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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in response to application filed on 3/22/2026.
Claims 1 and 3-21 have been examined and are pending with this action.
Claims 1, 3-4 & 15-21 have been rejected.
Claims 5-13 are objected.
Arguments
Applicant arguments related to added limitations are not persuasive based on the following arguments.
Applicant:
Applicant argues that based on the primary SID list, the first packet when a target SID in the primary SID list is available processing, based on the at least one secondary SID list, the first packet when the target SID in the primary SID list is unavailable are not disclosed in the provided arts.
Examiner:
Examiner cites that Kumar discloses processing, based on the primary SID list, the first packet when a target SID in the primary SID list is available (Kumar [0055-0056: “If the processor circuit 42 of the core router 18 determines the protected segment identifier "pPE-SID" 64c in the "Active SID" field 90 is available, the core router 18 forwards in operation 110 the data packet 70 without any changes toward the primary PE router 12 & the processor circuit 42 of the core router device 18 can execute fast rerouting based on retrieving, from the list 80, the backup segment identifier "bPE-SID" 64d under the active segment identifier "pPE-SID" 64c” ).
processing, based on the at least one secondary SID list, the first packet when the target SID in the primary SID list is unavailable (Kumar [0038]: “ a primary label (e.g., 54a) for use by a primary PE router (e.g., "PE0") 12 for reaching destination "CE2" 20, a repair label (e.g., 56b) for use by a backup PE router 16 for reaching the destination "CE2" 20 (if the primary PE router 12 is unavailable), and encapsulated by a SR-typed IPv6 outer header 74 and an SR-typed extension header 76 containing header fields 78 (described below) and a list 80 of segment identifiers 64 having respective rerouting flag groups 84.”.” ).
Kumar discloses segment identifiers (Dis) relates to the router and the list 80 and active SID field 90 availability are both discussed in the above citation. The unavailability of the router is disclosed which leads to the unavailability of the list and hence the SIDs.
Based on above explanation arguments made by applicant are not persuasive.
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 of this title, 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, 3-4, 14 & 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gandhi et al (US PUB # 2020/0084143) in view of Kumar (US Pub # 2015/0109902).
As per claim 1, Gandhi discloses a packet processing method implemented by a first network device in a segment routing network (Gandhi: [ABS]: “ mechanism that uses a Segment Routing-Multiprotocol Label Switching (SR-MPLS) IOAM segment identifier that can selectively collect IOAM data from “target” network nodes along a data packet path.”), wherein the packet processing method comprises:
receiving a first packet (Gandhi: [0066]: “when data packet 660 is received at a network node”), wherein the first packet comprises a plurality of segment identifier (SID) lists (Gandhi: [0066]: “the hint label 670 present using a global SID (18000) at the top of MPLS label stack 662 is used by the node to check for an IOAM function, whereas the next label in the label stack 662 (which is a regular adjacency or prefix SID) is used to forward data packet 660 to the next node.”),
processing, based on the primary SID list, the first packet (Gandhi: [ABS]: “Upon determining that the first SID is the regular SID, the method includes processing the data packet .”),
Gandhi doesn’t explicitly teaches the primary and secondary SIDs.
Kumar however discloses wherein the plurality of SID lists comprises a primary SID list and at least one secondary SID list, wherein the at least one secondary SID list comprises a first secondary SID list (Kumar [0043]: “ The flag group 84 associated with a segment identifier 64 in the list 80 of segment identifiers can include a protected flag "P" 86.”), and wherein the first secondary SID list is a first backup of the primary SID list (Kumar [0043]: that a segment identifier (64d) for a backup PE is positioned underlying the corresponding protected segment identifier (64c) in the list 80 & "Active SID" is protected by a segment identifier (e.g., 64d) of a backup PE 16.” ).
processing, based on the primary SID list, the first packet when a target SID in the primary SID list is available (Kumar [0055-0056: “If the processor circuit 42 of the core router 18 determines the protected segment identifier "pPE-SID" 64c in the "Active SID" field 90 is available, the core router 18 forwards in operation 110 the data packet 70 without any changes toward the primary PE router 12 & the processor circuit 42 of the core router device 18 can execute fast rerouting based on retrieving, from the list 80, the backup segment identifier "bPE-SID" 64d under the active segment identifier "pPE-SID" 64c” ). and
wherein the target SID is one or more unexecuted SIDs in the primary SID list (Kumar [0055-0056: “the processor circuit 42 of the core router device 18 can execute fast rerouting based on retrieving, from the list 80, the backup segment identifier "bPE-SID" 64d under the active segment identifier "pPE-SID" 64c (based on the pointer in the header fields 78). ” ).
processing, based on the at least one secondary SID list, the first packet when the target SID in the primary SID list is unavailable (Kumar [0038]: “ a primary label (e.g., 54a) for use by a primary PE router (e.g., "PE0") 12 for reaching destination "CE2" 20, a repair label (e.g., 56b) for use by a backup PE router 16 for reaching the destination "CE2" 20 (if the primary PE router 12 is unavailable), and encapsulated by a SR-typed IPv6 outer header 74 and an SR-typed extension header 76 containing header fields 78 (described below) and a list 80 of segment identifiers 64 having respective rerouting flag groups 84.”.” ).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Gandhi in view of Kumar to figure out the backup of SID. One would be motivated to do so because this technique advantageously aids in rerouting operations (Kumar: 0043).
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected based on rationale provided for claim 1.
As per claim 3, Gandhi/Kumar discloses the packet processing method of claim 2, wherein a forwarding path indicated by the first secondary SID list is a backup path of a forwarding path indicated by the primary SID list (Kumar [0050]: “provider edge router 14 in operation 94 can configure its forwarding table entries to specify that a received data packet (e.g., from a customer premises router "CE1" 20) 82 should be processed by inserting (i.e., pushing) labels in a prescribed sequence, for example pushing the repair label "rL2" 56b of the backup PE router "bPE" 16 as the bottom label overlying the received data packet 82, pushing the primary label "pL1" 54a of the primary PE router "pPE" 12 overlying the repair label "rL2" 56b, and encapsulating the packet with IPv6 segment routing headers, namely the outer IPv6 header 74 and the routing extension header 76 including the headers 78, and the list 80 of the sequence of segment identifiers” ).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Gandhi in view of Kumar to figure out the backup of SID. One would be motivated to do so because this technique advantageously aids in rerouting operations (Kumar: 0043).
Claim 21 is rejected based on rationale provided for claim 3.
As per claim 4, Gandhi/Kumar discloses the packet processing method of claim 3, wherein the target SID is available when a network device corresponding to the target SID is reachable for the first network device (Kumar [0055-0056: “If the processor circuit 42 of the core router 18 determines the protected segment identifier "pPE-SID" 64c in the "Active SID" field 90 is available, the core router 18 forwards in operation 110 the data packet 70 without any changes toward the primary PE router 12 & the processor circuit 42 of the core router device 18 can execute fast rerouting based on retrieving, from the list 80, the backup segment identifier "bPE-SID" 64d under the active segment identifier "pPE-SID" 64c” ).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Gandhi in view of Kumar to figure out the backup of SID. One would be motivated to do so because this technique advantageously aids in rerouting operations (Kumar: 0043).
As per claim 14, Gandhi/Kumar discloses the packet processing method of claim 2, wherein either the plurality of SID lists is in a segment routing header (SRH) of the first packet, or the plurality of SID lists is in a Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) header of the first packet (Kumar [0019: “ ingress provider edge (iPE) routers 14 can tunnel data traffic via the core network 22 based on inserting ("pushing") context-sensitive labels into each data packet: the context-sensitive labels, generated by the egress routers 12 and 16, can be implemented based on applying IPv6 based segment routing to multiprotocol label switching (MPLS).” ).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Gandhi in view of Kumar to figure out the multiprotocol label switching (MPLS). One would be motivated to do so because this technique advantageously aids in rerouting operations (Kumar: 0043).
As per claim 16, Gandhi/Kumar discloses the packet processing method of claim 1, wherein the primary SID list is adjacent to the first secondary SID list, and wherein a last SID in the primary SID list is before the first secondary SID list (Kumar [0043 & 0023]: “ The flag group 84 associated with a segment identifier 64 in the list 80 of segment identifiers can include a protected flag "P" 86.” & An adjacency segment is instantiated in the MPLS data plan as a crossconnect entry pointing to a specific egress datalink.)
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Gandhi in view of Kumar to figure out the backup of SID. One would be motivated to do so because this technique advantageously aids in rerouting operations (Kumar: 0043).
As per claim 17, Gandhi/Kumar discloses the packet processing method of claim 1, wherein the at least one secondary SID list further comprises a second secondary SID list, and wherein the second secondary SID list is either a second backup of the first secondary SID list or a third backup of the primary SID list (Kumar [ABS]: “ second provider edge routers as a backup router for reaching the destination via the core network; and inserting, into an IPv6 data packet destined for the destination, a primary label assigned by the primary router and a repair label assigned by backup router, and an IPv6 extension header specifying first and second segment identifiers associated with the respective first and second provider edge routers and a protected flag that enables fast rerouting of the IPv6 data packet to the backup router if the primary router is unavailable.”).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Gandhi in view of Kumar to figure out the backup of SID. One would be motivated to do so because this technique advantageously aids in rerouting operations (Kumar: 0043).
As per claim 18, Gandhi/Kumar discloses the packet processing method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of SID lists further comprises another primary SID list and another secondary SID list, and wherein the other secondary SID list is a backup of the other primary SID list (Kumar [0043]: “ The flag group 84 associated with a segment identifier 64 in the list 80 of segment identifiers can include a protected flag "P" 86.” & "Active SID" is protected by a segment identifier (e.g., 64d) of a backup PE 16”).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Gandhi in view of Kumar to figure out the backup of SID. One would be motivated to do so because this technique advantageously aids in rerouting operations (Kumar: 0043).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gandhi et al (US PUB # 2020/0084143) in view of Kumar (US Pub # 2015/0109902) in further view of FILSFILS (US Pub # 2021/0092043).
As per claim 15, Gandhi/Kumar discloses the packet processing method of claim 1 (Gandhi: [ABS]: “Upon determining that the first SID is the regular SID, the method includes processing the data packet .”),
Modified Gandhi does not explicitly teaches segment routing headers (SRHs) of the first packet , FILSFILS however discloses wherein the primary SID list and the first secondary SID list are in different segment routing headers (SRHs) of the first packet (FILSFILS [0044]: “ the first SID list 505-1 is edited to a second SID list 505-2 including the labels <17003, 16032> by removing the label 17002. The second SID list 505-2 is written to the traffic, e.g., into a MPLS header or a Segment Routing Header of packet(s) included in the traffic.”).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Gandhi in view of FILSFILS to figure out the segment routing headers. One would be motivated to do so because this technique advantageously aids in forwarding of the packet (FILSFILS).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in all independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. This includes:
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sibte Bukhari whose telephone number is (571) 270-7122. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 - 6:00.
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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached on (571) 272-7304. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SIBTE H BUKHARI/Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights