Gateway Decision Consolidation Using Configurable Response Mapping

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing gateway services require significant code changes and downtime when downstream services change, leading to inefficiencies and reduced productivity.

Innovation Solution

Implement a consolidation processor with a configuration file, response mapping table, and dynamic decision mapping model to determine final responses without rewriting code, allowing updates to be made efficiently through these elements.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If custom code is used to convert responses to a common format, then decision-making can be performed, but code changes and downtime are required when downstream services change

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to downstream service changesVSAvoiddowntime for code updates
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses configuration files as templates or blueprints that define how downstream service responses are mapped to gateway service decisions. Instead of rewriting code when services change, the system copies or references updated configuration files that contain the new mapping rules, allowing rapid adaptation without code changes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the system from code-based response handling to configuration-file-based response handling. By externalizing the decision logic into configurable parameters and rules in configuration files, the system can adapt to downstream service changes by simply updating these parameters rather than modifying and redeploying code.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Ease of operation

If custom code is implemented for response conversion, then decision responses can be determined, but the amount of code and system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of maintaining decision logicVSAvoidcode complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the decision logic and response mapping rules from the gateway service code and places them into separate configuration files. This separation removes the complexity of maintaining custom conversion code from the gateway service, making the system easier to operate and maintain while reducing code complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces configuration files as an intermediary layer between the gateway service and downstream services. This intermediary contains all the mapping rules and logic, allowing the gateway service to operate simply by reading and applying these configurations, thereby reducing the gateway's code complexity while maintaining ease of operation through centralized configuration management.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS12482001B2Gateway service decision process consolidation
Publication Date: 2025.11.25 PAYPAL INC
  • US12482001B2 patent drawing
  • US12482001B2 patent drawing
  • US12482001B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Various techniques are disclosed for providing gateway services between a client system and downstream service systems for a service system. The disclosed gateway service system is capable of providing a final decision response to a service request from the client system based on responses received from the downstream service systems. The gateway service system internally determines the final decision response through implementation of a decision determination processor in combination with a configuration file and a response mapping table. The configuration file provides information that allows the decision determination processor to determine the final decision response based on decision mapping in the response mapping table. In some instances, the decision determination processor may access a dynamic decision mapping model when the response mapping table does not provide a final decision response determination.