Appeal No. 1996-1715
Application No. 08/068,592
maintaining each said clearinghouse replica of each of
said directories on said data processing system;
systematically comparing each said replica attribute
value for each said clearinghouse replica with said second
directory attribute value for each of said directories;
systematically comparing each said first directory
attribute timestamp for each of said directories and said
second directory attribute timestamp for each of said
directories to said synchronization attribute timestamp;
systematically replacing each said clearinghouse replica
of each of said directories with said upgraded version of said
directory when said comparison of said replica attribute value
and said second directory attribute value indicates that said
second directory attribute value is a more recent version of
said directory than said clearinghouse replica and said
comparison of said first directory attribute timestamp and
said second directory attribute timestamp to said
synchronization attribute timestamp indicates that said
synchronization attribute timestamp is more recent than said
first directory attribute timestamp and said second directory
attribute timestamp;
synchronizing each said clearinghouse replica on said
data processing system by periodically propagating each said
clearinghouse replica throughout said data processing system;
and
modifying said synchronization attribute timestamp for
each of said directories to represent a time at which said
periodic propagation of said clearinghouse replica last
occurred.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Lowry et al. (Lowry) 4,864,497 Sep. 05, 1989
Mathur 5,008,814 Apr. 16, 1991
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007