Describes an existing condition, situation, or set of circumstances involving uncertainty as of the balance sheet date (or prior to issuance of the financial statements) as to a probable or reasonably possible gain to the entity that will ultimately be realized when one or more future events occur.

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef

-Publisher FASB

-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)

-Number 5

-Paragraph 17

-Subparagraph b

-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef

-Publisher FASB

-Name Accounting Standards Codification

-Topic 450

-SubTopic 30

-Section 50

-Paragraph 1

-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6397426&loc=d3e17499-108355

Name:	us-gaap_GainContingencyDescription
Namespace Prefix:	us-gaap_
Data Type:	xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type:	na
Period Type:	duration

Commitments And Contingencies (Gain Contingency Narrative) (Details) (A10 Networks [Member], USD $) In Millions, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Oct. 27, 2012	Aug. 06, 2012	Oct. 29, 2010 patents
A10 Networks [Member]
Gain Contingencies [Line Items]
Number of alleged patents infringed and seeking injunctive relief			13
Gain Contingency, Unrecorded Amount		$ 112
Gain Contingency, Description	On August 6, 2012, the jury found A10 responsible for intellectual property infringement and unfair competition, awarding approximately $112 million to Brocade. On August 7, 2012, A10 issued a press release that reflected a different interpretation of the jury verdict. A10 has stated that it will take appropriate action to set aside the verdict and reverse the award of damages. A10 also stated that it intends to seek judgment in its favor as a matter of law. On August 27, 2012, the Court entered a judgment in favor of Brocade without commenting on the differing interpretations of the jury verdict or any post-trial motions. On November 8, 2012 the Court heard argument on the post-trial motions, and Brocade expects that the Court will issue its decision in the coming months. The outcome of such motions cannot be predicted with any certainty.