DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-12, 14-17, 21-25, 28, 31, and 34-38 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 8, 15 and 21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,496,441 in view of ETSI: Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV); Management and Orchestration ETSI GS NFV-MAN 001 V1.1.1 (2014-12), hereinafter “ETSI”.
The differences are bolded in the table below:
Instant Application
US 10,496,441 B2
1. (Currently Amended) A method implemented by a network manager (NM) and comprising:
sending, a first message to a network function virtualization orchestrator (NFVO), wherein the first message requests performance of a network service (NS) instantiation for an NS, wherein the first message comprises first information about the NS, and wherein the first information comprises at least one of instantiation information of the NS or an NS identifier of the NS;
receiving, a second message from the NFVO, wherein the second message indicates that the NS instantiation is completed, and wherein the second message comprises the first information and virtualized network function (VNF) identifiers of VNFs that form the NS;
determining, a mapping relationship between the NS and the VNFs based on the VNF identifiers and the first information; and
maintaining the NS according to the mapping relationship by performing termination of a first VNF of the VNFs if the first VNF is faulty; and
updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the NFVO to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS.
1. A method, comprising:
sending, by a network manager (NM), a network service (NS) instantiation request message to a network function virtualization orchestrator (NFVO), wherein the NS instantiation request message comprises information about an NS, and wherein the NS instantiation request message requests the NFVO to perform instantiation for the NS;
receiving, by the NM, an NS instantiation completion message from the NFVO, wherein the NS instantiation completion message indicates that instantiation for the NS is completed, and wherein the NS instantiation completion message comprises the information about the NS and identifiers of one or more virtualized network functions (VNFs) forming the NS; and
determining, by the NM, a mapping relationship between the NS and the one or more VNFs according to the information about the NS and the identifiers of the one or more VNFs, wherein the instantiation information of the NS comprises an identifier of a VNF descriptor (VNFD) and an identifier of a deployment flavor of a VNF, wherein the information about the NS comprises instantiation information of the NS, and wherein determining the mapping relationship between the NS and the one or more VNFs comprises determining, by the NM, the mapping relationship between the NS and the one or more VNFs according to the instantiation information of the NS and the identifiers of the one or more VNFs.
Patent ‘411 does not expressly teach maintaining the NS according to the mapping relationship by performing termination of a first VNF of the VNFs if the first VNF is faulty; and
updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the NFVO to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS.
However, ETSI teaches maintaining the NS according to the mapping relationship by performing termination of a first VNF if the first VNF is faulty (Page 139, lines 13: The Network Manager can be an OSS, an NMS, an EM, or a WIM; Page 28, 5.5.1 Element Management (EM)… Fault management for the network functions provided by the VNF; Page 79, 7.2.8 VNF fault management, Description: “This interface allows providing VNF application-layer fault information (e.g., network function configuration failures, communication failures between software modules)” Consumed by VNFM, NFVO, or EM; Pages 145-146: C.6 Network Service instance termination flows; Page 128 B.6 NFV fault management: certain faults may impact multiple VNFs and multiple NSs, and fault information may be further processed; Page 129: 6. At the different fault correlation points, a fault resolution action may ensue. EM may forward correlated fault information regarding the VNF instance to an OSS (6.1). EM may trigger a corrective action request towards the VNF Manager (6.2). NFVO may forward correlated fault information to an OSS (6.3). NFVO may trigger a corrective action towards the VNF Manager (6.4). VNF Manager may itself trigger a corrective action if responsible for correlating certain events (6.5)….Some corrective actions may in fact involve executing some of the VNF instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. VNF scaling, VNF termination) or some of the Network Service instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. Network Service termination).); Page 130 “At the different fault correlation points, a fault resolution action may ensue. EM may forward correlated fault information regarding the VNF instance to an OSS (6.1). EM may trigger a corrective action request towards the VNF Manager (6.2)… The corrective actions will be different, depending on event. Some corrective actions may in fact involve executing some of the VNF instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. VNF scaling, VNF termination) or some of the Network Service instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. Network Service termination).”) and
updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the NFVO to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS (Page 112, “NFVO receives a request to instantiate a new VNF. This request might come from an OSS, commissioning of a new VNF or part of an order for a Network Service instantiation, or might come from the VNF Manager when the need to instantiate a new VNF is detected by the VNF Manager itself or by the EM. Thus the Sender in the above diagram can be the OSS or a VNF Manager.”; page 118: 3) […] sender (OSS/BSS or operator“); Page 142, C.5 Network Service instance update flows due to VNF instance modification: Network Service instance update due to VNF Instance modification is about replacing existing VNF Instances with new Instances by on boarding a new VNFD instantiating a VNF Instance out of it. As a new VNFD is required, the new Instance may differ in terms of deployment (e.g. NFVI Resource requirements, external interfaces) and operational (e.g. lifecycle management) characteristics of the VNF, basically all what can be present in VNFD may change; Fig. C.12 Step 1: “Sender makes a decision to update a NS by modifying one more constituent VNF Instances.”; Steps 1-6 See 143 associated description which shows the Sender instructing the NFVO; Once all new VNF instances are available, NFVO updates the VNF forwarding graphs which includes applying new VNF instances to the forwarding graph in place of the old VNF instances. The flows of the VNF Forwarding Graph update process are described in clause C.7.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of ETSI with ‘411 to manage lifecycle operations of the NS. The modification would have been motivated by the desire of managing the NS.
Claims 8, 15, and 21 have similar limitations as claim 1 above and therefore are rejected under the same rationale. However, for brevity purposes tables are not provided.
Claims 1, 8, 15 and 21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,163,607 in view of ETSI: Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV); Management and Orchestration ETSI GS NFV-MAN 001 V1.1.1 (2014-12), hereinafter “ETSI”.
The differences are bolded in the table below:
Instant Application
US 11,163,607 B2
1. (Currently Amended) A method implemented by a network manager (NM) and comprising:
sending, a first message to a network function virtualization orchestrator (NFVO), wherein the first message requests performance of a network service (NS) instantiation for an NS, wherein the first message comprises first information about the NS, and wherein the first information comprises at least one of instantiation information of the NS or an NS identifier of the NS;
receiving, a second message from the NFVO, wherein the second message indicates that the NS instantiation is completed, and wherein the second message comprises the first information and virtualized network function (VNF) identifiers of VNFs that form the NS;
determining, a mapping relationship between the NS and the VNFs based on the VNF identifiers and the first information; and
maintaining the NS according to the mapping relationship by performing termination of a first VNF of the VNFs if the first VNF is faulty; and
updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the NFVO to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS.
1. A method, comprising:
sending, by a network manager (NM), a first message to a network function virtualization orchestrator (NFVO), wherein the first message requests performance of a network service (NS) instantiation for an NS, wherein the first message comprises first information about the NS, and wherein the first information comprises instantiation information of the NS and an identifier of the NS;
receiving, by the NFVO, the first message from the NM;
obtaining, by the NFVO based on the first information, identifiers of virtualized network functions (VNFs) that form the NS, wherein each identifier of the identifiers of the VNFs represents a respective VNF of the VNFs;
sending, by the NFVO, a second message to the NM, wherein the second message indicates that the NS instantiation is completed, and wherein the second message comprises the first information and the identifiers of the VNFs;
receiving, by the NM, the second message from the NFVO; and
determining, by the NM, a mapping relationship between the NS and the VNFs based on the identifiers of the VNFs and at least one of the instantiation information or the identifier of the NS.
Patent ‘607 does not expressly teach maintaining the NS according to the mapping relationship by performing termination of a first VNF of the VNFs if the first VNF is faulty; and
updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the NFVO to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS.
However, ETSI teaches maintaining the NS according to the mapping relationship by performing termination of a first VNF if the first VNF is faulty (Page 139, lines 13: The Network Manager can be an OSS, an NMS, an EM, or a WIM; Page 28, 5.5.1 Element Management (EM)… Fault management for the network functions provided by the VNF; Page 79, 7.2.8 VNF fault management, Description: “This interface allows providing VNF application-layer fault information (e.g., network function configuration failures, communication failures between software modules)” Consumed by VNFM, NFVO, or EM; Pages 145-146: C.6 Network Service instance termination flows; Page 128 B.6 NFV fault management: certain faults may impact multiple VNFs and multiple NSs, and fault information may be further processed; Page 129: 6. At the different fault correlation points, a fault resolution action may ensue. EM may forward correlated fault information regarding the VNF instance to an OSS (6.1). EM may trigger a corrective action request towards the VNF Manager (6.2). NFVO may forward correlated fault information to an OSS (6.3). NFVO may trigger a corrective action towards the VNF Manager (6.4). VNF Manager may itself trigger a corrective action if responsible for correlating certain events (6.5)….Some corrective actions may in fact involve executing some of the VNF instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. VNF scaling, VNF termination) or some of the Network Service instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. Network Service termination).); Page 130 “At the different fault correlation points, a fault resolution action may ensue. EM may forward correlated fault information regarding the VNF instance to an OSS (6.1). EM may trigger a corrective action request towards the VNF Manager (6.2)… The corrective actions will be different, depending on event. Some corrective actions may in fact involve executing some of the VNF instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. VNF scaling, VNF termination) or some of the Network Service instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. Network Service termination).”) and
updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the NFVO to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS (Page 112, “NFVO receives a request to instantiate a new VNF. This request might come from an OSS, commissioning of a new VNF or part of an order for a Network Service instantiation, or might come from the VNF Manager when the need to instantiate a new VNF is detected by the VNF Manager itself or by the EM. Thus the Sender in the above diagram can be the OSS or a VNF Manager.”; page 118: 3) […] sender (OSS/BSS or operator“); Page 142, C.5 Network Service instance update flows due to VNF instance modification: Network Service instance update due to VNF Instance modification is about replacing existing VNF Instances with new Instances by on boarding a new VNFD instantiating a VNF Instance out of it. As a new VNFD is required, the new Instance may differ in terms of deployment (e.g. NFVI Resource requirements, external interfaces) and operational (e.g. lifecycle management) characteristics of the VNF, basically all what can be present in VNFD may change; Fig. C.12 Step 1: “Sender makes a decision to update a NS by modifying one more constituent VNF Instances.”; Steps 1-6 See 143 associated description which shows the Sender instructing the NFVO; Once all new VNF instances are available, NFVO updates the VNF forwarding graphs which includes applying new VNF instances to the forwarding graph in place of the old VNF instances. The flows of the VNF Forwarding Graph update process are described in clause C.7.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of ETSI with ‘607 to manage lifecycle operations of the NS. The modification would have been motivated by the desire of managing the NS.
Claims 8, 15 and 21 have similar limitations as claim 1 above and therefore are rejected under the same rationale. However, for brevity purposes tables are not provided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-12, 14-17, 21-25, 28, 31, and 34-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by ETSI: Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV); Management and Orchestration ETSI GS NFV-MAN 001 V1.1.1 (2014-12), hereinafter “ETSI”.
Regarding claim 1, ETSI teaches a method implemented by a network manager (NM) and comprising:
sending, a first message to a network function virtualization orchestrator (NFVO), wherein the first message requests performing a network service (NS) instantiation for an NS (Page 137: Sender, NFV Orchestrator), Step 1- Instantiate Network Service; Page 138, lines 1-2: NFVO receives a request to instantiate a new Network Service. This request might come from an OSS, receiving an order for Network Service instantiation.; Page 139, lines 13: The Network Manager can be an OSS, an NMS, an EM, or a WIM) wherein the first message comprises first information about the NS, and wherein the first information comprises at least one of instantiation information of the NS or an NS identifier of the NS (Fig. 6.2 Instantiation Input Parameter; Page 39, lines 18-21: On instantiation, the NFV Orchestrator or VNFM receive instantiation parameters from the entity initiating the instantiation operation. Instantiation input parameters are used to customize a specific instantiation of a NS or VNF. Instantiation input parameters contain information that identifies a deployment flavour to be used and may refer to existing instances of VNF/PNF, which shall be incorporated in the instantiation process.; Page 40, lines 1-2: The Network Service Descriptor (NSD) consists of static information elements as defined below. It is used by the NFV Orchestrator to instantiate a Network Service. The NSD also describes deployment flavours of Network Service. Page 41);
[AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image1.png
870
661
media_image1.png
Greyscale
receiving, in response to the first message, a second message from the NFVO, wherein the second message indicates that the NS instantiation is completed, and wherein the second message comprises the first information and virtualized network function (VNF) identifiers of VNFs that form the NS (Page 137 Step 14 Ack end of Network Service Instantiation; Page 139: 14. NFVO acknowledges the completion of the Network Service Instantiation; Page 67: 7.1.2 Network Service Lifecycle management, See tables 7.1.2.1, 7.1.2.2 and 7.1.3.1 attached below; Table 7.1.3.1 describes the NFVO as the producer, and the OSS (i.e., Network Manager) as the consumer. The Description states “This interface is used to provide runtime notifications related with the changes made to Network Service instances including (not limited to) instantiating/ terminating/ modifying Network Service, adding/deleting VNF to a NS, adding/deleting/changing VNF Forwarding Graphs and VLs in a NS. These notifications are triggered after completion of the corresponding lifecycle operation.” and further notes that “These notifications facilitate updating consuming functional blocks regarding completion of operations that may have been triggered earlier (e.g. for keeping the OSS service management updated).”);
[AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image2.png
601
955
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image3.png
550
999
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image4.png
450
970
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image5.png
378
936
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
602
958
media_image6.png
Greyscale
determining, a mapping relationship between the NS and the VNFs based on the VNF identifiers and the first information (Page 39: A VNF Forwarding Graph Descriptor (VNFFGD) is a deployment template which describes a topology of the Network Service or a portion of the Network Service, by referencing VNFs and PNFs and Virtual Links that connect them. See tables 6.2.1.3.2, 7.1.1.1 and 7.1.1.2 above); and
maintaining the NS according to the mapping relationship by performing termination of a first VNF if the first VNF is faulty (Page 139, lines 13: The Network Manager can be an OSS, an NMS, an EM, or a WIM; Page 28, 5.5.1 Element Management (EM)… Fault management for the network functions provided by the VNF; Page 79, 7.2.8 VNF fault management, Description: “This interface allows providing VNF application-layer fault information (e.g., network function configuration failures, communication failures between software modules)” Consumed by VNFM, NFVO, or EM; Pages 145-146: C.6 Network Service instance termination flows; Page 128 B.6 NFV fault management: certain faults may impact multiple VNFs and multiple NSs, and fault information may be further processed; Page 129: 6. At the different fault correlation points, a fault resolution action may ensue. EM may forward correlated fault information regarding the VNF instance to an OSS (6.1). EM may trigger a corrective action request towards the VNF Manager (6.2). NFVO may forward correlated fault information to an OSS (6.3). NFVO may trigger a corrective action towards the VNF Manager (6.4). VNF Manager may itself trigger a corrective action if responsible for correlating certain events (6.5)….Some corrective actions may in fact involve executing some of the VNF instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. VNF scaling, VNF termination) or some of the Network Service instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. Network Service termination).); Page 130 “At the different fault correlation points, a fault resolution action may ensue. EM may forward correlated fault information regarding the VNF instance to an OSS (6.1). EM may trigger a corrective action request towards the VNF Manager (6.2)… The corrective actions will be different, depending on event. Some corrective actions may in fact involve executing some of the VNF instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. VNF scaling, VNF termination) or some of the Network Service instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. Network Service termination).”) and
updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the NFVO to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS (Page 112, “NFVO receives a request to instantiate a new VNF. This request might come from an OSS, commissioning of a new VNF or part of an order for a Network Service instantiation, or might come from the VNF Manager when the need to instantiate a new VNF is detected by the VNF Manager itself or by the EM. Thus the Sender in the above diagram can be the OSS or a VNF Manager.”; page 118: 3) […] sender (OSS/BSS or operator“); Page 142, C.5 Network Service instance update flows due to VNF instance modification: Network Service instance update due to VNF Instance modification is about replacing existing VNF Instances with new Instances by on boarding a new VNFD instantiating a VNF Instance out of it. As a new VNFD is required, the new Instance may differ in terms of deployment (e.g. NFVI Resource requirements, external interfaces) and operational (e.g. lifecycle management) characteristics of the VNF, basically all what can be present in VNFD may change; Fig. C.12 Step 1: “Sender makes a decision to update a NS by modifying one more constituent VNF Instances.”; Steps 1-6 See 143 associated description which shows the Sender instructing the NFVO; Once all new VNF instances are available, NFVO updates the VNF forwarding graphs which includes applying new VNF instances to the forwarding graph in place of the old VNF instances. The flows of the VNF Forwarding Graph update process are described in clause C.7.).
Regarding claim 2, ETSI teaches wherein the instantiation information comprises at least one of an identifier of a VNF descriptor (VNFD) (Page 26, lines 1-8: The deployment and operational behaviour of each VNF is captured in a template called Virtualised Network Function Descriptor (VNFD) that is stored in the VNF catalogue. NFV-MANO uses a VNFD to create instances of the VNF it represents, and to manage the lifecycle of those instances. A VNFD has a one-to-one correspondence with a VNF Package, and it fully describes the attributes and requirements necessary to realize such a VNF. NFVI resources are assigned to a VNF based on the requirements captured in the VNFD (containing resource allocation criteria, among others), but also taking into consideration specific requirements, constraints, and policies that have been pre-provisioned or are accompanying the request for instantiation and may override certain requirements in the VNFD (e.g. operator policies, geo-location placement, affinity/anti-affinity rules, local regulations).) or an identifier of a deployment flavor of a VNF of the VNFs (Fig. 6.2 Instantiation Input Parameter; Page 39, lines 18-21: On instantiation, the NFV Orchestrator or VNFM receive instantiation parameters from the entity initiating the instantiation operation. Instantiation input parameters are used to customize a specific instantiation of a NS or VNF. Instantiation input parameters contain information that identifies a deployment flavour to be used and may refer to existing instances of VNF/PNF, which shall be incorporated in the instantiation process.).
Regarding claim 4, ETSI teaches wherein the VNF identifiers are allocated by the NFVO, the NM, an element manager (EM), or a VNF manager (VNFM) coupled to the VNFs (Page 39, lines 11-12: The NFVO on-boards all descriptors. NSD, VNFFGD, and VLD are "on-boarded" into a NS Catalogue; VNFD is on-boarded in a VNF Catalogue, as part of a VNF Package.).
Regarding claim 5, ETSI teaches wherein when the first information comprises the NS identifier of the NS (Page 38: A Network Service Descriptor (NSD) is a deployment template for a Network Service referencing all other descriptors which describe components that are part of that Network Service.), determining the mapping relationship between the NS and the VNFs comprises determining, by the NM, the mapping relationship based on the VNF identifiers and the NS identifier (Table 6.2.1.3.2 shows a VNF descriptor associated with a Network service via vnf:id and 7.1.1.2 shows the constituent VNFs of a Network Service. See below). [AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image4.png
450
970
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image6.png
602
958
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, ETSI teaches wherein when the first information comprises the instantiation information of the NS and the NS identifier of the NS, determining the mapping relationship between the NS and the VNFs comprises determining, the mapping relationship based on the VNF identifiers ,the instantiation information and the NS identifier(Page 39: A VNF Forwarding Graph Descriptor (VNFFGD) is a deployment template which describes a topology of the Network Service or a portion of the Network Service, by referencing VNFs and PNFs and Virtual Links that connect them.).
[AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image4.png
450
970
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image5.png
378
936
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
602
958
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, ETSI teaches wherein the NM is an operations support system/business support system (OSS/BSS) or a user interface of the OSS/BSS (Page 18: Management of end-to-end services by OSS/BSS; Page 117: The NFVO receives a trigger to instantiate a VNF in the infrastructure (this can be a manual trigger or an automatic service creation trigger request e.g. from the OSS/BSS) using the operation Instantiate VNF of the VNF Lifecycle Management interface.)
Regarding claim 8, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above. The additional limitations a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor and configured to storing instructions that, when executed by the processor are taught by ETSI in at least Page 14: Compute including machines (e.g. hosts or bare metal), and virtual machines, as resources that comprise both CPU and memory. Page 46 “processor, use of processor instructions”.
Regarding claim 8, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 9, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 2 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 11, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 4 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 12, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 5 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 14, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 7 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 15, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above. The additional limitations a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor and configured to storing instructions that, when executed by the processor are taught by ETSI in at least Page 14: Compute including machines (e.g. hosts or bare metal), and virtual machines, as resources that comprise both CPU and memory. Page 46 “processor, use of processor instructions”.
Regarding claim 16, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 2 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 17, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 4 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 21, ETSI teaches a method implemented by a network function virtualization orchestrator (NFVO) and comprising:
receiving a first message from a network manager (NM), wherein the first message requests performing a network service (NS) instantiation for an NS (Page 137: Sender, NFV Orchestrator), Step 1- Instantiate Network Service; Page 138, lines 1-2: NFVO receives a request to instantiate a new Network Service. This request might come from an OSS, receiving an order for Network Service instantiation.; Page 139, lines 13: The Network Manager can be an OSS, an NMS, an EM, or a WIM), wherein the first message comprises first information about the NS, and wherein the first information comprises at least one of instantiation information of the NS or an NS identifier of the NS (Fig. 6.2 Instantiation Input Parameter; Page 39, lines 18-21: On instantiation, the NFV Orchestrator or VNFM receive instantiation parameters from the entity initiating the instantiation operation. Instantiation input parameters are used to customize a specific instantiation of a NS or VNF. Instantiation input parameters contain information that identifies a deployment flavour to be used and may refer to existing instances of VNF/PNF, which shall be incorporated in the instantiation process.; Page 40, lines 1-2: The Network Service Descriptor (NSD) consists of static information elements as defined below. It is used by the NFV Orchestrator to instantiate a Network Service. The NSD also describes deployment flavours of Network Service. Page 41);
obtaining based on the first information, virtualized network function (VNF) identifiers of VNFs that form the NS; and sending, in response to the first message, a second message to the NM, wherein the second message indicates that the NS instantiation is completed, and wherein the second message comprises the first information and the VNF identifiers. (Page 137 Step 14 Ack end of Network Service Instantiation; Page 139: 14. NFVO acknowledges the completion of the Network Service Instantiation; Page 67: 7.1.2 Network Service Lifecycle management, See tables 7.1.2.1, 7.1.2.2 and 7.1.3.1 attached below; Table 7.1.3.1 describes the NFVO as the producer, and the OSS (i.e., Network Manager) as the consumer. The Description states “This interface is used to provide runtime notifications related with the changes made to Network Service instances including (not limited to) instantiating/ terminating/ modifying Network Service, adding/deleting VNF to a NS, adding/deleting/changing VNF Forwarding Graphs and VLs in a NS. These notifications are triggered after completion of the corresponding lifecycle operation.” and further notes that “These notifications facilitate updating consuming functional blocks regarding completion of operations that may have been triggered earlier (e.g. for keeping the OSS service management updated).”); and
wherein the first information and the VNF identifiers are configured for the NM to determine a mapping relationship between the NS and the VNFs (Page 39: A VNF Forwarding Graph Descriptor (VNFFGD) is a deployment template which describes a topology of the Network Service or a portion of the Network Service, by referencing VNFs and PNFs and Virtual Links that connect them. See tables 6.2.1.3.2, 7.1.1.1 and 7.1.1.2 above) and to maintain the NS according to the mapping relationship by performing termination of a first VNF of the VNFs if the first VNF is faulty (Page 139, lines 13: The Network Manager can be an OSS, an NMS, an EM, or a WIM; Page 28, 5.5.1 Element Management (EM)… Fault management for the network functions provided by the VNF; Page 79, 7.2.8 VNF fault management, Description: “This interface allows providing VNF application-layer fault information (e.g., network function configuration failures, communication failures between software modules)” Consumed by VNFM, NFVO, or EM; Pages 145-146: C.6 Network Service instance termination flows; Page 128 B.6 NFV fault management: certain faults may impact multiple VNFs and multiple NSs, and fault information may be further processed; Page 129: 6. At the different fault correlation points, a fault resolution action may ensue. EM may forward correlated fault information regarding the VNF instance to an OSS (6.1). EM may trigger a corrective action request towards the VNF Manager (6.2). NFVO may forward correlated fault information to an OSS (6.3). NFVO may trigger a corrective action towards the VNF Manager (6.4). VNF Manager may itself trigger a corrective action if responsible for correlating certain events (6.5)….Some corrective actions may in fact involve executing some of the VNF instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. VNF scaling, VNF termination) or some of the Network Service instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. Network Service termination).); Page 130 “At the different fault correlation points, a fault resolution action may ensue. EM may forward correlated fault information regarding the VNF instance to an OSS (6.1). EM may trigger a corrective action request towards the VNF Manager (6.2)… The corrective actions will be different, depending on event. Some corrective actions may in fact involve executing some of the VNF instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. VNF scaling, VNF termination) or some of the Network Service instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. Network Service termination).”) and
updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the NFVO to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS (Page 112, “NFVO receives a request to instantiate a new VNF. This request might come from an OSS, commissioning of a new VNF or part of an order for a Network Service instantiation, or might come from the VNF Manager when the need to instantiate a new VNF is detected by the VNF Manager itself or by the EM. Thus the Sender in the above diagram can be the OSS or a VNF Manager.”; page 118: 3) […] sender (OSS/BSS or operator“); Page 142, C.5 Network Service instance update flows due to VNF instance modification: Network Service instance update due to VNF Instance modification is about replacing existing VNF Instances with new Instances by on boarding a new VNFD instantiating a VNF Instance out of it. As a new VNFD is required, the new Instance may differ in terms of deployment (e.g. NFVI Resource requirements, external interfaces) and operational (e.g. lifecycle management) characteristics of the VNF, basically all what can be present in VNFD may change; Fig. C.12 Step 1: “Sender makes a decision to update a NS by modifying one more constituent VNF Instances.”; Steps 1-6 See 143 associated description which shows the Sender instructing the NFVO; Once all new VNF instances are available, NFVO updates the VNF forwarding graphs which includes applying new VNF instances to the forwarding graph in place of the old VNF instances. The flows of the VNF Forwarding Graph update process are described in clause C.7.).
Regarding claim 22, it is a method type claim having similar limitations as claim 2 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 23, it is a method type claim having similar limitations as claim 4 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 24, ETSI teaches further comprising: receiving an update request message for the NS, wherein the update request message comprises a requirement for instantiation of a second VNF to replace a first VNF of the VNFs (Page 142, C.5 Network Service instance update flows due to VNF instance modification: Network Service instance update due to VNF Instance modification is about replacing existing VNF Instances with new Instances by on boarding a new VNFD instantiating a VNF Instance out of it. As a new VNFD is required, the new Instance may differ in terms of deployment (e.g. NFVI Resource requirements, external interfaces) and operational (e.g. lifecycle management) characteristics of the VNF, basically all what can be present in VNFD may change; Fig. C.12 Step 1: “Sender makes a decision to update a NS by modifying one more constituent VNF Instances.”; Steps 2-6 See 143 associated description); and
performing, after completion of instantiation on the second VNF, a related connection operation on the second VNF and third VNF to complete an update on the NS, wherein the third VNF is a VNF other than the first VNF in the VNFs (Page 142, C.5 Network Service instance update flows due to VNF instance modification: Network Service instance update due to VNF Instance modification is about replacing existing VNF Instances with new Instances by on boarding a new VNFD instantiating a VNF Instance out of it and then updating an existing VNF Forwarding Graph with the instantiated VNF for the Network Service… Since a VNF Instance modification may change the requirements/dependencies on other VNF, the process of modifications may require changing dependent VNFs prior to the target VNF.; Fig. C.11 Before and After an VNF instance update; Fig. C.12: NS instance update due to VNF instance modification flow, Step 5: “VNF Instantiate Flow” and Step 6: “Update VNFFG” Steps 5-6 See 144 associated description; Fig. C.11 shows the three VNFs including the updating).
Regarding claim 25, ETSI teaches further comprising: determining, after receiving the update request message, the third VNF, and performing instantiating on the second VNF for the NS according to the requirement carried in the update request message (Fig. C.11, C.12; Page 143: Sender sends an update request to the NFVO to update a particular Network Service instance using Update Network Service operations of Network Service lifecycle management interface. The request will include: a. Identification of the existing Network Service instance that needs to be updated. b. Identification of the existing VNFD whose Instances (comprising in the Network Service) need to be updated. c. A reference to the on-boarded new VNFD for the VNF to be updated, Step 2 Update request, Step 5 VNF Instantiate Flow; To modify the VNFs identified above, the NFVO initiates VNF instantiation flow for each VNF to be modified providing instantiation data using the operation "Instantiate VNF" of the VNF Lifecycle Management interface. This includes identifying the VNFD for the dependent VNF instances to be used to update the instance of dependent VNF. In case several VNF instances need to be modified and errors occur during single VNF instance modification, roll-back mechanisms are required in order to revert back the VNF instances which have been already modified, i.e. revert to the old VNF instance. These procedures require interaction with corresponding VNF Managers while instantiating and terminating the VNF instances.).
Regarding claim 28, it is a method claim having similar limitations as claim 25 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 31, it is a system claim having similar limitations as claim 25 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 34, ETSI teaches wherein the second message further comprises second information about each of the VNFs, and wherein each instance of the second information represents a respective VNF of the VNFs forming the NS (Page 137 Step 14 Ack end of Network Service Instantiation; Page 139: 14. NFVO acknowledges the completion of the Network Service Instantiation; Page 67: 7.1.2 Network Service Lifecycle management, See tables 7.1.2.1, 7.1.2.2 and 7.1.3.1 attached below; Table 7.1.3.1 describes the NFVO as the producer, and the OSS (i.e., Network Manager) as the consumer. The Description states “This interface is used to provide runtime notifications related with the changes made to Network Service instances including (not limited to) instantiating/ terminating/ modifying Network Service, adding/deleting VNF to a NS, adding/deleting/changing VNF Forwarding Graphs and VLs in a NS.”).
Regarding claim 35, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 34 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 36, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as claim 34 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Regarding claim 37, it is a method type claim having similar limitations as claim 34 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In Remark Applicant argues:
In Regards to Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 102
ETSI fails to anticipate claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-12, 14-17, 21-25, 28, and 31 because ETSI fails to disclose a network manager (NM): 1) performing termination of a first virtualized network function (VNF) of the VNFs if the first VNF is faulty, and 2) updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the network function virtualization orchestrator (NFVO) to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS.
Further regarding point 1, Applicant argues “Furthermore, it is not clear that ETSI's NFVO and VNF manager trigger the corrective action when a VNF is fault. Thus, ETSI fails to disclose an NM performing termination of a first VNF of the VNFs if the first VNF is faulty.”
Further regarding point 2, Applicant argues “As shown, ETSI's sender sends the update request to update a particular network service instance. However, ETSI's sender does not also update the VNFFG at step 6. Instead, ETSI's NFVO updates the VNFFG. Thus, ETSI fails to disclose an NM updating the mapping relationship by replacing the first VNF with a second VNF if instructing the NFVO to instantiate the second VNF to replace the first VNF for the NS.”
In view of the above, Examiner submits the following:
As to point (I)
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant. The citations provided have been updated in view of the amendments and to address Applicant’s remarks. Examiner respectfully submits that ETSI as cited in Page 139 states that “The Network Manager can be an OSS, an NMS, an EM, or a WIM” and in Page 130 states that “EM may trigger a corrective action request towards the VNF Manager (6.2)… The corrective actions will be different, depending on event. Some corrective actions may in fact involve executing some of the VNF instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. VNF scaling, VNF termination) or some of the Network Service instance lifecycle management flows (e.g. Network Service termination)”. As such, ETSI teaches the limitation as claimed. Accordingly, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
As to point (II)
Examiner respectfully submits that the Sender, which is defined above as being the Network Manager makes a decision to update a NS by modifying one or more constituent VNF instances. It does this by instructing the NFVO to perform the instantiation flow which triggers the updating of the VNF forwarding graphs. As such, ETSI teaches the limitation as claimed. Accordingly, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE A CHU JOY-DAVILA whose telephone number is (571)270-0692. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:00am-5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aimee J Li can be reached at (571)272-4169. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JORGE A CHU JOY-DAVILA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2195