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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of the information disclosure statements filed on April 14, 2026. U.S. patent applications, foreign patents, and non-patent literature documents have been considered.
Priority
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 8-9, 28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke et. al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2020/0229023), herein referred to as “Ke”, in view of Teyeb and Barac. (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2022/0279552), herein referred to as “Teyeb.” The Teyeb reference claims support to, and has support in, provisional application 62/871932.
Regarding Claim 1,
Ke discloses: A routing method for an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) system, comprising: acquiring, by a first communication node, load information of a second communication node, wherein the first communication node is a Donor Central Unit (CU) in an IAB Donor and the second communication node is an IAB node or a Donor Distributed Unit (DU) on the IAB Donor
[0421] FIG. 11 is a schematic diagram of a fifth embodiment of a method of operating and controlling a data flow of the present disclosure. The CP-UP may obtain a resource of the DU in two ways, respectively as shown at steps 11-101 to 11-105 and at steps 11-201 to 11-207.
[0422] At step 11-101, the DU transmits the resource condition report of the DU to the CU-CP. Optionally, the report contains at least resource information of the DU (as described at step 301, such as an identity of the DU, an identity of the cell managed by the DU, a resource condition of the DU, and a resource condition of the cell).
Note: The “load information” is the resource information of the DU contained in the resource condition report transmitted to (“acquired”) the CU.
Ke does not explicitly disclose the following limitations.
Teyeb discloses sending, by the first communication node, routing configuration information to a second communication node.
[0138] FIG. 12 depicts a method in accordance with particular embodiments. In particular FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a method 1200 performed by a central unit control plane (CU-CP) of a base station (e.g. a gNB) for providing Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) mapping information. The base station (e.g. gNB) is configured as a donor base station (e.g. the IAB donor as described above) for one or more IAB nodes. The method begins at step 1202 with transmitting, to a distributed unit DU of the base station which is configured as a donor DU for one more IAB node, mapping information to map one or more field values to one or more backhaul radio link control BH RLC channels between the DU and a first IAB node on a downlink path.
[0139] The one or more field values may be included in an Internet Protocol, IP, header. The one of more field values may comprise a differentiated services code point, DSCP, value. The one or more field values may comprise an IPv6 Flow Label value.
Note: The routing configuration information is being interpreted as the mapping information.
Teyeb further discloses wherein the routing configuration information comprises a routing list configured for downlink data having different granularities and identifiers of the data having different granularities.
[0138] FIG. 12 depicts a method in accordance with particular embodiments. In particular FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a method 1200 performed by a central unit control plane (CU-CP) of a base station (e.g. a gNB) for providing Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) mapping information. The base station (e.g. gNB) is configured as a donor base station (e.g. the IAB donor as described above) for one or more IAB nodes. The method begins at step 1202 with transmitting, to a distributed unit DU of the base station which is configured as a donor DU for one more IAB node, mapping information to map one or more field values to one or more backhaul radio link control BH RLC channels between the DU and a first IAB node on a downlink path.
[0139] The one or more field values may be included in an Internet Protocol, IP, header. The one of more field values may comprise a differentiated services code point, DSCP, value. The one or more field values may comprise an IPv6 Flow Label value.
Note: The different granularities include an identifier of a QoS category (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0096]), to which DSCP, as well as flow label information is part of that category (Application’s specification paragraph [0061]).
Teyeb also discloses wherein the routing list comprises at least one routing Identifier (ID); wherein the routing configuration is downlink routing configuration information configured for routing transmission of the downlink data having different granularities according to routes corresponding to the routing list.
[0180] In other words, in some examples, the mapping information comprises first mapping information applicable to specific Internet Protocol, IP, addresses and second mapping information applicable to all IP addresses, where the IP addresses are IP addresses of destination IAB nodes.
[0138] FIG. 12 depicts a method in accordance with particular embodiments. In particular FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a method 1200 performed by a central unit control plane (CU-CP) of a base station (e.g. a gNB) for providing Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) mapping information. The base station (e.g. gNB) is configured as a donor base station (e.g. the IAB donor as described above) for one or more IAB nodes. The method begins at step 1202 with transmitting, to a distributed unit DU of the base station which is configured as a donor DU for one more IAB node, mapping information to map one or more field values to one or more backhaul radio link control BH RLC channels between the DU and a first IAB node on a downlink path.
[0139] The one or more field values may be included in an Internet Protocol, IP, header. The one of more field values may comprise a differentiated services code point, DSCP, value. The one or more field values may comprise an IPv6 Flow Label value.
Note: The routing ID here includes the IP address of the destination routing node (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0098]).
Teyeb also discloses wherein the downlink data having different granularities comprise a Quality of Service (QoS) category; wherein the identifier of the QoS category comprises at least one of the following: flow label information of the IP data packet for the data transmission of the QoS category; an IP address of the IP data packet for the data transmission of the QoS category.
[0138] FIG. 12 depicts a method in accordance with particular embodiments. In particular FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a method 1200 performed by a central unit control plane (CU-CP) of a base station (e.g. a gNB) for providing Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) mapping information. The base station (e.g. gNB) is configured as a donor base station (e.g. the IAB donor as described above) for one or more IAB nodes. The method begins at step 1202 with transmitting, to a distributed unit DU of the base station which is configured as a donor DU for one more IAB node, mapping information to map one or more field values to one or more backhaul radio link control BH RLC channels between the DU and a first IAB node on a downlink path.
[0139] The one or more field values may be included in an Internet Protocol, IP, header. The one of more field values may comprise a differentiated services code point, DSCP, value. The one or more field values may comprise an IPv6 Flow Label value.
Ke and Teyeb are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke to include the concepts of sending routing configuration information to the DU, having a routing list configured for data having different granularities and identifiers of the data having different granularities, having a routing list comprise a routing ID as well as having downlink data having different granularities corresponding to the routing list, and having different granularities based on an IP address as taught by Teyeb so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Regarding Claim 2,
Ke does not explicitly disclose the limitations of Claim 2.
However, Teyeb discloses: The method according to claim 1, wherein the routing ID comprises at least one of the following: a route number, an address of a destination routing node and an address of a routing source node.
[0180] In other words, in some examples, the mapping information comprises first mapping information applicable to specific Internet Protocol, IP, addresses and second mapping information applicable to all IP addresses, where the IP addresses are IP addresses of destination IAB nodes.
Ke and Teyeb are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke to include the concept of having the address of a destination node as taught by Teyeb so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Regarding Claim 3,
Ke does not disclose all the limitation of claim 3.
However, Teyeb discloses: The method according to claim 1, wherein the identifiers of the downlink data having different granularities further comprise at least one of the following:
an identifier of User Equipment (UE); or
an identifier of the second communication node.
[0197] For the case of IPv6 flow label mapping to LCID, may be likely that a mapping will be specific to a given IAB node, as flow labels may be considered as unique identifiers of a given bearer/flow.
Note: Here the given IAB mode is the “second communication node”.
Ke and Tyeb are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke to include the concept of having an identifier of the UE and the DU as taught by Teyeb so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Regarding Claim 4,
Ke does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 4.
However, Teyeb discloses: The method according to claim 3, wherein the identifier of the RB comprises at least one of the following:
a Tunnel Endpoint Identifier (TEID) of a General Packet Radio Service Tunneling Protocol (GTP) data packet for the RB data transmission;
an Internet Protocol (IP) address of the first communication node;
an IP address of a Centralized Unit (CU) of the first communication node;
an IP address of the second communication node;
an IP address of a Mobile Terminal (MT) of the second communication node;
an IP address of a Distributed Unit (DU) of the second communication node; and
Flow Label information in an IP data packet header for the RB data transmission.
[0180] In other words, in some examples, the mapping information comprises first mapping information applicable to specific Internet Protocol, IP, addresses and second mapping information applicable to all IP addresses, where the IP addresses are IP addresses of destination IAB nodes.
Ke and Teyeb are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke to include the concept of having IP addresses at different communication nodes as taught by Teyeb so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Regarding Claim 5,
Ke does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 5.
However, Teyeb discloses: The method according to claim 3, wherein the identifier of the second communication node comprises at least one of the following:
an identifier of a distributed unit (DU) in the second communication node;
an IP address of the DU in the second communication node;
an identifier of a Mobile Terminal (MT) in the second communication node; and
an IP address of the MT in the second communication node.
[0038] Establishment of BH RLC channel between IAB-node MT and parent node. [0039] RAN2 decided that this configuration is done by CU-CP (e.g. using RRC). [0040] For this, MT's CU-CP needs to know that MT belongs to an IAB node and not a UE, which it may derive, e.g., from MT authorization (agreed at RAN3#103). [0041] The BH RLC channel further has to be marked with the corresponding priority/QoS-class on IAB-node MT and parent node. [0042] Establishment of adapt route(s) between IAB-node MT and IAB-donor DU. This includes: [0043] Configuration of adapt routing identifier(s) on IAB-node MT and IAB-donor DU (RAN2; FFS), [0044] Configuration of routing entries on all IAB-node's ancestor nodes for new routing identifier (RAN2; FFS), [0045] IP address allocation to IAB-node for adapt interface, which is routable from wireline fronthaul via adapt route. [0046] The IP address must be specific to IAB-donor DU so that CU can send IP packets to IAB-node via this specific IAB-donor DU and the new adapt route. The IAB-donor DU has to support a pool of IP addresses that are routable from wireline fronthaul for all descendant IAB-nodes. [0047] If IP assignment is done by CU, the CU must know IAB-donor-DU's available IP address pool for IAB nodes. [0048] If IP assignment is done via DHCPv4/6 with DHCP proxy on IAB-donor-DU, as proposed in TR, a transport mechanism of ARP/NDP on top of adapt layer needs to be defined. [0049] There may be other options for IP address allocation.
Ke and Teyeb are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke to include the concept of having IP addresses at different communication nodes as taught by Teyeb so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Regarding Claim 8,
Ke does not explicitly disclose all the limitations of Claim 8.
However, Teyeb discloses: The method according to claim 1, wherein the first communication node sends routing configuration information to the second communication node, comprising: sending, by the first communication node, the routing configuration information to the second communication node through new F1 interface Disclosure Protocol (F1AP) signaling; or, adding, by the first communication node, the routing configuration information to the existing F1AP signaling, and sending the F1AP signaling after adding the routing configuration information to the second communication node; or,
adding, by the first communication node, the routing configuration information to a UE CONTEXT SETUP request in the existing F1AP signaling or a DRB to Be Setup Item Information Element of the UE CONTEXT SETUP request in the existing F1AP signaling, and sending the F1AP signaling after adding the routing configuration information to the second communication node; or, controlling, by the first communication node, a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message through a new radio resource, and sending the routing configuration information to the second communication node; or adding, by the first communication node, the routing configuration information to the existing RRC message, and sending the RRC message after adding the routing configuration information to the second communication node.
[0062] 3. The gNB-CU allocates a gNB-CU UE F1AP ID for the IAB node and generates RRCSetup message towards the IAB node. The RRC message is encapsulated in the DL RRC MESSAGE TRANSFER message.
Ke and Teyeb are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke to include the concept of using F1AP as taught by Teyeb so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Regarding Claim 9,
Claim 9 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1.
Ke discloses: A routing method for an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) system, comprising: sending, by a second communication node, load information to a first communication node, wherein the first communication node is a Donor Central Unit (CU) in an IAB Donor and the second communication node is an IAB node or a Donor Distributed Unit (DU) on the IAB Donor
[0421] FIG. 11 is a schematic diagram of a fifth embodiment of a method of operating and controlling a data flow of the present disclosure. The CP-UP may obtain a resource of the DU in two ways, respectively as shown at steps 11-101 to 11-105 and at steps 11-201 to 11-207.
[0422] At step 11-101, the DU transmits the resource condition report of the DU to the CU-CP. Optionally, the report contains at least resource information of the DU (as described at step 301, such as an identity of the DU, an identity of the cell managed by the DU, a resource condition of the DU, and a resource condition of the cell).
Note: The “load information” is the resource information of the DU contained in the resource condition report transmitted to (“acquired”) the CU.
Ke does not explicitly disclose the following limitations.
Teyeb discloses receiving, by the first communication node, routing configuration information to a second communication node.
[0138] FIG. 12 depicts a method in accordance with particular embodiments. In particular FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a method 1200 performed by a central unit control plane (CU-CP) of a base station (e.g. a gNB) for providing Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) mapping information. The base station (e.g. gNB) is configured as a donor base station (e.g. the IAB donor as described above) for one or more IAB nodes. The method begins at step 1202 with transmitting, to a distributed unit DU of the base station which is configured as a donor DU for one more IAB node, mapping information to map one or more field values to one or more backhaul radio link control BH RLC channels between the DU and a first IAB node on a downlink path.
[0139] The one or more field values may be included in an Internet Protocol, IP, header. The one of more field values may comprise a differentiated services code point, DSCP, value. The one or more field values may comprise an IPv6 Flow Label value.
Note: The routing configuration information is being interpreted as the mapping information.
Teyeb further discloses wherein the routing configuration information comprises a routing list configured for downlink data having different granularities and identifiers of the data having different granularities.
[0138] FIG. 12 depicts a method in accordance with particular embodiments. In particular FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a method 1200 performed by a central unit control plane (CU-CP) of a base station (e.g. a gNB) for providing Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) mapping information. The base station (e.g. gNB) is configured as a donor base station (e.g. the IAB donor as described above) for one or more IAB nodes. The method begins at step 1202 with transmitting, to a distributed unit DU of the base station which is configured as a donor DU for one more IAB node, mapping information to map one or more field values to one or more backhaul radio link control BH RLC channels between the DU and a first IAB node on a downlink path.
[0139] The one or more field values may be included in an Internet Protocol, IP, header. The one of more field values may comprise a differentiated services code point, DSCP, value. The one or more field values may comprise an IPv6 Flow Label value.
Note: The different granularities include an identifier of a QoS category (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0096]), to which DSCP, as well as flow label information is part of that category (Application’s specification paragraph [0061]).
Teyeb also discloses wherein the routing list comprises at least one routing Identifier (ID); wherein the routing configuration is downlink routing configuration information configured for routing transmission of the downlink data having different granularities according to routes corresponding to the routing list.
[0180] In other words, in some examples, the mapping information comprises first mapping information applicable to specific Internet Protocol, IP, addresses and second mapping information applicable to all IP addresses, where the IP addresses are IP addresses of destination IAB nodes.
[0138] FIG. 12 depicts a method in accordance with particular embodiments. In particular FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a method 1200 performed by a central unit control plane (CU-CP) of a base station (e.g. a gNB) for providing Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) mapping information. The base station (e.g. gNB) is configured as a donor base station (e.g. the IAB donor as described above) for one or more IAB nodes. The method begins at step 1202 with transmitting, to a distributed unit DU of the base station which is configured as a donor DU for one more IAB node, mapping information to map one or more field values to one or more backhaul radio link control BH RLC channels between the DU and a first IAB node on a downlink path.
[0139] The one or more field values may be included in an Internet Protocol, IP, header. The one of more field values may comprise a differentiated services code point, DSCP, value. The one or more field values may comprise an IPv6 Flow Label value.
Note: The routing ID here includes the IP address of the destination routing node (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0098]).
Teyeb also discloses wherein the downlink data having different granularities comprise a Quality of Service (QoS) category; wherein the identifier of the QoS category comprises at least one of the following: flow label information of the IP data packet for the data transmission of the QoS category; an IP address of the IP data packet for the data transmission of the QoS category.
[0138] FIG. 12 depicts a method in accordance with particular embodiments. In particular FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a method 1200 performed by a central unit control plane (CU-CP) of a base station (e.g. a gNB) for providing Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) mapping information. The base station (e.g. gNB) is configured as a donor base station (e.g. the IAB donor as described above) for one or more IAB nodes. The method begins at step 1202 with transmitting, to a distributed unit DU of the base station which is configured as a donor DU for one more IAB node, mapping information to map one or more field values to one or more backhaul radio link control BH RLC channels between the DU and a first IAB node on a downlink path.
[0139] The one or more field values may be included in an Internet Protocol, IP, header. The one of more field values may comprise a differentiated services code point, DSCP, value. The one or more field values may comprise an IPv6 Flow Label value.
Ke and Teyeb are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke to include the concepts of sending routing configuration information to the DU, having a routing list configured for data having different granularities and identifiers of the data having different granularities, having a routing list comprise a routing ID as well as having downlink data having different granularities corresponding to the routing list, and having different granularities based on an IP address as taught by Teyeb so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Regarding Claim 28,
Ke discloses: A routing device, comprising a processor configured to realize the routing method according to claim 1 when executing a computer program.
Processors are inherent in wireless communications systems.
Regarding Claim 30,
Ke discloses: A computer-readable storage medium, wherein a computer program is stored in the computer-readable storage medium; and the computer program realizes the routing method according to claim 1.
Memory is inherent in wireless communication systems.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke in view of Teyeb, held further in view of Zhu (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2021/0092667).
Regarding Claim 6,
Ke in view of Teyeb does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 6.
However, Zhu discloses: The method according to claim 3, wherein the identifier of the QoS category further comprises:
and a 5th Generation (5G) communication QoS Indicator of Data Radio Bearers (DRBs) to which the data packet of QoS category belongs.
[0466] S518: The CU sends a downlink F1AP message (for example, UE context configuration information) to the DU, where the downlink F1AP message may be used to perform a UE-related configuration on the DU. The UE-related configuration includes: an identifier of the UE (for example, a CU F1AP UE ID allocated by the CU to the UE on an F1 interface, an identifier that is allocated by the CU to the UE and that can be identified at the adaptation layer, an international mobile subscriber identity (IMSI) of the UE, a temporary mobile subscriber identity (TMSI) of the UE, or a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) of the UE), an identifier of a radio bearer of the UE, a QoS parameter corresponding to the radio bearer of the UE, an ARQ mode corresponding to the UE at an RLC layer or an ARQ mode corresponding to the radio bearer at an RLC layer, a QoS identifier (for example, a 5QI, a QFI, a QCI, or a DSCP) corresponding to a service of the UE, and a QoS parameter corresponding to the QoS identifier. Optionally, the UE-related configuration may further include a QoS mapping rule of the data packet on the DU (for example, a mapping rule from a QoS label or an F1AP message type carried in the data packet on the F1 interface to the radio bearer of the UE or a radio bearer between the DU and the IAB node 1, where the radio bearer may be a DRB or an SRB).
Ke in view of Teyeb and Zhu are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb to include the concept of having a QoS Indicator of DRBs as taught by Zhu so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Claims 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke in view of Teyeb, held further in view of Bhakri (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2019/0050306), herein referred to as “Bhakri.”
Regarding Claim 7,
Ke in view of Teyeb does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 7.
However, Bhakri discloses: The method according to claim 1, wherein the routing configuration information also comprises at least one of the following:
a feature of routes corresponding to the routing list, the feature of the routes comprising at least one of primary route and backup route; priorities of the routes corresponding to the routing list; a QoS identifier list that can be supported by the routes corresponding to the routing list; a backup routing ID corresponding to the routing ID in the routing list; a the number of remaining hops between the second communication node and a destination node in the routes corresponding to the routing list.
[0012] Particularly, the data redundancy allocation system may interface between network nodes associated with the telecommunications network and data repositories that are configured to store data records associated with the network nodes. The data redundancy allocation system may include network node routing list that is used to direct data records associated with the network nodes to one of the available data repositories. In one example, the network node routing list may include a list of multiple data repositories along with a designation of one data repository as an active repository. Additionally, or alternatively, the network node routing list may include a priority assignment for each data repository that designates an order of data repositories that the data redundancy allocation system should adhere to when transmitting data records associated with network nodes.
Ke in view of Teyeb and Bhakri are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb to include the concept of priorities of the routes corresponding to the routing list as taught by Bhakri so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Regarding Claim 10,
Claim 10 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 7.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke in view of Teyeb, held further in view of Sirotkin et. al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2019/0223078), herein referred to as “Sirotkin”.
Regarding Claim 11,
Ke in view of Teyeb does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 11.
However, Sirotkin discloses: The method according to claim 10, after the second communication node receives the routing configuration information sent by the first communication node, further comprising: selecting a route corresponding to a destination routing list for service data transmission according to the routing configuration information after the second communication node determines that the status of a current radio link is changed.
[0118] At operation 715, the relay 114 may determine a destination for forwarding of the packet. In some embodiments, the relay 114 may determine the destination based on the adaptation layer header, although the scope of embodiments is not limited in this respect. In some embodiments, the destination may be another relay 114 of the IAB or the UE 102.
[0133] In option 2, each IAB node keeps a routing table. In this option, the gNB-CU 106 may update the routing table(s) in some cases, including but not limited to one or more of the following cases: when an IAB node is added/removed; when the UE 102 attaches to an IAB node; when a handover of the UE 102 from one IAB node to another IAB node occurs; when the UE 102 is removed from an IAB node; when a link of one of the IAB node is not available; and/or other. In some embodiments, in option 2, the adaptation header may include a UE ID and UE bearer ID. In some embodiments, the adaptation header may include a source ID and/or source bearer ID.
Ke in view of Teyeb and Sirotkin are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb to include selecting a route corresponding to a destination when the status of a current radio link has changes as taught by Sirotkin so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Regarding Claim 12,
Ke in view of Teyeb does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 12.
However, Sirotkin discloses: The method according to claim 11, wherein selecting the route corresponding to the destination routing list for service data transmission according to the routing configuration information comprises: determining, by the second communication node, the destination routing list according to a priority of the route corresponding to the routing list, and transmitting service data in the route corresponding to the destination routing list; or determining, by the second communication node, the destination routing list according to the number of remaining hops between the second communication node and a destination node in the route corresponding to the routing lists, and transmitting service data in the route corresponding to the destination routing list; or
determining, by the second communication node, the destination routing list according to the QoS identifier list that can be supported by the routes corresponding to the routing lists, and transmitting service data in the route corresponding to the destination routing list; or determining, by the second communication node, the destination routing list according to local radio link information and the routing configuration information, and transmitting service data in the route corresponding to the destination routing list.
[0133] In option 2, each IAB node keeps a routing table. In this option, the gNB-CU 106 may update the routing table(s) in some cases, including but not limited to one or more of the following cases: when an IAB node is added/removed; when the UE 102 attaches to an IAB node; when a handover of the UE 102 from one IAB node to another IAB node occurs; when the UE 102 is removed from an IAB node; when a link of one of the IAB node is not available; and/or other. In some embodiments, in option 2, the adaptation header may include a UE ID and UE bearer ID. In some embodiments, the adaptation header may include a source ID and/or source bearer ID.
Ke in view of Teyeb and Sirotkin are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb to include determining the destination routing list according to local radio link information and the routing configuration information as taught by Sirotkin so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke in view of Teyeb, held further in view of Jen et. al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2018/0295529), herein referred to as “Jen.”
Regarding Claim 16,
Ke in view of Teyeb and Bhakri does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 16.
However, Jen discloses: The method according to claim 11, wherein selecting the route corresponding to the destination routing list for service data transmission comprises:
selecting routes corresponding to a plurality of destination routing lists for service data transmission when the second communication node determines that the service volume on a current radio link is greater than a specified service volume threshold; and selecting the route corresponding to a destination routing list for service data transmission when the second communication node determines that the service volume on the current radio link is less than or equal to the service volume threshold.
[0059] Additionally, or alternatively, S440 may include fast-filtering poor performing radio links from the radio links that may be considered in the formulation of a proposed fastest route path for a node. For instance, fast-filtering the radio links may include setting a performance threshold for route segments or an overall routing path, possibly based on bit rates, and comparing all links available for a possible route segment to the performance threshold. Thus, any radio link that does not satisfy, exceeds, or falls below the threshold are immediately filtered from a database or list of radio links that can be considered for a proposed fastest route path. Accordingly, fast-filtering the radio links reduces the amount of processing and time required for generating a fastest route path for a subject node.
Ke in view of Teyeb, Bhakri, and Jen are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb and Bhakri to include the concept of a threshold as taught by Jen so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke in view of Teyeb, Bhakri, and Jen, held further in view of Zhang (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2016/0149797), herein referred to as “Zhang.”
Regarding Claim 17,
Ke in view of Teyeb, Bhakri, and Jen does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 17.
However, Zhang discloses: The method according to claim 16, wherein selecting the routes corresponding to the plurality of destination routing lists for service data transmission comprises: equally distributing, by the second communication node, service data to be transmitted to the routes corresponding to the plurality of destination routing lists for transmission; or, determining a distribution proportion, by the second communication node, according to at least one of: the priorities of the routes corresponding to the routing lists, the number of remaining hops between the second communication node and the destination node in the routes corresponding to the routing lists, the QoS identifier list that can be supported by the routes corresponding to the routing lists and the local radio link information; and distributing the data to be transmitted to the routes corresponding to the plurality of destination routing lists according to the distribution proportion for service data transmission.
[0047] In a first possible implementation manner of the second aspect,
[0048] the generating, by the tail node of the first path, the first route message includes:
[0049] when the route that is distributed by the second BGP speaker and is towards the destination reaches the tail node of the first path, adding, by the tail node of the first path, a first priority to the next hop list attribute in the route towards the destination;
[0050] the generating, by the tail node of the second path, the second route message includes:
[0051] when the route that is distributed by the second BGP speaker and is towards the destination reaches the tail node of the second path, adding, by the tail node of the second path, a second priority to the next hop list attribute in the route towards the destination;
[0052] the determining unit is further configured to:
[0053] determine that the quantity of next hops in the first next hop list attribute is equal to the quantity of next hops in the second next hop list attribute; and
[0054] determine that the first priority is higher than the second priority; and
[0055] the generating unit is further configured to:
[0056] generate the route entry according to the path attributes, of the path towards the destination, in the first route message corresponding to the first priority.
Ke in view of Teyeb, Bhakri, Jen, and Zhang, are considered to be analogous because they pertain to routing over network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb, Bhakri, and Jen to include the concept of determining a distribution proportion according to the priorities of routes as taught by Zhang so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke in view of Teyeb, held further in view of Hong (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2021/0127293).
Regarding Claim 31,
Ke in view of Teyeb does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 31.
However, Hong discloses: The method according to claim 9, further comprising:
generating, by the second communication node, a Buffer Status Report (BSR) according to
data buffered in a Backhaul Adaptation Protocol (BAP) entity.
[0156] For example, when downlink data are lost in the IAB node, the IAB node may transmit downlink buffer status information to the donor base station or the associated parent IAB node. The IAB node may transmit the downlink buffer status information to the associated parent IAB node by including the downlink buffer status information in a MAC control element (MAC CE) or a backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) control PDU. As another example, the IAB node may transmit the downlink buffer status information to the donor base station by including the downlink buffer status information in a F1 user plane protocol header or a F1AP message. That is, the IAB node delivers the downlink buffer status information to an entity in a higher level using a different message depending on an entity receiving the downlink buffer status information.
Ke in view of Teyeb and Hong are considered to be analogous because they pertain to routing over network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb to include the concept of buffer status report according to a BAP entity as taught by Hong so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke in view of Teyeb and Hong, held further in view of Li and Hunter (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2010/0261495), herein referred to as “Li”.
Regarding Claim 32,
Ke in view of Teyeb does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 32.
However, Hong discloses: The method according to claim 9, further comprising:
sending, by the second communication node, routing status information to an adjacent
second communication node through Backhaul Adaptation Protocol (BAP) layer signaling;
[0156] For example, when downlink data are lost in the IAB node, the IAB node may transmit downlink buffer status information to the donor base station or the associated parent IAB node. The IAB node may transmit the downlink buffer status information to the associated parent IAB node by including the downlink buffer status information in a MAC control element (MAC CE) or a backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) control PDU. As another example, the IAB node may transmit the downlink buffer status information to the donor base station by including the downlink buffer status information in a F1 user plane protocol header or a F1AP message. That is, the IAB node delivers the downlink buffer status information to an entity in a higher level using a different message depending on an entity receiving the downlink buffer status information.
Ke in view of Teyeb and Hong are considered to be analogous because they pertain to routing over network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb to include the concept routing status information to an adjacent node as taught by Hong so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Li further discloses wherein the adjacent second communication node, after receiving the routing status information, filters the routing status information to form routing status information to be sent, and sends the filtered routing status information to its adjacent second communication node.
Distributed hole recovery steps: [0035] Step 1: When a hole enclosed by N boundary nodes is detected, any one boundary node K broadcasts a hole message if no other node has done so. This message contains the IDs of all N boundary nodes, and, if it exists, the ID of one redundant node, connected directly to all these N boundary nodes, which can therefore recover the hole by itself, in which case hole recovery terminates early. Each boundary node is allocated a timeslot according to the sequence of IDs of all N boundary nodes. [0036] Step 2: Each of the N boundary nodes broadcasts in its respective timeslot a neighbor message containing its own neighbor set. Then each boundary node discards unnecessary neighboring node(s) from its own neighbor set. To implement this, each boundary node must be aware not only of its own neighbors, but also its 2-hop neighbors. After that, each boundary node initializes the set P to contain the IDs of all the redundant nodes connected to it, before starting the redundant node filtering algorithm: if the neighbor set of a inactive node A (which is a member of P) is a subset of the neighbor set of any one of the N boundary nodes, then links from A offer no additional assistance in triangulating the hole, so A is removed from P, wherein an inactive node A's neighbor set includes all neighbor nodes connecting not only to A but also to at least one of the boundary nodes adjacent to the hole.
Ke in view of Teyeb, Hong, and Li are considered to be analogous because they pertain to routing over network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb and Hong to include the concept of filtering routing status information to an adjacent node as taught by Li so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke in view of Teyeb, Hong, and Li held further in view of White et. al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2006/0007865), herein referred to as “White”.
Regarding Claim 33,
Ke in view of Teyeb, Hong, and Li does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 33.
However, White discloses: The method according to claim 32, wherein the routing status information comprises at least one of: an indication that a route to which a routing ID belongs is reachable; an indication that a route to which a routing ID belongs is unreachable; a number of hops of a route to which a routing ID belongs; and a cost of transmission per hop of a route to which a routing ID belongs.
[0013] FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a network 10 having routers 12 (e.g., 12a, 12b, 12c, 12d, 12e, 12f) configured for sending routing update messages according to a flooding distance vector protocol. Assume for example that each of the routers 12 is configured for sending routing update messages according to RIP. In a standard distance vector protocol, a given router (e.g., 12b) would send a router advertisement message to its neighboring routers (e.g., 12a, 12c) specifying only reachability information, for example that it can reach router 12f at some specified cost (e.g., 1 hop). In response to receiving the router advertisement message, the neighboring routers (e.g., 12a, 12c) would output respective router advertisement messages specifying that the router 12f was reachable at an added cost (e.g., 2 hops). The router advertisement messages are thus propagated throughout the network 10.
[0014] If the path 14 from router 12b to 12f fails following distribution of the above-described router advertisement messages, such that the router 12f is not reachable by any mechanism (e.g., the router 12f itself fails), the router 12b will detect that the router 12f is no longer reachable via the default interface providing a cost of 1 hop: in response, the router 12b will install the route advertised by the router 12a as its default route for reaching the router 12f, and output an updated router advertisement message specifying that the router 12f is reachable via the router 12b at a cost of 3 hops, based on the router advertisement message from the router 12a. The remaining routers 12a, 12c, 12d, and 12e update their respective routing tables and output updated router advertisement messages with increasing costs; as each route to the router 12f is determined to be invalid (due to a time out due to inactivity of the path), the routers continually select another route to the router 12f and specifying an increased cost, resulting in an infinite loop that results in the "count to infinity".
Ke in view of Teyeb, Hong, Li, and White are considered to be analogous because they pertain to routing over network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb, Hong, and Li to include the concept of have routing information that is reachable, unreachable, an overall cost, and a hop count as taught by White so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ke in view of Teyeb, Hong, and Li held further in view of Muhammad et. al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2022/0182917), herein referred to as “Muhammad”. This application claims priority to, and has support in, provisional application 62/805324.
Regarding Claim 34,
Ke in view of Teyeb, Hong, and Li does not disclose all the limitations of Claim 33.
However, Muhammad discloses: The method according to claim 32, wherein after receiving the routing status information, the adjacent second communication node updates a Backhaul Adaptation Protocol (BAP) sub-header of a data packet sent to an affected route, wherein the update comprises updating routing ID information in the BAP sub-header.
[0306] The mapping configuration in IAB nodes 110 may be done by the CU 134 such as the Donor CU-CP, which will be updated as per need. This mapping configuration may be used as default mapping, which may be overruled by IAB nodes 110 to instantly cope with the temporary variations in radio link conditions to meet the QoS requirements for data and/or traffic. One such example is given above in Action c, where the intermediate IAB nodes 110 may change links and/or paths for packets to meet their QoS requirements. QoS fairness may be enforced using the route hops since the IAB node 110 will know how far the final destination is for route ID contained in a received packet header. For example, IAB1 will know that the final destination for a packet containing route ID 3 (in the Adaptation header) is one hop away while the final destination for a packet containing route ID 19 is two hops away. Using this information, the IAB1 may map packets containing route ID 19 to a high priority Backhaul RLC channel compared to packets containing route ID 13. The IAB nodes 110 may overrule (when needed) the default mapping for traffic/packets carried by all the ingress backhaul RLC channels or only for some specific channels. Also, this information may be indicated to the IAB nodes 110 either implicitly or explicitly. One possibility is to predefine the sets of BH RLC channels, one set for carrying traffic and/or packets which are forwarded only via default mapping and another set for carrying traffic/packets which are forwarded via flexible mapping, i.e. overruled default mapping if needed. Besides, the number of BH RLC channels in each set may be varied based on the network traffic conditions and requirements. Another possibility is to use 1-bit Flag in the Adaptation packet header to indicate whether to use default mapping or flexible mapping for the packet. This Flag bit may either be part of the Route ID field in the Adaptation layer header (e.g., using/allocating the Most Significant Bit (MSB) or Least Significant Bit (LSB) in the Route ID field for the Flag bit) or a separate field in the Adaptation layer header.
Ke in view of Teyeb, Hong, Li, and Muhammad are considered to be analogous because they pertain to routing over network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ke in view of Teyeb, Hong, and Li to include the concept of updating subheader as taught by Muhammad so as to effectively route communication over a network.
Response to Arguments
The following claims were amended: 1, 2, 3, and 9.
There following claims are new: 31-34.
There are no canceled claims.
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112 is withdrawn.
Claims 1-12, 16-17, 28, and 31-34 are pending.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1 and 9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSE P. SAMLUK whose telephone number is (571)270-5607. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/JESSE P. SAMLUK/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights