Managed-Node Lifecycle Updates Using Customer Context

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing lifecycle management systems provide generic updates that are resource-intensive for customers, lacking granularity and customer insight, leading to inefficient allocation of resources for hardware, firmware, and software updates.

Innovation Solution

A centralized dynamic contextual lifecycle management service (DLCMS) with a CI/CD pipeline that integrates customer preferences and generates personalized update schedules and modules based on customer-specific needs, allowing for granular management of hardware, firmware, and software updates.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If generic lifecycle management updates are provided to all customers, then system-wide update deployment is simplified, but resource efficiency and customer-specific relevance deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveupdate deployment simplicityVSAvoidresource overhead
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments lifecycle management updates into customer-specific subsets based on individual customer preferences, hardware configurations, and operational contexts. The system divides the universal update package into tailored portions for each customer, delivering only relevant updates rather than generic blanket updates to all customers.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements local quality by customizing update content for each customer based on their specific needs, hardware profiles, and operational requirements. Each customer receives updates with quality and relevance optimized for their local context rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Device complexity

If generic lifecycle management updates are provided to all customers, then implementation complexity is reduced, but update relevance and customer insight deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelifecycle management complexityVSAvoidcustomer insight
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent incorporates feedback mechanisms where customer responses, preferences, and operational data are collected and used to refine future update selections. The system learns from customer interactions and feedback to improve the accuracy of update recommendations and maintain customer insight while managing complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent enables customers to self-serve by allowing them to specify their own update preferences, priorities, and constraints. Customers can configure their own update policies, select which updates they want to receive, and control their own lifecycle management, reducing the need for complex centralized decision-making.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Speed

If generic lifecycle management updates are provided to all customers, then deployment speed is maintained, but resource allocation efficiency deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveupdate deployment speedVSAvoidresource allocation efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary actions by pre-configuring update packages based on customer profiles, hardware configurations, and stated preferences before actual deployment. Update subsets are prepared in advance tailored to each customer, so when deployment occurs, it proceeds quickly with pre-sorted, customer-specific content rather than requiring real-time customization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS20250335174A1Dynamic and contextual lifecycle management of managed nodes
Publication Date: 2025.10.30 DELL PROD LP
  • US20250335174A1 patent drawing
  • US20250335174A1 patent drawing
  • US20250335174A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An information handling system includes a memory to store machine-executable code and a processor to execute code. The processor creates a listing of a plurality of management functions, receives a subset of the management functions, and creates an execution script based on the subset of the management functions.