that be operated with or without speech communications between the clients. When used with digital speech, the speech data consumes a significant amount of data bandwidth. Further consider that the application is a peer-to-peer application with no need for a server. In this example a user creates a match offer for this application and sets an instance attribute for this match offer to enable speech communications. When a new client requests to join the match offer, the match maker will ask the new client to measure the bandwidth between the new client and all of the clients that are already members of the match offer. If the bandwidth between the new client and any one of the existing members of the match offer is too low to support the bandwidth requirements of the application when speech is enabled, the match maker will see that the client attributes for communications bandwidth to one of the existing clients does not match the instance attributes of the match offer for client-to-client communication bandwidth. The new client will therefore be prevented from joining the match offer. The same client may be allowed to join a match offer for the same application when the match offer instance specifies that client-to-client speech is not enabled. This will be true if the match offer instance attributes for client-to-client bandwidth are equal to or lower to the bandwidth from the new client to each of the existing client members of the match offer.
- Latency is another important communications attribute. Latency is the time for a communications data to travel over a network link from one system to another. Many interactive applications will have strict requirements for communications latency that if not met will prevent the application from operating properly. Total latency on a communications link will be the sum of many factors including the propagation time of signals over long distances. The other factors can generally be minimized or reduced, but propagation delays are set by physical laws. Imagine a highly interactive game that is played between multiple clients through a server. Each client in a game instance sends and receives its communications data to the other clients through the server. In this example, also consider that the pool of potential clients to play the game are spread over a wide geographic area and that there are multiple servers also spread through the same area. The example game has strict latency requirements for the communications delay between the clients and a server used for a game instance. If the latency between a client and the server exceed this, the quality of the game play for the client or all of the clients in the game instance may be unacceptable. In this example, the match maker must not only match clients together into matched sets, but it also must match each matched set of clients to a specific server. As described earlier there are two methods of matching the server to a group of clients: early server binding and later server binding. With early server binding, the match maker will choose the server that has the lowest measured latency to the first client in the match offer. As each new client attempts to join the match offer, the match maker will ask the client to measure its latency to the server that has been selected for the match offer. If the measured latency meets the requirement of the match offer instance for latency, the new client will be allowed to join. The end result is that all of the clients that join the match offer will meet the requirements for latency of the match offer instance. With server late binding, when the match offer is initially created, the match maker will create a list of all of the servers that match all of the instance attributes of the match offer. As clients join the match offer, the match maker will ask the clients to measure their latency to each of the servers in the list. The new client will provide this vector of measured latencies to the match maker. Each latency in the vector will be compared to the latency attribute requirements of the match offer. If one or more the latency vector elements meet the latency requirements of the match offer, the new client will be allowed to join it. The match maker will then prune from the server list associated with the match offer any servers whose corresponding latency vector elements for the new client did not meet the requirements of the match offer. Once all of the desired clients have joined the match offer, there may be more than one server that are in the pruned list. The match maker will then use some criteria to select a single server. One criteria would be to choose the server that minimized the average latency between that server and all of the clients. Another criteria would be to minimize the latency differences between each of the clients and the server.
- In a well managed network, most of the latency between two points in the network will come from the network propagation time. In both the early and late server binding cases, this will mean that the clients will tend to be matched to servers that are located near to them in the network. If the network tends to minimize the lengths of the network connections, this will result in clients being matched to servers in their geographical vicinity.
- Packet loss rate is the rate at which data is lost during transmission in a network. Most networks transmit data in discrete units called packets or frames. Some networking protocols such as UDP do not provide guaranteed data delivery so it is up to the application to either be tolerant of transmission loss or provide a means to retransmit the data. Other networking protocols such as TCP/IP do provide guaranteed delivery. However, when a packet is lost this must be signaled to the sender and the transmission retried. Unfortunately, this takes time and introduces a large delay before the lost packet can be recovered. In some applications, this delay causes more problems than the loss of the data. Therefore, many interactive applications will have requirements for maximum tolerated packet loss rates. This then becomes an important attribute of a network link that an application may want the match maker to consider as part of matching clients to a match offer and a server to matched set of clients. This attribute will be used in a similar fashion to the other network attributes.
- Generalizations to the Invention
- The previous discussion of client-server applications only considers the cases where this is only a single server or the match maker chooses a single server from multiple servers to match to a match offer. It is also possible in the case where there are multiple servers that the application may require multiple servers. Consider an application that has two forms of data that it transmits through the network. As an example consider an interactive game that supports speech communications between players. It will transmit game information and user speech data that it separates into two separate data streams that flow between the clients and two different servers. One server will handle the game data while the other the speech data. This allows the server that handles the speech data to be equipped with special capabilities specific to processing the speech data prior to routing it to the clients that are to receive it.
- With this arrangement, the application will require two servers, each with unique attributes. Since the game data and speech data will have different bandwidth, latency and packet loss requirements, the application will have separate requirements for each of the two data streams. This will mean that there will be two sets of application attributes for properties of the network links between the clients and the servers. During the match making process in this example, the match maker will ask a client requesting to join a match offer to measure the properties of the network links from the client to each of the two servers. For the client to be allowed to join the match offer, both sets of network properties must match the instance attributes of the match offer for the application requirements for each of the network links from a client to the two servers.
- In the prior discussions it has been assumed that once a sufficient number of clients have joined a match offer for an application that the application is launched with all of the clients that have successfully joined the match offer. The launch may be triggered by a moderator in a user created match offer or may be triggered by the match maker when enough clients have been matched to an automatic match offer. There is another important case of a persistent application. This is an application that allows clients to join and leave it during its operations. In this case, the game may be launched by a single client or automatically by the match maker. In this case, the running application also embodies a match offer. If the application requires a server or servers, they are chosen at the time that the application is launched. The server is chosen based on its attributes and the required attributes of the application. When a client requests to join the running application, the attributes of the client are compared to the required attributes of the application. The properties of the appropriate network links are measured and matched to the required network attributes of the application. If all matches, the new client is allowed to join the running application. At a later time the client may leave the application. This situation is the same as clients joining a match offer with early server binding.
- Although the above description of the present invention is entirely enabling of the invention generally and of this embodiment in particular to a practitioner ordinarily skilled in the arts, as an aid to more quickly understanding the invention it is useful to consider in some detail an embodiment that contains only a relatively small subset of the invention and which is therefore relatively simple to describe and also is relatively quick and easy to understand.
- The present embodiment relates to matchmaking for Peer to Peer games that is to say games that play without the use of any Servers even though the matchmaker is itself implemented as at least one Server. The network that this particular embodiment uses is the well known Internet which uses the also well known Internet Protocols (such as TCP/IP and UDP/IP). Moreover, for simplicity since the present embodiment is described only by way of illustration of the above described invention, only a relatively few of the possible alternatives are incorporated into this particular embodiment.
- The term computer program is commonly abbreviated to program. A matchmaker server program is used, an executing instance of this program (abbreviated to MM) resides on a server computer. The concepts of server computers and executing instances of programs are well known in the computing arts. Each computer user (abbreviated to user in this embodiment) launches an instance of a client computer program on his computer which computer is then a client computer for the time being.
- Referring to FIG. 1, in
step 11, an instance of a client program (CL1) sends a request to the MM, the use of message exchanges by means of Internet communications to send requests is well known in the data communications and computing arts. The request asks the MM to create a game offer and the request includes attributes of the various game and match preferences chosen by the user together with intrinsic attributes of the requested type of game and attributes of the hardware and software installed on the user's computer. The intrinsic attributes of the game include limiting values for communications attributes of links between users' computers. Instep 12, the MM receives this request. A well known intrinsic feature of the Internet Protocol (IP) used by CL1 to send a request to the MM, is that all messages carry a return unique network address in the form of an Internet Protocol address (IPaddr.) exploiting which the MM can subsequently send a reply data message to the CL1, this eliminates any need for the CL1 to embed an address within the request as might be needed on other types of network or link. Instep 13 the MM creates a record to represent game offer (GOR1) which contains the attributes from the request and the return unique network address of CL1. Records, sets of records and techniques for creating and maintaining them are well known in the computer programming art. Instep 14 the MM sends a reply back to CL1 notifying CL1 that the match is not yet complete (step 14′). Instep 15 CL1 waits for a request from MM. CL1 thus becomes the first member of a game match yet to be completed. Instep 16 the MM makes the contents of the game offer record available to other potential users. Instep 17 MM waits for further requests from other clients. - Referring to FIG. 2, in
step 21, another instance of a client program (CL2) which is executing on a different user's computer from CL1 and also a different computer from MM, sends a request for a list of game offers to the MM. Instep 22 the MM receives this request. Instep 23 the MM responds with information extracted from GOR1 that was created instep 13. Instep 24 CL1 receives the response from MM which contains the game offer information from GOR1. - Referring to FIG. 3, in
step 31, CL2 sends to MM a request to be matched into the offer represented by GOR1. Instep 32 the MM receives this request. Instep 33 the MM compares the attributes in the latest request sent by CL2 with those in GOR1 and if they do not match by whatever criteria the MM is programmed to use then CL2 is sent a message from MM that informs CL2 that it cannot join the offer represented by GOR1, at least not at this time (step 34). The use of programmed criteria to match requirements and sets of requirements is well known in the computer programming art. Assuming the attributes match instep 35 the MM sends to CL2 a request to measure the communications attributes between CL1 and CL2. - Referring to FIG. 4, in
step 41, CL2 receives the latest described request from CL2. In step 42 a determination is made by MM as to whether the request is a request to measure communications (comms.) attributes or is a rejection. Instep 43 CL2 measures the communications attributes of the data communications link between CL2 and CL1. Methods of measuring communications attributes are well known in the arts. Not all communications attributes are mutually orthogonal, though the especially important ones of latency, bandwidth and packet loss rate are indeed substantially orthogonal. For example, CL2 could measure a data throughput rate attribute directly or CL2 could measure latency, bandwidth and packet loss rate separately and then calculate data throughput rate to a reasonable degree of accuracy (limited inter-alia by mensuration precision) from those three attributes by methods well known in the data communications arts. Another communications attribute is best case round trip time for a kilobyte sized message, this attribute is a function of latency, bandwidth and as a second order effect computer speed but is entirely independent of packet loss rate. Round trip times and methods of measuring them are also well known in the arts. Instep 44 CL2 reports the results of measuring the attributes of the data communications link between CL2 and CL1 back to MM. Instep 45 MM receives the message reporting the results of the comms. attribute measurement. - Referring to FIG. 5, in
step 51, the MM compares the communications attributes with the limiting values for communications attributes for the game recorded in GOR1 (or some predetermined default values for any limiting values for communications attributes absent from GOR1) and if (step 52) the communications attributes exceed any limiting values for communications attributes specified in GOR1 (or, in their absence predetermined defaults) according to programmed criteria then instep 53 MM notifies CL2 that it is allowed to join the game offer and a further game offer record (GOR2) is created to record all the known attributes associated with CL2. Otherwise (step 54) CL2 is sent a message from MM that informs CL2 that it cannot join the offer represented by GOR1 (step 55). If not allowed to join, CL2 finishes. If allowed to join, CL2 waits for completion of a game match (step 56). - Referring to FIG. 6, the MM must next determine whether or not the game match is complete. One vital criterion is whether sufficient players are joined into the game offer (step61). This embodiment uses the automatic match approach, so if a sufficient number of instances of client programs are joined then a time-out timer is started (step 62) for a predetermined interval such as 30 seconds during which time further clients may join the game provided the maximum allowed number is players is not reached (step 63). Time-out timers are well known in the computer programming art. If a sufficient number of players is not yet joined then the time-out timer is not started yet and MM waits for more client (step 64).
- Until and unless the time-out timer expires further instances of client programs (CL3, CL4 etc) may join the game offer upon the same basis of negotiation as CL2 used, with the exception that the third and later clients (CLn) will be requested and required by the MM to measure and report back the communications attributes between the candidate instance of client program and all of the clients already joined (CL1 through CL(n−1)).
- Referring to FIG. 7, in
step 71, when and if the time-out timer expires MM deems the game matched and sends messages to each of the clients (CL1 through CLn) to inform them of the successful completion of the game match. Otherwise MM takes no particular action in connection with the time-out timer (step 72). Upon receipt of the message informing them of the successful completion of the game match, each player's computer starts executing the game program instructions and each makes game data message exchanges between each user computer upon a Peer to Peer basis. At this point communication between the clients and the MM (which is a server) is no longer essential and gameplay proceeds. - By way of further illustration the present embodiment is an example subset of the general description of the present invention, the subset being directed to matchmaking for a game that uses multiple clients to a single server with early server binding. The network that this particular embodiment uses is again the well known Internet. The above general description of the present invention is entirely enabling of the invention generally and of this embodiment in particular to a practitioner ordinarily skilled in the arts.
- A matchmaker server program is used, an executing instance of this program (abbreviated to MM) resides on a server computer. Each computer user (abbreviated to user in this embodiment) launches an instance of a client computer program on his computer which computer is then a client computer.
- Referring to FIG. 8, in
step 101, an instance of a client program (CL10) sends a request to the MM. The request asks the MM to create a game offer and the request includes attributes of the various game and match preferences chosen by the user together with intrinsic attributes of the requested type of game and attributes of the hardware and software installed on the user's computer. The intrinsic attributes of the game include limiting values for communications attributes of links between clients and game servers (GSs). Instep 102, the MM receives this request. Instep 103 the MM creates a game offer record (GOR10) which contains the attributes from the request and the return unique network address of CL10. Instep 104 MM matches the attributes recorded in GOR10 with the attributes (if any) that game servers (GSs) have, at their own initiative, previously reported to MM and which MM retained in records created for this purpose. In the case that this matching of game server (GS) attributes to the attributes recorded in GOR10 fails to identify a GS for which the attributes match GOR10 adequately according to programmed criteria (step 105) then CL10 is sent a message from MM that informs CL10 that CL10 cannot join the offer represented by GOR10 (step 106). - Referring to FIG. 9, in
step 111 the MM sends to CL10 a request to measure the communications attributes between CL10 and each of a shortlist of computers identified by the unique network addresses of all of the potentially compatible GSs identified by MM instep 104 above. - Referring to FIG. 10, in
step 121, CL10 receives one of the latest described requests from MM. Instep 122, a determination is made by CL10 as to whether the requst is a request to measure communications attributes or is a rejection. If a rejection, then CL10 finishes. Otherwise, instep 123 CL10 measures the communications attributes of each of the data communications links between CL10 and the shortlisted GSs. Instep 124 CL10 reports the results of measuring the various communications attributes back to MM. Instep 125 the MM receives this report. - Referring to FIG. 11, in
step 131, the MM compares the communications attributes (for each path between CL10 and each of the GSs reported on) with the limiting values in GOR10 (or some predetermined default values for communications attributes absent from GOR10) and if the communications attributes exceed the limiting values according to programmed criteria specified in GOR10 or, in their absence predetermined defaults (step 132) then instep 133 CL10 is allowed to create a valid game offer by recording the unique network address of one of the qualifying servers in GOR10. This is termed early server binding. The server so selected (in step 133) is termed the early bound game server (EBGS). If no qualifying server is found then CL10 is sent a message from MM that informs CL10 that MM cannot create a game offer (step 135) and GOR10 is destroyed (step 136). Methods for destroying records are well known in the arts. - At CL10, a determination is made as to whether MM has allowed CL10 to join game offer (step 137). If CL10 is allowed, then CL10 waits for completion of game match (step 138). Otherwise, if not allowed to join, CL10 finishes.
- When further clients attempt to join the game offer represented by GOR10, they are requested by the MM to measure the communications attributes only between themselves and the EBGS. On reporting these communications attributes back to MM a determination is made as to whether those attributes exceed the limiting values according to programmed criteria established above so that the client may be allowed to join the game offer.
- This embodiment does not use the automatic match approach, so MM informs CL10 of the progress of the match as each client joins. When the user of CL10 is satisfied that a sufficient number of players have joined the match then the user of CL10 can stimulate CL10 to send a message commanding MM to treat the match as completed. User stimulation of programs through means such as (for example) keyboards or computer mice is well known in the computer programming arts. The MM then sends each client a message informing the client of the completion of the match.
- Upon receipt of the message informing them of the successful completion of the game match, the each player's computer starts executing the game program instructions and makes game data message exchanges between the each users computer and EBGS. At this point communication between the clients and the MM is no longer essential and gameplay proceeds.
- By way of further illustration the present embodiment is an example still further subset of the general description of the invention, this subset being directed to matchmaking for a game that uses multiple clients to multiple servers with late server binding. The network that this particular embodiment uses is again the well known Internet. The general description above is entirely enabling of the invention generally and of this embodiment in particular to a practitioner ordinarily skilled in the arts.
- When a matchmaker server program is used, an executing instance of this program (MM) resides on a server computer. Each computer user (user) launches an instance of a client computer program on his computer which computer is then a client computer.
- An instance of a client program (CL20) sends a request to the MM. The request asks the MM to create a game offer and the request includes attributes of the various game and match preferences chosen by the user together with intrinsic attributes of the requested type of game and attributes of the hardware and software installed on the user's computer. The intrinsic attributes of the game include limiting values for communications attributes of links between clients and game servers (GSs). Next the MM receives this request. The MM creates a game offer record (GOR20) which contains the attributes from the request and the return unique network address of CL20. Then MM matches the attributes recorded in GOR20 with the attributes (if any) that game servers (GSs) have, at their own initiative, previously reported to MM and which MM retained in records created for this purpose. In the case that this matching of game server (GS) attributes to the attributes recorded in GOR20 fails to identify a sufficient number of GSs (the number required is one of the attributes passed by CL20 to MM) for which the attributes match GOR20 adequately according to programmed criteria then CL20 is sent a message from MM that informs CL20 that it cannot join the offer represented by GOR20.
- Next the MM sends to CL20 a request to measure the communications attributes between CL20 and each of a shortlist of computers identified by the unique network addresses of all of the potentially compatible GSs previously identified by MM.
- Then CL20 receives the latest described request from MM. CL20 measures the communications attributes of each of the data communications links between CL20 and the shortlisted GSs. CL20 reports the results of measuring the various communications attributes back to MM.
- The MM compares the communications attributes (for each path between CL20 and each of the GSs reported on) with the limiting values in GOR20 (or some predetermined default values for communications attributes absent from GOR20) and if the communications attributes exceed the limiting values according to programmed criteria specified in GOR20 (or, in their absence predetermined defaults) then MM creates for CL20 a valid game offer by recording all the unique network addresses of all of the qualifying servers in GOR20.
- The network addresses in this list of unique network addresses is necessarily a subset of the shortlist referred to above.
- The servers to be bound into the match are not yet selected because this embodiment uses late server binding.
- If an insufficient number of qualifying servers are found then CL20 is sent a message from MM that informs CL20 that MM cannot create a game offer and GOR20 is destroyed.
- When further clients attempt to join the game offer represented by GOR20, they are requested by the MM to measure the communications attributes between themselves and all of the servers listed in GOR20 as qualifying.
- On reporting these communications attributes back to MM a determination is made as to whether those attributes exceed the limiting values for a sufficient number of servers according to programmed criteria established above so that the client may be allowed to join the game offer. If the client is allowed to join the game offer then any servers for which the communications attributes of the further client fail to meet criteria are removed from the list of qualifying servers in GOR20. Thus the list of qualifying servers may become smaller and smaller as more clients join the game offer.
- This embodiment does not use the automatic match approach, so MM informs CL20 of the progress of the match as each client joins. When the user of CL20 is satisfied that a sufficient number of players have joined the match then the user of CL20 can stimulate CL20 to send a message commanding MM to treat the match as completed. At this stage the MM selects the GSs to be bound into the match. The servers most likely to result in good gameplay are chosen according to programmed criteria and other factors including all the reported communications attributes. This is known as late server binding. The MM sends to each server a notification that the match is complete together with a list of the addresses of the servers selected.
- Upon receipt of the message informing them of the successful completion of the game match, the each player's computer starts executing the game program instructions and makes game data message exchanges between the each user's computer and each bound server. At this point communication between the clients and the MM is no longer essential and gameplay proceeds.
- It is to be understood that even though numerous embodiments and advantages of the present invention have been set forth in the foregoing description, the above disclosure is illustrative only, and changes may be made in detail yet remain within the broad principles of the invention. Therefore, the present invention is to be limited only by the appended claims.
Claims (20)
1. A method for establishing a peer to peer match of clients for at least one application, said method comprising:
receiving at least one offer being indicative of at least one application for which an offer for matching is proposed from an offering peer client, and recording at least one attribute associated with said offer using at least one offer record;
receiving a measurement of at least one communication link property between said offering peer client and an inquiring client; and
comparing said offer record with said measured at least one link property to determine if a peer to peer match between said offering and said inquiring peer clients is to be permitted.
2. The method of claim 1 , further comprising the step of launching an application so as to allow direct peer to peer communication between said first and inquiring clients.
3. The method of claim 1 , further comprising the step of launching an application allowing direct peer to peer communication for allowable matches after a predetermined number of inquiring peer clients are deemed allowable matches.
4. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:
receiving a measurement of at least one communication link property between said first peer client and a second inquiring client; and
comparing said offer record with said measured at least one link property so as to determine if a peer to peer match between said offering and second inquiring peer clients is to be permitted.
5. The method of claim 1 , wherein said at least one communication link property comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of bandwidth, latency, and packet loss.
6. A system suitable for establishing a peer to peer match between at least two peer client computers each including at least one instance of an application, said system comprising:
at least one server;
code for recording an offer for match and desired match attributes associated with at least one of said at least two peer client computers;
code for recording link performance information indicative of communications between any two of said at least two peer client computers so as to be associable with said recorded offer and attributes; and,
code for comparing said recorded offer and attributes and said recorded link properties to determine whether a peer to peer match is to be permitted;
wherein, said code for recording said offer, code for recording said link performance information and code for comparing are at least partially stored using said at least one server.
7. The system of claim 6 , further comprising code for accepting said offer of match from at least one of said at least two client computers, providing access to said at least two client computers of said offer record allowing an acceptance of said offer of match by one or more of said peer client computers, requiring an offer-accepting peer client computer to provide attributes and measure the link parameters to each one of said at least two client computers whereby said attributes and said link parameters are forwarded to said match maker program, and comparing said record of offer with said attributes and said link parameters in determining the suitability of a match before initiating said peer to peer match.
8. The system of claim 6 , wherein said attributes include instance and class attributes.
9. The system of claim 6 , wherein said code for measuring includes at least one link measurement application residing in at least one of said peer client computers, wherein the results of said link measurement program are forwarded to said at least one server prior to comparing said offer record.
10. The system of claim 6 , wherein said code for recording said offer, code for recording said link performance information and code for comparing are part of an application.
11. A method for establishing a match for at least voice and data, said method comprising:
receiving at least one offer associated with an application supporting voice and data communications for which an offer for matching is proposed from an offering peer client, and recording at least one attribute along with said offer using at least one offer record;
receiving a measurement of at least one communication link property between said first peer client and an inquiring client; and
comparing said at least one offer record with said measured at least one link property so as to determine if a peer to peer match between said offering and inquiring peer clients is allowable.
12. The method of claim 11 , further comprising launching said application thereby allowing communication for voice and data for allowable matches.
13. The method of claim 11 , further comprising launching said application so as to allow communication for voice and data for allowable matches after a predetermined number of inquiring clients are deemed allowable matches.
14. The method of claim 11 , further comprising the steps of;
receiving a measurement of at least one communication link property between said first peer client and a second inquiring client;
comparing said offer record with said measured at least one link property so as to determine if a peer to peer match between said offering and second inquiring peer clients is allowable; and,
launching said application allowing communication for voice and data for allowable matches.
15. The method of claim 11 , wherein said communication link properties comprise one or more selected from the group consisting of bandwidth, latency, and packet loss.
16. A method for establishing at least one match of clients for at least one application, said method comprising:
receiving at least one offer being indicative of an application from an offering client, and recording at least one attribute along with said offer using at least one offer record;
selecting at least one game server using said at least one offer record;
receiving a measurement of at least one communication link property between said offering client and said at least one game server; and
comparing said received measurement to at least one condition associated with said at least one application so as to determine if a match between said offering client and said selected at least one game server is allowable.
17. The method of claim 16 , further comprising instantiating said at least one application if said match is allowable.
18. The method of claim 17 , wherein said selecting comprises selecting a plurality of servers, and said instantiating is based upon said comparing.
19. The method of claim 18 , further comprising:
receiving a second measurement of at least one communication link property between a second client and said at least one game server; and
comparing said received second measurement to at least one condition associated with said at least one application so as to determine if a match between said second client and said selected at least one game server is allowable.
20. The method of claim 19 , further comprising deselecting at least one of said selected servers if said match between said second client and said selected at least one game server is not allowable.
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US09/997,194 US20020091833A1 (en) | 1996-03-21 | 2001-11-29 | Network match maker |
Applications Claiming Priority (4)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US1381296P | 1996-03-21 | 1996-03-21 | |
US08/821,279 US6128660A (en) | 1996-03-21 | 1997-03-20 | Network match maker |
US09/578,683 US6345297B1 (en) | 1996-03-21 | 2000-05-26 | Network match maker |
US09/997,194 US20020091833A1 (en) | 1996-03-21 | 2001-11-29 | Network match maker |
Related Parent Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US09/578,683 Continuation US6345297B1 (en) | 1996-03-21 | 2000-05-26 | Network match maker |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20020091833A1 true US20020091833A1 (en) | 2002-07-11 |
Family
ID=21761892
Family Applications (5)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US08/822,785 Expired - Lifetime US5894556A (en) | 1996-03-21 | 1997-03-20 | Network match maker matching requesters based on communication attribute between the requesters |
US08/821,279 Expired - Lifetime US6128660A (en) | 1996-03-21 | 1997-03-20 | Network match maker |
US08/822,289 Expired - Lifetime US5828843A (en) | 1996-03-21 | 1997-03-20 | Object-oriented method for matching clients together with servers according to attributes included in join request |
US09/578,683 Expired - Lifetime US6345297B1 (en) | 1996-03-21 | 2000-05-26 | Network match maker |
US09/997,194 Abandoned US20020091833A1 (en) | 1996-03-21 | 2001-11-29 | Network match maker |
Family Applications Before (4)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US08/822,785 Expired - Lifetime US5894556A (en) | 1996-03-21 | 1997-03-20 | Network match maker matching requesters based on communication attribute between the requesters |
US08/821,279 Expired - Lifetime US6128660A (en) | 1996-03-21 | 1997-03-20 | Network match maker |
US08/822,289 Expired - Lifetime US5828843A (en) | 1996-03-21 | 1997-03-20 | Object-oriented method for matching clients together with servers according to attributes included in join request |
US09/578,683 Expired - Lifetime US6345297B1 (en) | 1996-03-21 | 2000-05-26 | Network match maker |
Country Status (5)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (5) | US5894556A (en) |
EP (1) | EP0965084A1 (en) |
JP (1) | JP2000508097A (en) |
AU (1) | AU2343097A (en) |
WO (1) | WO1997035258A1 (en) |
Cited By (36)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20040003039A1 (en) * | 2002-06-28 | 2004-01-01 | Brett Humphrey | Distributed session listing and content discovery |
US20040038708A1 (en) * | 2002-08-21 | 2004-02-26 | Shih-Kuang Tsai | Method for playing game over mobile communication network |
US20050257220A1 (en) * | 2002-06-20 | 2005-11-17 | Mckee Paul F | Distributed computer |
US20050267992A1 (en) * | 2001-04-02 | 2005-12-01 | Microsoft Corporation | Peer-to-peer name resolution protocol (PNRP) and multilevel cache for use therewith |
US20060155708A1 (en) * | 2005-01-13 | 2006-07-13 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for generating virtual networks |
US20060186052A1 (en) * | 2003-06-13 | 2006-08-24 | Rudiger Seidel | Device for treating water using iron-doped ion exchangers |
US20060242291A1 (en) * | 2003-06-30 | 2006-10-26 | Mikko Nevalainen | Method and device for determining and notifying users having matching preference profiles for accessing a multiple access online application |
US20080040499A1 (en) * | 2002-01-28 | 2008-02-14 | English Jason R | Filtered Peer-to-Peer Business Communication in a Distributed Computer Environment |
US20080046517A1 (en) * | 2001-03-13 | 2008-02-21 | Tomas Frohm | Routing of Peer-To-Peer Messages in a Communications Network |
US20080072158A1 (en) * | 2006-09-15 | 2008-03-20 | Antonio Samele | User collaboration system |
US20080147855A1 (en) * | 2005-08-09 | 2008-06-19 | Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | Method and server for detecting condition of network communication |
US20080176625A1 (en) * | 1996-11-14 | 2008-07-24 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Gaming system utilizing wheels & enhanced input/output systems |
US20080209049A1 (en) * | 2007-02-23 | 2008-08-28 | Krupp Peter H | Systems and Methods for Enabling Communications between Clients and Hosts |
US20080227525A1 (en) * | 1996-11-14 | 2008-09-18 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Gaming system having game difficulty controller |
US20100227678A1 (en) * | 2006-02-16 | 2010-09-09 | Kazuma Konishi | Game Terminal Device, Game Management System and Game Management Method |
US20100306813A1 (en) * | 2009-06-01 | 2010-12-02 | David Perry | Qualified Video Delivery |
US20140128138A1 (en) * | 2012-11-06 | 2014-05-08 | Justin Wickett | Poker communities |
US8740710B2 (en) | 1996-11-14 | 2014-06-03 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Progressive controller and TCP/IP in a gaming system |
CN104936666A (en) * | 2013-01-31 | 2015-09-23 | 索尼电脑娱乐公司 | Game device, game control method, game control program, matching server, matching control method, and matching control program |
CN105377381A (en) * | 2013-05-15 | 2016-03-02 | 金.Com有限公司 | Mobile device game interface |
US9413540B2 (en) | 2011-07-05 | 2016-08-09 | Genband Us Llc | Combining P2P and server-based conferencing |
US20170264961A1 (en) * | 2006-04-12 | 2017-09-14 | Winview, Inc. | Synchronized gaming and programming |
US10207185B2 (en) | 2015-03-07 | 2019-02-19 | Sony Interactive Entertainment America Llc | Using connection quality history to optimize user experience |
US10556183B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2020-02-11 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contest of skill with a single performance |
US10556177B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2020-02-11 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US10653955B2 (en) | 2005-10-03 | 2020-05-19 | Winview, Inc. | Synchronized gaming and programming |
US10709987B2 (en) | 2004-06-28 | 2020-07-14 | Winview, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for distributed gaming over a mobile device |
US10721543B2 (en) | 2005-06-20 | 2020-07-21 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for managing client resources and assets for activities on computing devices |
US10744414B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2020-08-18 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US10758809B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2020-09-01 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US10828571B2 (en) | 2004-06-28 | 2020-11-10 | Winview, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for distributed gaming over a mobile device |
US10933319B2 (en) | 2004-07-14 | 2021-03-02 | Winview, Inc. | Game of skill played by remote participants utilizing wireless devices in connection with a common game event |
US10958985B1 (en) | 2008-11-10 | 2021-03-23 | Winview, Inc. | Interactive advertising system |
US11148050B2 (en) | 2005-10-03 | 2021-10-19 | Winview, Inc. | Cellular phone games based upon television archives |
US11308765B2 (en) | 2018-10-08 | 2022-04-19 | Winview, Inc. | Method and systems for reducing risk in setting odds for single fixed in-play propositions utilizing real time input |
US11551529B2 (en) | 2016-07-20 | 2023-01-10 | Winview, Inc. | Method of generating separate contests of skill or chance from two independent events |
Families Citing this family (377)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US7448063B2 (en) * | 1991-11-25 | 2008-11-04 | Actv, Inc. | Digital interactive system for providing full interactivity with live programming events |
US20040261127A1 (en) * | 1991-11-25 | 2004-12-23 | Actv, Inc. | Digital interactive system for providing full interactivity with programming events |
US5761606A (en) * | 1996-02-08 | 1998-06-02 | Wolzien; Thomas R. | Media online services access via address embedded in video or audio program |
US6513069B1 (en) * | 1996-03-08 | 2003-01-28 | Actv, Inc. | Enhanced video programming system and method for providing a distributed community network |
US20020049832A1 (en) * | 1996-03-08 | 2002-04-25 | Craig Ullman | Enhanced video programming system and method for incorporating and displaying retrieved integrated internet information segments |
EP0965084A1 (en) * | 1996-03-21 | 1999-12-22 | MPATH Interactive Inc. | Network match maker for selecting clients based on attributes of servers and communication links |
US6343313B1 (en) * | 1996-03-26 | 2002-01-29 | Pixion, Inc. | Computer conferencing system with real-time multipoint, multi-speed, multi-stream scalability |
US5956491A (en) | 1996-04-01 | 1999-09-21 | Marks; Daniel L. | Group communications multiplexing system |
US6050898A (en) * | 1996-05-15 | 2000-04-18 | Vr-1, Inc. | Initiating and scaling massive concurrent data transaction |
JPH1040197A (en) * | 1996-07-19 | 1998-02-13 | Fujitsu Ltd | Communication managing device |
ATE536588T1 (en) * | 1996-07-25 | 2011-12-15 | Xcelera Inc | WEB SERVER SYSTEM WITH PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SERVERS |
JP3683051B2 (en) * | 1996-10-18 | 2005-08-17 | 三菱電機株式会社 | Data transmission method |
JP3956161B2 (en) * | 1996-12-05 | 2007-08-08 | 株式会社セガ | COMMUNICATION CONTROL SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION CONTROL DEVICE, GAME DEVICE, AND RECORDING MEDIUM |
US6178453B1 (en) * | 1997-02-18 | 2001-01-23 | Netspeak Corporation | Virtual circuit switching architecture |
US6152824A (en) * | 1997-03-06 | 2000-11-28 | Mpath Interactive, Inc. | Online gaming architecture |
US6530840B1 (en) * | 1997-04-02 | 2003-03-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for an object architecture for a multi-user game lobby and game session |
US6038599A (en) * | 1997-04-23 | 2000-03-14 | Mpath Interactive, Inc. | Latency server and matchmaker |
US6023729A (en) * | 1997-05-05 | 2000-02-08 | Mpath Interactive, Inc. | Method and apparatus for match making |
US6071190A (en) * | 1997-05-21 | 2000-06-06 | Casino Data Systems | Gaming device security system: apparatus and method |
US6571290B2 (en) * | 1997-06-19 | 2003-05-27 | Mymail, Inc. | Method and apparatus for providing fungible intercourse over a network |
US8516132B2 (en) | 1997-06-19 | 2013-08-20 | Mymail, Ltd. | Method of accessing a selected network |
US5963951A (en) * | 1997-06-30 | 1999-10-05 | Movo Media, Inc. | Computerized on-line dating service for searching and matching people |
JPH11110324A (en) * | 1997-10-07 | 1999-04-23 | Hitachi Ltd | Substitutive server selector and substitutive server |
US20010044843A1 (en) * | 1997-10-28 | 2001-11-22 | Philip Bates | Multi-user computer system |
US6016496A (en) * | 1997-11-20 | 2000-01-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for an object-oriented object for retrieving information from local and remote databases |
WO1999038590A1 (en) * | 1998-01-29 | 1999-08-05 | Sega Enterprises, Ltd. | Play system |
US7054935B2 (en) * | 1998-02-10 | 2006-05-30 | Savvis Communications Corporation | Internet content delivery network |
US6185598B1 (en) | 1998-02-10 | 2001-02-06 | Digital Island, Inc. | Optimized network resource location |
US8296396B2 (en) | 1998-02-10 | 2012-10-23 | Level 3 Communications, Llc | Delivering resources to clients in a distributed computing environment with rendezvous based on load balancing and network conditions |
US6553420B1 (en) | 1998-03-13 | 2003-04-22 | Massachusetts Institute Of Technology | Method and apparatus for distributing requests among a plurality of resources |
US6430618B1 (en) | 1998-03-13 | 2002-08-06 | Massachusetts Institute Of Technology | Method and apparatus for distributing requests among a plurality of resources |
US6633908B1 (en) * | 1998-05-20 | 2003-10-14 | International Business Machines Corporation | Enabling application response measurement |
US6446121B1 (en) | 1998-05-26 | 2002-09-03 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for measuring round trip times in a network using a TCP packet |
US6260070B1 (en) | 1998-06-30 | 2001-07-10 | Dhaval N. Shah | System and method for determining a preferred mirrored service in a network by evaluating a border gateway protocol |
US6718470B1 (en) * | 1998-06-05 | 2004-04-06 | Entrust Technologies Limited | System and method for granting security privilege in a communication system |
WO1999066692A1 (en) * | 1998-06-19 | 1999-12-23 | Netsafe, Inc. | Method and apparatus for providing connections over a network |
US6463078B1 (en) * | 1998-07-22 | 2002-10-08 | Microsoft Corporation | Method for switching protocols transparently in multi-user applications |
TW463503B (en) | 1998-08-26 | 2001-11-11 | United Video Properties Inc | Television chat system |
US6324580B1 (en) | 1998-09-03 | 2001-11-27 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Load balancing for replicated services |
US6327622B1 (en) | 1998-09-03 | 2001-12-04 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Load balancing in a network environment |
US6092178A (en) * | 1998-09-03 | 2000-07-18 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | System for responding to a resource request |
US6315668B1 (en) * | 1998-09-24 | 2001-11-13 | Midway Games, Inc. | System and method for networking video games |
US6622157B1 (en) * | 1998-09-28 | 2003-09-16 | Certeon, Inc. | Extending network services using mobile agents |
US6298381B1 (en) | 1998-10-20 | 2001-10-02 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for information retrieval regarding services |
JP4097240B2 (en) * | 1998-10-26 | 2008-06-11 | 株式会社バンダイナムコゲームス | GAME SYSTEM AND INFORMATION STORAGE MEDIUM |
US6961748B2 (en) * | 1998-10-27 | 2005-11-01 | Murrell Stephen J | Uniform network access |
JP2000176168A (en) * | 1998-12-18 | 2000-06-27 | Konami Co Ltd | Message preparation game machine and message preparation method |
DE19900636B8 (en) | 1999-01-11 | 2005-04-07 | Gailer, Peter | Data access and management system and method for data access and data management for a computer system and their use |
US6724724B1 (en) | 1999-01-21 | 2004-04-20 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for resolving an electronic address |
US6532488B1 (en) * | 1999-01-25 | 2003-03-11 | John J. Ciarlante | Method and system for hosting applications |
EP1078667B1 (en) * | 1999-01-28 | 2007-08-29 | Kabushiki Kaisha Sega doing business as Sega Corporation | Network game system, game device terminal used in it and storage medium |
US6339801B1 (en) * | 1999-02-19 | 2002-01-15 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for determining appropriate devices for processing of data requests using a queued direct input/output device by issuing a special command specifying the devices can process data |
KR100692422B1 (en) * | 1999-03-03 | 2007-03-09 | 옵티노즈 에이에스 | Nasal delivery device |
US6287201B1 (en) * | 1999-03-12 | 2001-09-11 | Midway Games West | Arcade game with keypad input |
US6795860B1 (en) | 1999-04-05 | 2004-09-21 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for selecting a service with dynamically changing information |
AU4036700A (en) * | 1999-04-06 | 2000-10-23 | Lipstream Networks, Inc. | Facilitating real-time, multi-point communications over the internet |
US6763371B1 (en) * | 1999-05-10 | 2004-07-13 | Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ) | Method and apparatus for collaborative communication in a communication network |
US7006616B1 (en) | 1999-05-21 | 2006-02-28 | Terayon Communication Systems, Inc. | Teleconferencing bridge with EdgePoint mixing |
US6275470B1 (en) | 1999-06-18 | 2001-08-14 | Digital Island, Inc. | On-demand overlay routing for computer-based communication networks |
JP3307894B2 (en) * | 1999-06-22 | 2002-07-24 | 三菱電機株式会社 | Communication method |
US6499053B1 (en) | 1999-06-30 | 2002-12-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Master/slave architecture for a distributed chat application in a bandwidth constrained network |
US6859821B1 (en) * | 1999-07-19 | 2005-02-22 | Groove Networks, Inc. | Method and apparatus for prioritizing data change requests and maintaining data consistency in a distributed computer system equipped for activity-based collaboration |
US6289340B1 (en) | 1999-08-03 | 2001-09-11 | Ixmatch, Inc. | Consultant matching system and method for selecting candidates from a candidate pool by adjusting skill values |
US6721410B1 (en) * | 1999-08-10 | 2004-04-13 | Nortel Networks Limited | Recursive identification of individuals for casual collaborative conferencing |
US6758754B1 (en) * | 1999-08-13 | 2004-07-06 | Actv, Inc | System and method for interactive game-play scheduled based on real-life events |
US6381252B1 (en) | 1999-08-19 | 2002-04-30 | Armilliare Technologies, Inc. | Method and system for managing communication resources |
US6378014B1 (en) | 1999-08-25 | 2002-04-23 | Apex Inc. | Terminal emulator for interfacing between a communications port and a KVM switch |
US20040193722A1 (en) * | 1999-08-30 | 2004-09-30 | Donovan Kevin Remington Joseph Bartholomew | Universal instant messaging system for the internet |
US20060167986A1 (en) * | 1999-08-30 | 2006-07-27 | Trzyna Peter K | Internet telephone system |
US6352479B1 (en) * | 1999-08-31 | 2002-03-05 | Nvidia U.S. Investment Company | Interactive gaming server and online community forum |
JP2001198363A (en) * | 1999-09-14 | 2001-07-24 | Sega Corp | Data processing method |
JP3852814B2 (en) * | 1999-09-24 | 2006-12-06 | 富士通株式会社 | Profile creation method and system |
US7949722B1 (en) | 1999-09-29 | 2011-05-24 | Actv Inc. | Enhanced video programming system and method utilizing user-profile information |
US6434599B1 (en) * | 1999-09-30 | 2002-08-13 | Xoucin, Inc. | Method and apparatus for on-line chatting |
US8543901B1 (en) | 1999-11-01 | 2013-09-24 | Level 3 Communications, Llc | Verification of content stored in a network |
US6535909B1 (en) * | 1999-11-18 | 2003-03-18 | Contigo Software, Inc. | System and method for record and playback of collaborative Web browsing session |
US7349944B2 (en) * | 1999-11-18 | 2008-03-25 | Intercall, Inc. | System and method for record and playback of collaborative communications session |
US6668273B1 (en) * | 1999-11-18 | 2003-12-23 | Raindance Communications, Inc. | System and method for application viewing through collaborative web browsing session |
US6755743B1 (en) * | 1999-12-08 | 2004-06-29 | Kabushiki Kaisha Sega Enterprises | Communication game system and processing method thereof |
US8132219B2 (en) * | 2002-06-21 | 2012-03-06 | Tivo Inc. | Intelligent peer-to-peer system and method for collaborative suggestions and propagation of media |
AU2262601A (en) * | 1999-12-21 | 2001-07-03 | Tivo, Inc. | Intelligent system and methods of recommending media content items based on userpreferences |
EP1252563A4 (en) * | 1999-12-23 | 2005-12-07 | M H Segan Ltd Partnership | System for viewing content over a network and method therefor |
US8090856B1 (en) | 2000-01-31 | 2012-01-03 | Telecommunication Systems, Inc. | Intelligent messaging network server interconnection |
US8370435B1 (en) | 2000-01-31 | 2013-02-05 | Telecommunication Systems, Inc. | System and method for servers to send alerts to connectionless devices |
US6435164B1 (en) | 2000-12-07 | 2002-08-20 | Ford Global Technologies, Inc. | Fuel weathering method for vehicle evaporative emission system |
US7003571B1 (en) * | 2000-01-31 | 2006-02-21 | Telecommunication Systems Corporation Of Maryland | System and method for re-directing requests from browsers for communication over non-IP based networks |
US7689696B2 (en) * | 2000-01-31 | 2010-03-30 | Telecommunication Systems, Inc. | System and method for re-directing requests from browsers for communications over non-IP based networks |
JP2001222498A (en) * | 2000-02-07 | 2001-08-17 | Isao:Kk | Communication system, its method, server device for the system. and computer readable recording medium recording program |
US6651086B1 (en) * | 2000-02-22 | 2003-11-18 | Yahoo! Inc. | Systems and methods for matching participants to a conversation |
US20010039203A1 (en) * | 2000-02-23 | 2001-11-08 | Brown Geoffrey Parker | Behavior modeling in a gaming environment with contextual accuracy |
US6697840B1 (en) * | 2000-02-29 | 2004-02-24 | Lucent Technologies Inc. | Presence awareness in collaborative systems |
US6377975B1 (en) | 2000-03-01 | 2002-04-23 | Interactive Intelligence, Inc. | Methods and systems to distribute client software tasks among a number of servers |
US7328239B1 (en) | 2000-03-01 | 2008-02-05 | Intercall, Inc. | Method and apparatus for automatically data streaming a multiparty conference session |
JP2001344372A (en) * | 2000-03-30 | 2001-12-14 | Sega Corp | Online organizing method |
CA2403662A1 (en) | 2000-03-31 | 2001-10-11 | Intellocity Usa, Inc. | System and method for local meta data insertion |
GB2356071A (en) * | 2000-04-06 | 2001-05-09 | Sporting Exchange Ltd | Internet betting matches bets and lays |
US20020119821A1 (en) * | 2000-05-12 | 2002-08-29 | Sanjoy Sen | System and method for joining a broadband multi-user communication session |
US20060067500A1 (en) * | 2000-05-15 | 2006-03-30 | Christofferson Frank C | Teleconferencing bridge with edgepoint mixing |
US7951002B1 (en) * | 2000-06-16 | 2011-05-31 | Igt | Using a gaming machine as a server |
US6505123B1 (en) | 2000-07-24 | 2003-01-07 | Weatherbank, Inc. | Interactive weather advisory system |
US20020143960A1 (en) * | 2000-08-02 | 2002-10-03 | Erez Goren | Virtual network generation system and method |
US6430602B1 (en) * | 2000-08-22 | 2002-08-06 | Active Buddy, Inc. | Method and system for interactively responding to instant messaging requests |
US7146404B2 (en) * | 2000-08-22 | 2006-12-05 | Colloquis, Inc. | Method for performing authenticated access to a service on behalf of a user |
US20020083213A1 (en) * | 2000-09-18 | 2002-06-27 | Oberstein Brien M. | Method and system for simulating and certifying complex business applications |
US6648760B1 (en) * | 2000-09-27 | 2003-11-18 | Midway Amusement Games, Llc | Skill mapping method and apparatus |
JP3946635B2 (en) * | 2000-09-28 | 2007-07-18 | エヌ・ティ・ティ・コムウェア株式会社 | Computer system, computer system control method, terminal device, and recording medium |
US7212985B2 (en) * | 2000-10-10 | 2007-05-01 | Intragroup, Inc. | Automated system and method for managing a process for the shopping and selection of human entities |
US8229777B2 (en) * | 2000-10-10 | 2012-07-24 | Intragroup, Inc. | Automated system and method for managing a process for the shopping and selection of human entities |
US6547568B1 (en) * | 2000-10-12 | 2003-04-15 | Kiyokazu Yamano | Education intermediary system and method |
GB2368223B (en) * | 2000-10-17 | 2004-01-07 | Hewlett Packard Co | Associating parties with communication sessions |
JP3439187B2 (en) * | 2000-11-09 | 2003-08-25 | 株式会社コナミコンピュータエンタテインメント大阪 | NET GAME SYSTEM, NET GAME PROCESSING METHOD, AND COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM CONTAINING NET GAME PROCESSING PROGRAM |
US7244181B2 (en) * | 2000-11-14 | 2007-07-17 | Netamin Communication Corp. | Multi-player game employing dynamic re-sequencing |
US6641481B1 (en) * | 2000-11-17 | 2003-11-04 | Microsoft Corporation | Simplified matchmaking |
JP2002157190A (en) * | 2000-11-17 | 2002-05-31 | Square Co Ltd | Search server for membership information, user terminal, message transmitting terminal, method for searching membership information and method for transmitting message |
US7574493B2 (en) | 2000-11-22 | 2009-08-11 | Cricket Communications, Inc. | Method and system for improving the efficiency of state information transfer over a wireless communications network |
US20020083461A1 (en) * | 2000-11-22 | 2002-06-27 | Hutcheson Stewart Douglas | Method and system for providing interactive services over a wireless communications network |
US6874029B2 (en) | 2000-11-22 | 2005-03-29 | Leap Wireless International, Inc. | Method and system for mediating interactive services over a wireless communications network |
AU2002219857A1 (en) * | 2000-11-27 | 2002-06-03 | Butterfly.Net, Inc. | System and method for synthesizing environments to facilitate distributed, context-sensitive, multi-user interactive applications |
US20050153778A1 (en) * | 2004-01-14 | 2005-07-14 | Dwayne Nelson | Methods and apparatus for gaming data downloading |
US7972214B2 (en) | 2000-12-07 | 2011-07-05 | Igt | Methods and devices for downloading games of chance |
US8458754B2 (en) | 2001-01-22 | 2013-06-04 | Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. | Method and system for providing instant start multimedia content |
US20020112002A1 (en) * | 2001-02-15 | 2002-08-15 | Abato Michael R. | System and process for creating a virtual stage and presenting enhanced content via the virtual stage |
US20020156909A1 (en) * | 2001-02-15 | 2002-10-24 | Harrington Jeffrey M. | System and method for server side control of a flash presentation |
CA2340562A1 (en) * | 2001-02-28 | 2002-08-28 | Midway Amusement Games, Llc | Tournament network for linking amusement games |
JP4610163B2 (en) | 2001-03-14 | 2011-01-12 | ノキア コーポレイション | Realization of presence management |
US20020142842A1 (en) * | 2001-03-29 | 2002-10-03 | Easley Gregory W. | Console-based system and method for providing multi-player interactive game functionality for use with interactive games |
US20020152117A1 (en) * | 2001-04-12 | 2002-10-17 | Mike Cristofalo | System and method for targeting object oriented audio and video content to users |
KR20020083187A (en) * | 2001-04-25 | 2002-11-02 | (주) 그라비티 | Instant messenger server and method for supporting on-line game and storage media having program source thereof |
FR2824930B1 (en) * | 2001-05-15 | 2005-02-04 | Deuxieme Tete | METHOD FOR COMMUNICATING AND / OR SHARING MACHINE RESOURCES WITHIN A COMMUNICATION NETWORK BETWEEN A PLURALITY OF MEMBERS OF A COMMUNITY |
KR100429059B1 (en) * | 2001-05-24 | 2004-04-28 | 주식회사 비즈모델라인 | System and Method for syncronizing web browser of multi-users by using the direct data communication(P2P) between clients |
CA2349083A1 (en) * | 2001-05-30 | 2002-11-30 | Ibm Canada Limited-Ibm Canada Limitee | Server configuration tool |
WO2002098526A1 (en) * | 2001-06-04 | 2002-12-12 | Playnet, Inc. | System and method for distributing a multi-client game/application over a communications network |
US7657643B2 (en) * | 2001-06-15 | 2010-02-02 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for determining a preferred mirrored service in a network by evaluating a border gateway protocol |
US6884166B2 (en) | 2001-07-13 | 2005-04-26 | Gameaccount Limited | System and method for establishing a wager for a gaming application |
EP1406709A2 (en) | 2001-07-13 | 2004-04-14 | Gameaccount Limited | System and method for adding a skill aspect to games of chance |
US7416488B2 (en) * | 2001-07-18 | 2008-08-26 | Duplicate (2007) Inc. | System and method for playing a game of skill |
WO2003013675A1 (en) * | 2001-08-07 | 2003-02-20 | Rebel Arts Llc | Distributed and fault tolerant server system and method |
GB0120135D0 (en) * | 2001-08-17 | 2001-10-10 | Massey Graham P | A system for playing interactive games |
US7860964B2 (en) | 2001-09-28 | 2010-12-28 | Level 3 Communications, Llc | Policy-based content delivery network selection |
JP4160506B2 (en) | 2001-09-28 | 2008-10-01 | レヴェル 3 シーディーエヌ インターナショナル インコーポレーテッド. | Configurable adaptive wide area traffic control and management |
US7373644B2 (en) | 2001-10-02 | 2008-05-13 | Level 3 Communications, Llc | Automated server replication |
US7487104B2 (en) * | 2001-10-08 | 2009-02-03 | David Sciuk | Automated system and method for managing a process for the shopping and selection of human entities |
US20030079027A1 (en) | 2001-10-18 | 2003-04-24 | Michael Slocombe | Content request routing and load balancing for content distribution networks |
JP3764090B2 (en) * | 2001-11-08 | 2006-04-05 | 株式会社ナムコ | Server, server control program, and recording medium recording the program |
US20030126213A1 (en) * | 2002-01-02 | 2003-07-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Establishing direct instant messaging communication between wireless devices |
US20030135552A1 (en) * | 2002-01-14 | 2003-07-17 | Blackstock Michael A. | Method for discovering and discriminating devices on local collaborative networks to facilitate collaboration among users |
US20030145338A1 (en) * | 2002-01-31 | 2003-07-31 | Actv, Inc. | System and process for incorporating, retrieving and displaying an enhanced flash movie |
US20040043806A1 (en) * | 2002-02-08 | 2004-03-04 | Keith Kirby | Online vehicle collection and play activity |
US9167036B2 (en) | 2002-02-14 | 2015-10-20 | Level 3 Communications, Llc | Managed object replication and delivery |
US6997803B2 (en) | 2002-03-12 | 2006-02-14 | Igt | Virtual gaming peripherals for a gaming machine |
US8597116B2 (en) | 2002-03-12 | 2013-12-03 | Igt | Virtual player tracking and related services |
JP2003308209A (en) * | 2002-04-17 | 2003-10-31 | Fujitsu Ltd | Network service system |
US7711847B2 (en) | 2002-04-26 | 2010-05-04 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. | Managing users in a multi-user network game environment |
GB2388045A (en) * | 2002-04-29 | 2003-11-05 | Sendo Int Ltd | Remote gaming mechanism |
US20030217135A1 (en) * | 2002-05-17 | 2003-11-20 | Masayuki Chatani | Dynamic player management |
US20030228908A1 (en) * | 2002-06-10 | 2003-12-11 | Daniel Caiafa | Statistics system for online console-based gaming |
US20040030801A1 (en) * | 2002-06-14 | 2004-02-12 | Moran Timothy L. | Method and system for a client to invoke a named service |
US7803052B2 (en) * | 2002-06-28 | 2010-09-28 | Microsoft Corporation | Discovery and distribution of game session information |
US20040014527A1 (en) * | 2002-07-19 | 2004-01-22 | Orr Scott Stewart | System and method to integrate digital characters across multiple interactive games |
US7613772B2 (en) * | 2002-07-25 | 2009-11-03 | Colligo Networks, Inc. | Method for context based discovery and filtering of portable collaborative networks |
US9682319B2 (en) * | 2002-07-31 | 2017-06-20 | Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc. | Combiner method for altering game gearing |
US8560707B2 (en) | 2007-10-05 | 2013-10-15 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | Seamless host migration based on NAT type |
US8131802B2 (en) | 2007-10-05 | 2012-03-06 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | Systems and methods for seamless host migration |
WO2004015531A2 (en) * | 2002-08-08 | 2004-02-19 | Versaly Games, Inc. | System and method for automatically finding gaming partners based on pre-established criteria |
US6979264B2 (en) * | 2002-09-12 | 2005-12-27 | Igt | Method and system for verifying entitlement to play a game using biometric identifier |
US20040081199A1 (en) * | 2002-10-29 | 2004-04-29 | Lopez Ricardo Jorge | Multi-channel communication system and method based on class of service requirements |
US20040093427A1 (en) * | 2002-10-29 | 2004-05-13 | Lopez Ricardo Jorge | Service diversity for communication system |
US20040097287A1 (en) * | 2002-11-14 | 2004-05-20 | Richard Postrel | Method and system for gaming over a computer network |
US8255407B1 (en) * | 2002-11-14 | 2012-08-28 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Matching of data center resource capabilities and resource needs by match-overlapping |
US7878908B2 (en) * | 2002-11-14 | 2011-02-01 | Nintendo Co., Ltd. | Multiplexed secure video game play distribution |
US8468575B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2013-06-18 | Ol2, Inc. | System for recursive recombination of streaming interactive video |
US8387099B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2013-02-26 | Ol2, Inc. | System for acceleration of web page delivery |
US20110126255A1 (en) * | 2002-12-10 | 2011-05-26 | Onlive, Inc. | System and method for remote-hosted video effects |
US9003461B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2015-04-07 | Ol2, Inc. | Streaming interactive video integrated with recorded video segments |
US8840475B2 (en) * | 2002-12-10 | 2014-09-23 | Ol2, Inc. | Method for user session transitioning among streaming interactive video servers |
US8495678B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2013-07-23 | Ol2, Inc. | System for reporting recorded video preceding system failures |
US9108107B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2015-08-18 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | Hosting and broadcasting virtual events using streaming interactive video |
US20110122063A1 (en) * | 2002-12-10 | 2011-05-26 | Onlive, Inc. | System and method for remote-hosted video effects |
US9032465B2 (en) * | 2002-12-10 | 2015-05-12 | Ol2, Inc. | Method for multicasting views of real-time streaming interactive video |
US20090118019A1 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2009-05-07 | Onlive, Inc. | System for streaming databases serving real-time applications used through streaming interactive video |
US8893207B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2014-11-18 | Ol2, Inc. | System and method for compressing streaming interactive video |
US9314691B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2016-04-19 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | System and method for compressing video frames or portions thereof based on feedback information from a client device |
US8832772B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2014-09-09 | Ol2, Inc. | System for combining recorded application state with application streaming interactive video output |
US8549574B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2013-10-01 | Ol2, Inc. | Method of combining linear content and interactive content compressed together as streaming interactive video |
US8661496B2 (en) * | 2002-12-10 | 2014-02-25 | Ol2, Inc. | System for combining a plurality of views of real-time streaming interactive video |
US8949922B2 (en) * | 2002-12-10 | 2015-02-03 | Ol2, Inc. | System for collaborative conferencing using streaming interactive video |
US9077991B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2015-07-07 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | System and method for utilizing forward error correction with video compression |
US9138644B2 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2015-09-22 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | System and method for accelerated machine switching |
US8964830B2 (en) * | 2002-12-10 | 2015-02-24 | Ol2, Inc. | System and method for multi-stream video compression using multiple encoding formats |
JP4518739B2 (en) * | 2002-12-27 | 2010-08-04 | 株式会社ユニバーサルエンターテインメント | Game system |
US7930716B2 (en) | 2002-12-31 | 2011-04-19 | Actv Inc. | Techniques for reinsertion of local market advertising in digital video from a bypass source |
CA2515492A1 (en) | 2003-02-10 | 2004-08-26 | Raindance Communications, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for automatically adding a media component to an established multimedia collaboration session |
AU2004211235B2 (en) | 2003-02-10 | 2009-12-03 | Open Invention Network, Llc | Methods and apparatus for providing egalitarian control in a multimedia collaboration session |
US7701882B2 (en) | 2003-02-10 | 2010-04-20 | Intercall, Inc. | Systems and methods for collaborative communication |
US7461166B2 (en) * | 2003-02-21 | 2008-12-02 | International Business Machines Corporation | Autonomic service routing using observed resource requirement for self-optimization |
US7529798B2 (en) | 2003-03-18 | 2009-05-05 | Intercall, Inc. | System and method for record and playback of collaborative web browsing session |
US7867083B2 (en) | 2003-03-25 | 2011-01-11 | Igt | Methods and apparatus for limiting access to games using biometric data |
US8123616B2 (en) | 2003-03-25 | 2012-02-28 | Igt | Methods and apparatus for limiting access to games using biometric data |
US20050277472A1 (en) * | 2003-03-26 | 2005-12-15 | William Gillan | Game server system and method for generating revenue therewith |
CA2470588A1 (en) * | 2003-06-09 | 2004-12-09 | Blue Diamond International Capital Inc. | Pull-tab skill tournament poker |
US7270605B2 (en) * | 2003-07-08 | 2007-09-18 | Gt | Peer-to-peer gaming system |
JP2005062927A (en) * | 2003-08-11 | 2005-03-10 | Hitachi Ltd | Load control method and device, and processing program therefor |
US7288028B2 (en) * | 2003-09-26 | 2007-10-30 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and apparatus for quickly joining an online game being played by a friend |
US7761514B2 (en) | 2003-11-26 | 2010-07-20 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for providing dynamic group management for distributed interactive applications |
US7975035B2 (en) * | 2003-12-01 | 2011-07-05 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus to support application and network awareness of collaborative applications using multi-attribute clustering |
US20090222537A1 (en) * | 2003-12-04 | 2009-09-03 | Colligo Newworks, Inc., A Canadian Corporation | System And Method For Interactive Instant Networking |
US7426578B2 (en) | 2003-12-12 | 2008-09-16 | Intercall, Inc. | Systems and methods for synchronizing data between communication devices in a networked environment |
US10152190B2 (en) | 2003-12-15 | 2018-12-11 | Open Invention Network, Llc | Systems and methods for improved application sharing in a multimedia collaboration session |
US20050137014A1 (en) * | 2003-12-22 | 2005-06-23 | Asko Vetelainen | Electronic gaming device and method of initiating multiplayer game |
JP4064355B2 (en) * | 2004-01-20 | 2008-03-19 | 任天堂株式会社 | GAME SYSTEM AND GAME DEVICE |
US7828652B2 (en) | 2004-02-12 | 2010-11-09 | Igt | Player verification method and system for remote gaming terminals |
DE602004013272T2 (en) * | 2004-02-19 | 2009-07-16 | Alcatel Lucent | Method, server and mobile terminal for establishing connections between subscribers of a telecommunications network |
US7614955B2 (en) * | 2004-03-01 | 2009-11-10 | Microsoft Corporation | Method for online game matchmaking using play style information |
US20050278642A1 (en) * | 2004-06-10 | 2005-12-15 | Chang Nelson L A | Method and system for controlling a collaborative computing environment |
US7780533B2 (en) * | 2004-08-30 | 2010-08-24 | Panasonic Corporation | Client terminal for executing multiplayer application, group forming method, and group forming program |
US8793762B2 (en) * | 2004-09-20 | 2014-07-29 | Secure Content Storage Association Llc | Simple nonautonomous peering network media |
US11734393B2 (en) | 2004-09-20 | 2023-08-22 | Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. | Content distribution with renewable content protection |
CN1770168A (en) * | 2004-11-05 | 2006-05-10 | 株式会社巨摩 | Program structure of multiple online action game |
US7677970B2 (en) * | 2004-12-08 | 2010-03-16 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for social matching of game players on-line |
US20060136584A1 (en) * | 2004-12-17 | 2006-06-22 | Nokia Corporation | System, network entity, client, method and computer program product for managing a contact list |
US20060135258A1 (en) * | 2004-12-17 | 2006-06-22 | Nokia Corporation | System, network entity, client and method for facilitating fairness in a multiplayer game |
US20060135259A1 (en) * | 2004-12-17 | 2006-06-22 | Nokia Corporation | System, game server, terminal, and method for game event notification in a multiplayer game |
US20060161469A1 (en) | 2005-01-14 | 2006-07-20 | Weatherbank, Inc. | Interactive advisory system |
US20060161476A1 (en) * | 2005-01-19 | 2006-07-20 | Meir Zohar | System for acquisition of users |
US8832121B2 (en) * | 2005-02-02 | 2014-09-09 | Accuweather, Inc. | Location-based data communications system and method |
US8066568B2 (en) * | 2005-04-19 | 2011-11-29 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for providing feedback on game players and enhancing social matchmaking |
US8221238B1 (en) | 2005-04-19 | 2012-07-17 | Microsoft Corporation | Determination of a reputation of an on-line game player |
US20060258416A1 (en) * | 2005-05-13 | 2006-11-16 | Yahoo! Inc. | Analyzer for data relating to networked games |
WO2006124811A2 (en) * | 2005-05-13 | 2006-11-23 | Professional Interactive Entertainment, Inc. | System and method for network interactive game match-up and server selection |
US8038535B2 (en) | 2005-05-17 | 2011-10-18 | Electronic Arts Inc. | Collaborative online gaming system and method |
DE102005024635A1 (en) * | 2005-05-30 | 2006-12-07 | Siemens Ag | Method for content-specific search in data networks |
US8046777B2 (en) * | 2005-06-02 | 2011-10-25 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Calling of late bound functions from an external program environment |
US8348748B2 (en) | 2005-07-20 | 2013-01-08 | The Sporting Exchange, Ltd. | Betting on games using a betting exchange system |
CN100358283C (en) * | 2005-09-02 | 2007-12-26 | 华为技术有限公司 | Business appearing system and method of issuring and obtaining appeared information |
US7887420B2 (en) | 2005-09-12 | 2011-02-15 | Igt | Method and system for instant-on game download |
US8287379B2 (en) | 2005-09-12 | 2012-10-16 | Igt | Distributed game services |
KR100562427B1 (en) * | 2005-10-04 | 2006-03-17 | 주식회사 솔루션박스 | Apparatus for receiving contents and recording medium storing program therefor |
EP1948335A4 (en) * | 2005-10-11 | 2011-02-09 | Thq Wireless Inc | Method and apparatus for finding desirable multi-player games for players |
US8732186B2 (en) * | 2005-12-01 | 2014-05-20 | Peter Warren | Computer-implemented method and system for enabling communication between networked users based on common characteristics |
US8996562B2 (en) | 2005-12-01 | 2015-03-31 | Peter Warren | Computer-implemented method and system for enabling anonymous communication between networked users based on common search queries |
US7818340B1 (en) * | 2005-12-01 | 2010-10-19 | Peter Warren | Computer-implemented method and system for enabling network communication using sponsored chat links |
WO2007067217A2 (en) * | 2005-12-02 | 2007-06-14 | Cyberscan Technology, Inc. | In-room gaming |
US7941515B2 (en) * | 2006-01-13 | 2011-05-10 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Applying a filter set to information provided to a subscribing client |
US8229467B2 (en) | 2006-01-19 | 2012-07-24 | Locator IP, L.P. | Interactive advisory system |
EP1821487B1 (en) | 2006-02-21 | 2010-04-07 | Microsoft Corporation | Topology management in peer-to-peer content distribution clouds |
US20070265043A1 (en) * | 2006-04-12 | 2007-11-15 | Wang Andy Y | Team-based networked video gaming and automatic event management |
US8376857B1 (en) * | 2006-04-28 | 2013-02-19 | Navteq B.V. | Multi-player online game player proximity feature |
US20070293319A1 (en) * | 2006-06-20 | 2007-12-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Transfer of Features Between Gaming Devices |
US8888592B1 (en) | 2009-06-01 | 2014-11-18 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | Voice overlay |
US8009173B2 (en) | 2006-08-10 | 2011-08-30 | Avocent Huntsville Corporation | Rack interface pod with intelligent platform control |
US8427489B2 (en) | 2006-08-10 | 2013-04-23 | Avocent Huntsville Corporation | Rack interface pod with intelligent platform control |
JP5080048B2 (en) * | 2006-09-20 | 2012-11-21 | 株式会社バンダイナムコゲームス | Program, information storage medium, player terminal, and server system |
US9630104B2 (en) * | 2006-10-23 | 2017-04-25 | Konrad V. Sherinian | Systems, methods, and apparatus for transmitting virtual world content from a server system to a client |
US8634814B2 (en) | 2007-02-23 | 2014-01-21 | Locator IP, L.P. | Interactive advisory system for prioritizing content |
GB2447094B (en) * | 2007-03-01 | 2010-03-10 | Sony Comp Entertainment Europe | Entertainment device and method |
US20080248845A1 (en) * | 2007-04-06 | 2008-10-09 | Henry Paul Morgan | Contextual Gamer Options Menu |
US8083591B2 (en) * | 2007-05-15 | 2011-12-27 | Microsoft Corporation | Game hosting service |
US20080318687A1 (en) | 2007-06-21 | 2008-12-25 | Microsoft Corporation | Live Game Lobby |
US20090030980A1 (en) * | 2007-07-23 | 2009-01-29 | Kevin Remington Joseph Donovan | Universal instant messaging system for the internet |
US8266671B2 (en) | 2007-08-02 | 2012-09-11 | Alcatel Lucent | Policy-enabled aggregation of IM user communities |
US8602865B2 (en) | 2007-08-06 | 2013-12-10 | Igt | Gaming system and method providing a group bonus event for linked gaming devices |
US9483405B2 (en) * | 2007-09-20 | 2016-11-01 | Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc. | Simplified run-time program translation for emulating complex processor pipelines |
US8087999B2 (en) | 2007-09-28 | 2012-01-03 | Igt | Gaming system and method of operating a gaming system providing wagering control features for wagering games |
TW200941233A (en) * | 2007-12-05 | 2009-10-01 | Onlive Inc | System and method for intelligently allocating client requests to server centers |
US8613673B2 (en) | 2008-12-15 | 2013-12-24 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | Intelligent game loading |
US8147339B1 (en) | 2007-12-15 | 2012-04-03 | Gaikai Inc. | Systems and methods of serving game video |
US8968087B1 (en) | 2009-06-01 | 2015-03-03 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | Video game overlay |
US8055766B2 (en) * | 2008-02-15 | 2011-11-08 | Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Ab | Systems methods and user state files for enabling interactions between virtual and real world identities |
US20090210483A1 (en) * | 2008-02-15 | 2009-08-20 | Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Ab | Systems Methods and Computer Program Products for Remotely Controlling Actions of a Virtual World Identity |
US9277004B2 (en) * | 2008-02-19 | 2016-03-01 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc | Prediction of network path quality among peer networking devices |
US9762692B2 (en) | 2008-04-04 | 2017-09-12 | Level 3 Communications, Llc | Handling long-tail content in a content delivery network (CDN) |
US10924573B2 (en) | 2008-04-04 | 2021-02-16 | Level 3 Communications, Llc | Handling long-tail content in a content delivery network (CDN) |
CN102047244B (en) | 2008-04-04 | 2013-02-27 | 第三雷沃通讯有限责任公司 | Handling long-tail content in a content delivery network (CDN) |
US9888092B2 (en) * | 2008-04-28 | 2018-02-06 | Oracle International Corporation | System and method for executing third party module with web servers |
US8480499B2 (en) * | 2008-04-30 | 2013-07-09 | Scientific Games Holdings Limited | System and method for game brokering |
US20100170760A1 (en) | 2009-01-07 | 2010-07-08 | John Marking | Remotely Operated Bypass for a Suspension Damper |
US9033122B2 (en) | 2009-01-07 | 2015-05-19 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Method and apparatus for an adjustable damper |
US10047817B2 (en) | 2009-01-07 | 2018-08-14 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Method and apparatus for an adjustable damper |
US11306798B2 (en) | 2008-05-09 | 2022-04-19 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Position sensitive suspension damping with an active valve |
US9452654B2 (en) | 2009-01-07 | 2016-09-27 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Method and apparatus for an adjustable damper |
US10060499B2 (en) | 2009-01-07 | 2018-08-28 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Method and apparatus for an adjustable damper |
US8627932B2 (en) | 2009-01-07 | 2014-01-14 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Bypass for a suspension damper |
US20090325709A1 (en) * | 2008-06-26 | 2009-12-31 | Microsoft Corporation | Game Clan Matchmaking |
US20090325712A1 (en) * | 2008-06-28 | 2009-12-31 | Microsoft Corporation | Player character matchmaking with distributed peer-to-peer functionality |
CN101325559B (en) * | 2008-07-28 | 2010-08-18 | 腾讯科技(深圳)有限公司 | Method for commending game room, system and game server |
US8393446B2 (en) | 2008-08-25 | 2013-03-12 | David M Haugen | Methods and apparatus for suspension lock out and signal generation |
US20100057857A1 (en) * | 2008-08-27 | 2010-03-04 | Szeto Christopher T | Chat matching |
EP2335790B1 (en) * | 2008-10-08 | 2022-06-15 | Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc. | Game control program, game device, game server and method for controlling game |
US10235832B2 (en) | 2008-10-17 | 2019-03-19 | Igt | Post certification metering for diverse game machines |
US9005016B2 (en) | 2008-10-24 | 2015-04-14 | Lee Amaitis | Wagering on event outcomes during the event |
US8342946B2 (en) | 2008-10-24 | 2013-01-01 | Bgc Partners, Inc. | Computer graphics processing and display of selectable items |
US8342966B2 (en) | 2008-10-24 | 2013-01-01 | Cfph, Llc | Wager market creation and management |
EP3666347B1 (en) | 2008-11-25 | 2021-10-20 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Computer usable storage medium for virtual competition |
US10036443B2 (en) | 2009-03-19 | 2018-07-31 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for suspension adjustment |
US9422018B2 (en) | 2008-11-25 | 2016-08-23 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Seat post |
US9140325B2 (en) | 2009-03-19 | 2015-09-22 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for selective spring pre-load adjustment |
US8610673B2 (en) | 2008-12-03 | 2013-12-17 | Microsoft Corporation | Manipulation of list on a multi-touch display |
US8926435B2 (en) | 2008-12-15 | 2015-01-06 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | Dual-mode program execution |
US9038791B2 (en) | 2009-01-07 | 2015-05-26 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Compression isolator for a suspension damper |
US11299233B2 (en) | 2009-01-07 | 2022-04-12 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Method and apparatus for an adjustable damper |
US8019862B2 (en) | 2009-03-17 | 2011-09-13 | Microsoft Corporation | Collaborative speed determination in distributed systems |
US8936139B2 (en) | 2009-03-19 | 2015-01-20 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for suspension adjustment |
US20100293072A1 (en) * | 2009-05-13 | 2010-11-18 | David Murrant | Preserving the Integrity of Segments of Audio Streams |
US8672106B2 (en) | 2009-10-13 | 2014-03-18 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Self-regulating suspension |
EP2312180B1 (en) | 2009-10-13 | 2019-09-18 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Apparatus for controlling a fluid damper |
US10697514B2 (en) | 2010-01-20 | 2020-06-30 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Remotely operated bypass for a suspension damper |
GB201005458D0 (en) | 2010-03-31 | 2010-05-19 | Skype Ltd | Media appliance |
JP5557590B2 (en) * | 2010-05-06 | 2014-07-23 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Load balancing apparatus and system |
US8433759B2 (en) | 2010-05-24 | 2013-04-30 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | Direction-conscious information sharing |
EP3778358B1 (en) | 2010-07-02 | 2023-04-12 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Positive lock adjustable seat post |
US8560331B1 (en) | 2010-08-02 | 2013-10-15 | Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc | Audio acceleration |
WO2012037165A2 (en) | 2010-09-13 | 2012-03-22 | Gaikai, Inc. | Add-on management |
KR101956639B1 (en) | 2010-09-13 | 2019-03-11 | 소니 인터랙티브 엔터테인먼트 아메리카 엘엘씨 | A method and system of providing a computer game at a computer game system including a video server and a game server |
US8774010B2 (en) | 2010-11-02 | 2014-07-08 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for providing proactive fault monitoring in a network environment |
US8559341B2 (en) | 2010-11-08 | 2013-10-15 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for providing a loop free topology in a network environment |
US20120142429A1 (en) | 2010-12-03 | 2012-06-07 | Muller Marcus S | Collaborative electronic game play employing player classification and aggregation |
US20120209982A1 (en) * | 2011-02-10 | 2012-08-16 | Microsoft Corporation | Network device matching |
US8982733B2 (en) | 2011-03-04 | 2015-03-17 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for managing topology changes in a network environment |
US8670326B1 (en) | 2011-03-31 | 2014-03-11 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for probing multiple paths in a network environment |
US10449457B2 (en) * | 2011-04-20 | 2019-10-22 | Disney Enterprises, Inc. | System and method for dynamic matchmaking population herding |
EP2530355B1 (en) | 2011-05-31 | 2019-09-04 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Apparatus for position sensitive and/or adjustable suspension damping |
US8724517B1 (en) | 2011-06-02 | 2014-05-13 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for managing network traffic disruption |
US8830875B1 (en) | 2011-06-15 | 2014-09-09 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for providing a loop free topology in a network environment |
US9289686B2 (en) | 2011-07-28 | 2016-03-22 | Zynga Inc. | Method and system for matchmaking connections within a gaming social network |
EP3567272B1 (en) | 2011-09-12 | 2021-05-26 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for suspension set up |
US11279199B2 (en) | 2012-01-25 | 2022-03-22 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Suspension damper with by-pass valves |
US10552446B2 (en) * | 2012-03-01 | 2020-02-04 | Zynga Inc. | Leveraging social graphs with game play auto-neighboring |
US10330171B2 (en) | 2012-05-10 | 2019-06-25 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Method and apparatus for an adjustable damper |
JP6162929B2 (en) * | 2012-06-01 | 2017-07-12 | 任天堂株式会社 | Posting information sharing system |
US9795887B2 (en) * | 2012-07-17 | 2017-10-24 | Riot Games, Inc. | Systems and methods that enable player matching for multi-player online games |
EP2693374A1 (en) * | 2012-08-02 | 2014-02-05 | Alcatel-Lucent | Relationship establishment |
US9450846B1 (en) | 2012-10-17 | 2016-09-20 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for tracking packets in a network environment |
US9120020B2 (en) | 2013-03-13 | 2015-09-01 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc | Matchmaking in multiplayer gaming |
US9177262B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2015-11-03 | Qbase, LLC | Method of automated discovery of new topics |
US9317565B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2016-04-19 | Qbase, LLC | Alerting system based on newly disambiguated features |
US9984427B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2018-05-29 | Qbase, LLC | Data ingestion module for event detection and increased situational awareness |
US9223833B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2015-12-29 | Qbase, LLC | Method for in-loop human validation of disambiguated features |
US9355152B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2016-05-31 | Qbase, LLC | Non-exclusionary search within in-memory databases |
US9336280B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2016-05-10 | Qbase, LLC | Method for entity-driven alerts based on disambiguated features |
US9659108B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2017-05-23 | Qbase, LLC | Pluggable architecture for embedding analytics in clustered in-memory databases |
US9424294B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2016-08-23 | Qbase, LLC | Method for facet searching and search suggestions |
WO2015084760A1 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2015-06-11 | Qbase, LLC | Design and implementation of clustered in-memory database |
WO2015084726A1 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2015-06-11 | Qbase, LLC | Event detection through text analysis template models |
US9542477B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2017-01-10 | Qbase, LLC | Method of automated discovery of topics relatedness |
US9208204B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2015-12-08 | Qbase, LLC | Search suggestions using fuzzy-score matching and entity co-occurrence |
US9424524B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2016-08-23 | Qbase, LLC | Extracting facts from unstructured text |
US9230041B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2016-01-05 | Qbase, LLC | Search suggestions of related entities based on co-occurrence and/or fuzzy-score matching |
US9025892B1 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2015-05-05 | Qbase, LLC | Data record compression with progressive and/or selective decomposition |
US9922032B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2018-03-20 | Qbase, LLC | Featured co-occurrence knowledge base from a corpus of documents |
US9348573B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2016-05-24 | Qbase, LLC | Installation and fault handling in a distributed system utilizing supervisor and dependency manager nodes |
US9619571B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2017-04-11 | Qbase, LLC | Method for searching related entities through entity co-occurrence |
US9201744B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2015-12-01 | Qbase, LLC | Fault tolerant architecture for distributed computing systems |
EP3077919A4 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2017-05-10 | Qbase LLC | Method for disambiguating features in unstructured text |
US9544361B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2017-01-10 | Qbase, LLC | Event detection through text analysis using dynamic self evolving/learning module |
US9547701B2 (en) | 2013-12-02 | 2017-01-17 | Qbase, LLC | Method of discovering and exploring feature knowledge |
US9223875B2 (en) * | 2013-12-02 | 2015-12-29 | Qbase, LLC | Real-time distributed in memory search architecture |
US9225599B2 (en) * | 2013-12-16 | 2015-12-29 | Software Ag | Method and system to adapt functionality to capabilities of client and data storage |
US9361317B2 (en) | 2014-03-04 | 2016-06-07 | Qbase, LLC | Method for entity enrichment of digital content to enable advanced search functionality in content management systems |
US9776091B1 (en) | 2014-05-16 | 2017-10-03 | Electronic Arts Inc. | Systems and methods for hardware-based matchmaking |
KR102432150B1 (en) | 2014-08-15 | 2022-08-11 | 어플라이드 머티어리얼스, 인코포레이티드 | Compact configurable modular radio frequency matching network assembly for plasma processing systems |
WO2016061658A1 (en) * | 2014-10-20 | 2016-04-28 | Tsx Inc. | Database updating with latency tolerance |
US10471348B2 (en) | 2015-07-24 | 2019-11-12 | Activision Publishing, Inc. | System and method for creating and sharing customized video game weapon configurations in multiplayer video games via one or more social networks |
US9993735B2 (en) | 2016-03-08 | 2018-06-12 | Electronic Arts Inc. | Multiplayer video game matchmaking optimization |
US10112110B1 (en) * | 2016-03-30 | 2018-10-30 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Initiating a game session with broadcast subscribers |
US10729975B1 (en) | 2016-03-30 | 2020-08-04 | Electronic Arts Inc. | Network connection selection processing system |
US10737546B2 (en) | 2016-04-08 | 2020-08-11 | Fox Factory, Inc. | Electronic compression and rebound control |
US10286327B2 (en) | 2016-10-21 | 2019-05-14 | Electronic Arts Inc. | Multiplayer video game matchmaking system and methods |
US10091281B1 (en) | 2016-12-01 | 2018-10-02 | Electronics Arts Inc. | Multi-user application host-system selection system |
US10807006B1 (en) * | 2017-12-06 | 2020-10-20 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Behavior-aware player selection for multiplayer electronic games |
US10467069B2 (en) * | 2018-04-04 | 2019-11-05 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc | Selective application instance activation |
US10765952B2 (en) | 2018-09-21 | 2020-09-08 | Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC | System-level multiplayer matchmaking |
US10695671B2 (en) | 2018-09-28 | 2020-06-30 | Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC | Establishing and managing multiplayer sessions |
WO2020193108A1 (en) * | 2019-03-28 | 2020-10-01 | British Telecommunications Public Limited Company | Competitor selection |
US20220226736A1 (en) * | 2019-06-03 | 2022-07-21 | Ping-Kang Hsiung | Selection of virtual server for smart cloud gaming application from multiple cloud providers based on user parameters |
CN111617487B (en) * | 2020-05-22 | 2021-03-16 | 腾讯科技(深圳)有限公司 | Account access method and device in game application, storage medium and electronic equipment |
US11571618B1 (en) * | 2021-08-16 | 2023-02-07 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Multi-region game server fleets |
US11571619B1 (en) * | 2021-08-16 | 2023-02-07 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Cross-region management of game server fleets |
Citations (15)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5517609A (en) * | 1990-08-06 | 1996-05-14 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Graphics display system using tiles of data |
US5526025A (en) * | 1992-04-07 | 1996-06-11 | Chips And Technolgies, Inc. | Method and apparatus for performing run length tagging for increased bandwidth in dynamic data repetitive memory systems |
US5852775A (en) * | 1996-09-12 | 1998-12-22 | Earthweb, Inc. | Cellular telephone advertising system |
US6050898A (en) * | 1996-05-15 | 2000-04-18 | Vr-1, Inc. | Initiating and scaling massive concurrent data transaction |
US6055510A (en) * | 1997-10-24 | 2000-04-25 | At&T Corp. | Method for performing targeted marketing over a large computer network |
US6113494A (en) * | 1997-06-17 | 2000-09-05 | Intel Corporation | Using multiple prioritized statements of abstracted intention to align different views |
US6157841A (en) * | 1997-09-18 | 2000-12-05 | At&T Corp. | Cellular phone network that provides location-based information |
US6181927B1 (en) * | 1997-02-18 | 2001-01-30 | Nortel Networks Corporation | Sponsored call and cell service |
US6208866B1 (en) * | 1998-12-30 | 2001-03-27 | Ericsson Inc. | System and method for location-based marketing to mobile stations within a cellular network |
US6223291B1 (en) * | 1999-03-26 | 2001-04-24 | Motorola, Inc. | Secure wireless electronic-commerce system with digital product certificates and digital license certificates |
US20010005839A1 (en) * | 1999-12-22 | 2001-06-28 | Jari Maenpaa | Electronic commerce system |
US20010011248A1 (en) * | 1999-01-29 | 2001-08-02 | Maria Azua Himmel | Method and apparatus for transmitting and tendering electronic cash using a phone wallet |
US20010013037A1 (en) * | 2000-02-09 | 2001-08-09 | Nec Corporation | Information communication system, information communication method, and information provision business method |
US6313844B1 (en) * | 1998-02-24 | 2001-11-06 | Sony Corporation | Storage device, image processing apparatus and method of the same, and refresh controller and method of the same |
US6407740B1 (en) * | 1998-09-30 | 2002-06-18 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Addressable output buffer architecture |
Family Cites Families (46)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US4521014A (en) * | 1982-09-30 | 1985-06-04 | Sitrick David H | Video game including user visual image |
US4572509A (en) * | 1982-09-30 | 1986-02-25 | Sitrick David H | Video game network |
US4570930A (en) * | 1983-10-03 | 1986-02-18 | At&T Bell Laboratories | System, method, and station interface arrangement for playing video game over telephone lines |
CA1245361A (en) * | 1984-06-27 | 1988-11-22 | Kerry E. Thacher | Tournament data system |
US4856787B1 (en) * | 1986-02-05 | 1997-09-23 | Fortunet Inc | Concurrent game network |
US4811199A (en) * | 1987-05-08 | 1989-03-07 | Kuechler William L | System for storing and manipulating information in an information base |
US4998199A (en) * | 1987-10-02 | 1991-03-05 | Namco Ltd. | Game machine system with machine grouping feature |
US5014219A (en) * | 1988-05-06 | 1991-05-07 | White James A | Mask controled neural networks |
CA1337132C (en) * | 1988-07-15 | 1995-09-26 | Robert Filepp | Reception system for an interactive computer network and method of operation |
US5021943A (en) * | 1988-08-01 | 1991-06-04 | Motorola, Inc. | Content independent rule based options negotiations method |
US5341477A (en) * | 1989-02-24 | 1994-08-23 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Broker for computer network server selection |
US5560008A (en) * | 1989-05-15 | 1996-09-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Remote authentication and authorization in a distributed data processing system |
US5083800A (en) * | 1989-06-09 | 1992-01-28 | Interactive Network, Inc. | Game of skill or chance playable by several participants remote from each other in conjunction with a common event |
US5187790A (en) * | 1989-06-29 | 1993-02-16 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Server impersonation of client processes in an object based computer operating system |
AU647086B2 (en) * | 1990-01-30 | 1994-03-17 | Johnson Service Company | Networked facilities management system |
DE69130587T2 (en) * | 1990-05-10 | 1999-05-06 | Hewlett Packard Co | System for integrating user programs in a heterogeneous network environment |
US5114155A (en) * | 1990-06-15 | 1992-05-19 | Arachnid, Inc. | System for automatic collection and distribution of player statistics for electronic dart games |
GB9022650D0 (en) * | 1990-10-18 | 1990-11-28 | Code Masters Softwara | Verification system |
US5359510A (en) * | 1990-11-28 | 1994-10-25 | Sabaliauskas Anthony L | Automated universal tournament management system |
US5426427A (en) * | 1991-04-04 | 1995-06-20 | Compuserve Incorporated | Data transmission routing system |
US5317568A (en) * | 1991-04-11 | 1994-05-31 | Galileo International Partnership | Method and apparatus for managing and facilitating communications in a distributed hetergeneous network |
US5350176A (en) * | 1991-05-31 | 1994-09-27 | Peter Hochstein | Video game |
EP0529864B1 (en) * | 1991-08-22 | 2001-10-31 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Network video server apparatus and method |
US5367635A (en) * | 1991-08-29 | 1994-11-22 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Network management agent with user created objects providing additional functionality |
US5324035A (en) * | 1991-12-02 | 1994-06-28 | Infinational Technologies, Inc. | Video gaming system with fixed pool of winning plays and global pool access |
AU672770B2 (en) * | 1992-02-18 | 1996-10-17 | Ricos Co., Ltd. | Computer game device |
GB9210363D0 (en) * | 1992-05-14 | 1992-07-01 | Codemasters Ltd | Computer game systems |
US5351970A (en) * | 1992-09-16 | 1994-10-04 | Fioretti Philip R | Methods and apparatus for playing bingo over a wide geographic area |
US5422883A (en) * | 1992-10-16 | 1995-06-06 | International Business Machines Corporation | Call setup and channel allocation for a multi-media network bus |
JPH06266813A (en) * | 1992-10-19 | 1994-09-22 | Internatl Business Mach Corp <Ibm> | Data collecting device and method for collecting and inputting data and requirement from plurality of user for constructing process-model and data-model |
US5329619A (en) * | 1992-10-30 | 1994-07-12 | Software Ag | Cooperative processing interface and communication broker for heterogeneous computing environments |
US5491797A (en) * | 1992-11-30 | 1996-02-13 | Qwest Communications | Schedulable automatically configured video conferencing system |
US5497491A (en) * | 1993-01-26 | 1996-03-05 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for importing and exporting data between an object oriented computing environment and an external computing environment |
US5459837A (en) * | 1993-04-21 | 1995-10-17 | Digital Equipment Corporation | System to facilitate efficient utilization of network resources in a computer network |
ZA943336B (en) * | 1993-05-19 | 1995-08-11 | Menashe Julian | Interactive computerised gaming system with remote terminals |
US5600833A (en) * | 1993-09-17 | 1997-02-04 | Digital Equipment Corp. | Attribute portion based document retrieval system with system query language interface |
US5513126A (en) * | 1993-10-04 | 1996-04-30 | Xerox Corporation | Network having selectively accessible recipient prioritized communication channel profiles |
US5548726A (en) * | 1993-12-17 | 1996-08-20 | Taligeni, Inc. | System for activating new service in client server network by reconfiguring the multilayer network protocol stack dynamically within the server node |
US5580309A (en) * | 1994-02-22 | 1996-12-03 | Sigma Game, Inc. | Linked gaming machines having a common feature controller |
US5560005A (en) * | 1994-02-25 | 1996-09-24 | Actamed Corp. | Methods and systems for object-based relational distributed databases |
US5559933A (en) * | 1994-04-22 | 1996-09-24 | Unisys Corporation | Distributed enterprise print controller |
US5586257A (en) * | 1994-05-05 | 1996-12-17 | Perlman; Stephen G. | Network architecture to support multiple site real-time video games |
US5593349A (en) * | 1994-09-09 | 1997-01-14 | Valley Recreation Products Inc. | Automated league and tournament system for electronic games |
US5553239A (en) * | 1994-11-10 | 1996-09-03 | At&T Corporation | Management facility for server entry and application utilization in a multi-node server configuration |
US5572582A (en) * | 1995-02-24 | 1996-11-05 | Apple Computer, Inc. | Method and apparatus for establishing communication between two teleconferencing endpoints |
EP0965084A1 (en) * | 1996-03-21 | 1999-12-22 | MPATH Interactive Inc. | Network match maker for selecting clients based on attributes of servers and communication links |
-
1997
- 1997-03-20 EP EP97916187A patent/EP0965084A1/en not_active Withdrawn
- 1997-03-20 US US08/822,785 patent/US5894556A/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 1997-03-20 US US08/821,279 patent/US6128660A/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 1997-03-20 JP JP9533778A patent/JP2000508097A/en active Pending
- 1997-03-20 US US08/822,289 patent/US5828843A/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 1997-03-20 WO PCT/US1997/004716 patent/WO1997035258A1/en not_active Application Discontinuation
- 1997-03-20 AU AU23430/97A patent/AU2343097A/en not_active Abandoned
-
2000
- 2000-05-26 US US09/578,683 patent/US6345297B1/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
-
2001
- 2001-11-29 US US09/997,194 patent/US20020091833A1/en not_active Abandoned
Patent Citations (15)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5517609A (en) * | 1990-08-06 | 1996-05-14 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Graphics display system using tiles of data |
US5526025A (en) * | 1992-04-07 | 1996-06-11 | Chips And Technolgies, Inc. | Method and apparatus for performing run length tagging for increased bandwidth in dynamic data repetitive memory systems |
US6050898A (en) * | 1996-05-15 | 2000-04-18 | Vr-1, Inc. | Initiating and scaling massive concurrent data transaction |
US5852775A (en) * | 1996-09-12 | 1998-12-22 | Earthweb, Inc. | Cellular telephone advertising system |
US6181927B1 (en) * | 1997-02-18 | 2001-01-30 | Nortel Networks Corporation | Sponsored call and cell service |
US6113494A (en) * | 1997-06-17 | 2000-09-05 | Intel Corporation | Using multiple prioritized statements of abstracted intention to align different views |
US6157841A (en) * | 1997-09-18 | 2000-12-05 | At&T Corp. | Cellular phone network that provides location-based information |
US6055510A (en) * | 1997-10-24 | 2000-04-25 | At&T Corp. | Method for performing targeted marketing over a large computer network |
US6313844B1 (en) * | 1998-02-24 | 2001-11-06 | Sony Corporation | Storage device, image processing apparatus and method of the same, and refresh controller and method of the same |
US6407740B1 (en) * | 1998-09-30 | 2002-06-18 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Addressable output buffer architecture |
US6208866B1 (en) * | 1998-12-30 | 2001-03-27 | Ericsson Inc. | System and method for location-based marketing to mobile stations within a cellular network |
US20010011248A1 (en) * | 1999-01-29 | 2001-08-02 | Maria Azua Himmel | Method and apparatus for transmitting and tendering electronic cash using a phone wallet |
US6223291B1 (en) * | 1999-03-26 | 2001-04-24 | Motorola, Inc. | Secure wireless electronic-commerce system with digital product certificates and digital license certificates |
US20010005839A1 (en) * | 1999-12-22 | 2001-06-28 | Jari Maenpaa | Electronic commerce system |
US20010013037A1 (en) * | 2000-02-09 | 2001-08-09 | Nec Corporation | Information communication system, information communication method, and information provision business method |
Cited By (88)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US8641507B2 (en) | 1996-11-14 | 2014-02-04 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Tournament qualification and characteristics in a gaming system |
US8740710B2 (en) | 1996-11-14 | 2014-06-03 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Progressive controller and TCP/IP in a gaming system |
US9070250B2 (en) | 1996-11-14 | 2015-06-30 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Wireless real-time gaming system |
US8944909B2 (en) * | 1996-11-14 | 2015-02-03 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Gaming system having a plurality of players and randomly incremented progressive prize |
US20090005170A9 (en) * | 1996-11-14 | 2009-01-01 | Bally Gaming Inc. | Dynamically reconfigurable real-time gaming system |
US20080300039A9 (en) * | 1996-11-14 | 2008-12-04 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Gaming system utilizing wheels & enhanced input/output systems |
US20080227525A1 (en) * | 1996-11-14 | 2008-09-18 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Gaming system having game difficulty controller |
US20080227551A1 (en) * | 1996-11-14 | 2008-09-18 | Bally Gaming Inc. | Dynamically reconfigurable real-time gaming system |
US20080176625A1 (en) * | 1996-11-14 | 2008-07-24 | Bally Gaming, Inc. | Gaming system utilizing wheels & enhanced input/output systems |
US20080046517A1 (en) * | 2001-03-13 | 2008-02-21 | Tomas Frohm | Routing of Peer-To-Peer Messages in a Communications Network |
US20050267992A1 (en) * | 2001-04-02 | 2005-12-01 | Microsoft Corporation | Peer-to-peer name resolution protocol (PNRP) and multilevel cache for use therewith |
US7962651B2 (en) | 2001-04-02 | 2011-06-14 | Microsoft Corporation | Peer-to-peer name resolution protocol (PNRP) and multilevel cache for use therewith |
US20080040499A1 (en) * | 2002-01-28 | 2008-02-14 | English Jason R | Filtered Peer-to-Peer Business Communication in a Distributed Computer Environment |
US9224109B2 (en) * | 2002-01-28 | 2015-12-29 | Jda Software Group, Inc. | Filtered peer-to-peer business communication in a distributed computer environment |
US10318925B2 (en) * | 2002-01-28 | 2019-06-11 | Jda Software Group, Inc. | Filtered peer-to-peer business communication in a distributed computer environment |
US7937704B2 (en) * | 2002-06-20 | 2011-05-03 | British Telecommunications Public Limited Company | Distributed computer |
US20050257220A1 (en) * | 2002-06-20 | 2005-11-17 | Mckee Paul F | Distributed computer |
US7277946B2 (en) * | 2002-06-28 | 2007-10-02 | Microsoft Corporation | Distributed session listing and content discovery |
US20040003039A1 (en) * | 2002-06-28 | 2004-01-01 | Brett Humphrey | Distributed session listing and content discovery |
US20040038708A1 (en) * | 2002-08-21 | 2004-02-26 | Shih-Kuang Tsai | Method for playing game over mobile communication network |
US20060186052A1 (en) * | 2003-06-13 | 2006-08-24 | Rudiger Seidel | Device for treating water using iron-doped ion exchangers |
US8892643B2 (en) * | 2003-06-30 | 2014-11-18 | Nokia Corporation | Method and device for determining and notifying users having matching preference profiles for accessing a multiple access online application |
US20060242291A1 (en) * | 2003-06-30 | 2006-10-26 | Mikko Nevalainen | Method and device for determining and notifying users having matching preference profiles for accessing a multiple access online application |
US10709987B2 (en) | 2004-06-28 | 2020-07-14 | Winview, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for distributed gaming over a mobile device |
US11400379B2 (en) | 2004-06-28 | 2022-08-02 | Winview, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for distributed gaming over a mobile device |
US10828571B2 (en) | 2004-06-28 | 2020-11-10 | Winview, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for distributed gaming over a mobile device |
US11654368B2 (en) | 2004-06-28 | 2023-05-23 | Winview, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for distributed gaming over a mobile device |
US11786813B2 (en) | 2004-07-14 | 2023-10-17 | Winview, Inc. | Game of skill played by remote participants utilizing wireless devices in connection with a common game event |
US10933319B2 (en) | 2004-07-14 | 2021-03-02 | Winview, Inc. | Game of skill played by remote participants utilizing wireless devices in connection with a common game event |
US20060155708A1 (en) * | 2005-01-13 | 2006-07-13 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for generating virtual networks |
US7730183B2 (en) * | 2005-01-13 | 2010-06-01 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for generating virtual networks |
US11451883B2 (en) | 2005-06-20 | 2022-09-20 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for managing client resources and assets for activities on computing devices |
US10721543B2 (en) | 2005-06-20 | 2020-07-21 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for managing client resources and assets for activities on computing devices |
US20080147855A1 (en) * | 2005-08-09 | 2008-06-19 | Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | Method and server for detecting condition of network communication |
US11154775B2 (en) | 2005-10-03 | 2021-10-26 | Winview, Inc. | Synchronized gaming and programming |
US11148050B2 (en) | 2005-10-03 | 2021-10-19 | Winview, Inc. | Cellular phone games based upon television archives |
US10653955B2 (en) | 2005-10-03 | 2020-05-19 | Winview, Inc. | Synchronized gaming and programming |
US10744414B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2020-08-18 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US11338189B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2022-05-24 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US11358064B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2022-06-14 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US11298621B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2022-04-12 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US10556183B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2020-02-11 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contest of skill with a single performance |
US10806988B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2020-10-20 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US11266896B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2022-03-08 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US10758809B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2020-09-01 | Winview, Inc. | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US11918880B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2024-03-05 | Winview Ip Holdings, Llc | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US11951402B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2024-04-09 | Winview Ip Holdings, Llc | Method of and system for conducting multiple contests of skill with a single performance |
US8287350B2 (en) * | 2006-02-16 | 2012-10-16 | Konami Digital Entertainment Co., Ltd. | Game terminal device, game management system and game management method |
US20100227678A1 (en) * | 2006-02-16 | 2010-09-09 | Kazuma Konishi | Game Terminal Device, Game Management System and Game Management Method |
US10556177B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2020-02-11 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US11678020B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2023-06-13 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US10576371B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2020-03-03 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US11917254B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2024-02-27 | Winview Ip Holdings, Llc | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US10874942B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2020-12-29 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US11889157B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2024-01-30 | Winview Ip Holdings, Llc | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US11825168B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2023-11-21 | Winview Ip Holdings, Llc | Eception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US20230353830A1 (en) * | 2006-04-12 | 2023-11-02 | Winview, Inc. | Synchronized gaming and programming |
US11007434B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2021-05-18 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US11077366B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2021-08-03 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US11082746B2 (en) * | 2006-04-12 | 2021-08-03 | Winview, Inc. | Synchronized gaming and programming |
US11083965B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2021-08-10 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US20170264961A1 (en) * | 2006-04-12 | 2017-09-14 | Winview, Inc. | Synchronized gaming and programming |
US11736771B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2023-08-22 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US20210360325A1 (en) * | 2006-04-12 | 2021-11-18 | Winview, Inc. | Synchronized gaming and programming |
US11179632B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2021-11-23 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US11185770B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2021-11-30 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US11235237B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2022-02-01 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US11722743B2 (en) * | 2006-04-12 | 2023-08-08 | Winview, Inc. | Synchronized gaming and programming |
US11716515B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2023-08-01 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US10695672B2 (en) | 2006-04-12 | 2020-06-30 | Winview, Inc. | Methodology for equalizing systemic latencies in television reception in connection with games of skill played in connection with live television programming |
US8875028B2 (en) * | 2006-09-15 | 2014-10-28 | Accenture Global Services Limited | User collaboration system |
US20080072158A1 (en) * | 2006-09-15 | 2008-03-20 | Antonio Samele | User collaboration system |
US20080209049A1 (en) * | 2007-02-23 | 2008-08-28 | Krupp Peter H | Systems and Methods for Enabling Communications between Clients and Hosts |
US10958985B1 (en) | 2008-11-10 | 2021-03-23 | Winview, Inc. | Interactive advertising system |
US11601727B2 (en) | 2008-11-10 | 2023-03-07 | Winview, Inc. | Interactive advertising system |
US20100306813A1 (en) * | 2009-06-01 | 2010-12-02 | David Perry | Qualified Video Delivery |
US9584575B2 (en) * | 2009-06-01 | 2017-02-28 | Sony Interactive Entertainment America Llc | Qualified video delivery |
US9413540B2 (en) | 2011-07-05 | 2016-08-09 | Genband Us Llc | Combining P2P and server-based conferencing |
US20140128138A1 (en) * | 2012-11-06 | 2014-05-08 | Justin Wickett | Poker communities |
US9155965B2 (en) * | 2012-11-06 | 2015-10-13 | Zynga Inc. | Poker communities |
EP2952235A4 (en) * | 2013-01-31 | 2016-09-14 | Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc | Game device, game control method, game control program, matching server, matching control method, and matching control program |
US10350496B2 (en) | 2013-01-31 | 2019-07-16 | Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc. | Game device, game control method, game control program, matching server, matching control method, and matching control program |
CN104936666A (en) * | 2013-01-31 | 2015-09-23 | 索尼电脑娱乐公司 | Game device, game control method, game control program, matching server, matching control method, and matching control program |
CN105377381A (en) * | 2013-05-15 | 2016-03-02 | 金.Com有限公司 | Mobile device game interface |
CN112569590A (en) * | 2015-03-07 | 2021-03-30 | 索尼互动娱乐美国有限责任公司 | Optimizing user experience using connection quality history |
US10207185B2 (en) | 2015-03-07 | 2019-02-19 | Sony Interactive Entertainment America Llc | Using connection quality history to optimize user experience |
US11551529B2 (en) | 2016-07-20 | 2023-01-10 | Winview, Inc. | Method of generating separate contests of skill or chance from two independent events |
US11308765B2 (en) | 2018-10-08 | 2022-04-19 | Winview, Inc. | Method and systems for reducing risk in setting odds for single fixed in-play propositions utilizing real time input |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
US6345297B1 (en) | 2002-02-05 |
WO1997035258A1 (en) | 1997-09-25 |
US6128660A (en) | 2000-10-03 |
EP0965084A1 (en) | 1999-12-22 |
JP2000508097A (en) | 2000-06-27 |
AU2343097A (en) | 1997-10-10 |
US5894556A (en) | 1999-04-13 |
US5828843A (en) | 1998-10-27 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US6345297B1 (en) | Network match maker | |
US8024467B2 (en) | Distributed session listing and content discovery | |
US10659500B2 (en) | Managing participants in an online session | |
US7177950B2 (en) | Synchronization and recovery of peers in a peer to peer environment | |
JP3990400B2 (en) | Dynamic switching of configuration between network communication architectures | |
US7395335B2 (en) | Distributed load balancing for single entry-point systems | |
KR100638071B1 (en) | Multi-user application program interface | |
US20040260701A1 (en) | System and method for weblog and sharing in a peer-to-peer environment | |
EP1506485B1 (en) | Configuration control by automatic communication port selection and switching configuration by switching communication port | |
US20020061780A1 (en) | Information terminal, information providing server, online game method and recording medium | |
KR100683238B1 (en) | Method and system for providing on line game | |
O'Daniel | Http 1.2: Distributed HTTP for Load Balancing Server Systems | |
Dalsgaard et al. | Peer-to-peer Podcast Distribution |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AS COLLATERAL AGENT, MINNE Free format text: SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:LEAP WIRELESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.;REEL/FRAME:015732/0121 Effective date: 20040816 |
|
STCB | Information on status: application discontinuation |
Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: INTEL CORPORATION, CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:CRICKET COMMUNICATIONS, INC.;REEL/FRAME:030508/0146 Effective date: 20130502 |