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 .
The response filed 4/8/2026 has been considered.
Claims 1-7, 10, 12-17, 20, 22-26 and 29 are pending.
Claims 8-9, 11, 18-19, 21, 27-28 and 30 are cancelled.
Claims 12-17 and 20 are withdrawn from consideration.
Claims 1-7, 10, 22-26 and 29 stand rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wan et al. (Pub. No.: US 20120287772 A1) in view of Cai et al. (Pub. No.: US 20110051727 A1), hereafter respectively referred to as Wan and Cai.
In regard to Claim 1, Wan teaches A method performed by a transmit node (the control logic CTRLCKT-A typically sets the sequence number field SEQ of a first packet of a plurality of first packets sent from the device A, Para. 28, FIG. 1), the method comprising: determining that a sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset (When it is detected that recovering the transmission between the device A and the device B is unsuccessful, the control logic CTRLCKT-A controls the device A to send a reset pattern RST to notifying the device B that resetting the transmission between the device A and the device B is required, Para. 44).
Wan teaches responsive to determining that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset (When it is detected that recovering the transmission between the device A and the device B is unsuccessful, Para. 44), transmitting a first plurality of packets in a stream of packets (a plurality of first packets sent from the device A, Para. 28, FIG. 5. FIG. 8 illustrates a reset scheme involved with the method 300 shown in FIG. 3, where the sequence-number/acknowledgement scheme shown in FIG. 5 and the associated operations of the control logic CTRLCKT-A and CTRLCKT-B, Para. 43, FIGS. 3, 5, 8) through a network (FIG. 1, which illustrates a diagram of two devices 100 and 200 (labeled "Device 1" and "Device 2", respectively) for performing serial transport communication, Para. 16, FIG. 1), wherein: (a) each of the first plurality of packets comprises a respective sequence number from a linear sequence number space (the sequence number may vary from 0 to 7, Para. 25. As shown in the upper half of FIG. 5, the sequence numbers in the respective headers of some of the first packets are 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . (labeled "SEQ=0", "SEQ=1", "SEQ=2", "SEQ=3", . . . in the headers of the first row of packets), respectively, Para. 28, FIG. 5) and (b) at least a first packet (FIG. 8 shows a packet of device A comprising a sequence number labeled "SEQ=0", Para. 43) from among the first plurality of packets that was sent (As shown in the upper half of FIG. 5, the sequence numbers in the respective headers of some of the first packets are 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . (labeled "SEQ=0", "SEQ=1", "SEQ=2", "SEQ=3", . . . in the headers of the first row of packets), respectively, Para. 28, FIG. 5) after the reset (a reset pattern RST, Para. 44, FIG. 8) further comprises an explicit indicator of the reset (FIG. 8 shows a sequence number labeled "SEQ=0" within a packet of device A, Para. 43. The control logic CTRLCKT-A controls the device A to send a reset pattern RST to notifying the device B that resetting the transmission between the device A and the device B is required, Para. 44, FIGS. 5, 8), wherein the explicit indicator is a sequence reset flag (the respective header of the first packet (labeled "SEQ=0", . . . in the header of the first row of packets), Para. 28, FIGS. 5, 8).
Wan teaches determining that an end of the linear sequence number space has been reached (the sequence formed with the sequence numbers of the first packets can be {{0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, . . . }, Para. 28, FIG. 5) or that use of the linear sequence number space has been otherwise disabled.
Wan teaches responsive to determining that the end of the linear sequence number space has been reached (the sequence formed with the sequence numbers of the first packets can be {{0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, . . . }, Para. 28, FIG. 5) or that the use of the linear sequence number space has been otherwise disabled, transmitting a second plurality of packets in the stream of packets (the control logic CTRLCKT-B controls the device B to send another reset pattern RST to notifying the device A that the reset pattern RST sent from the device A is received. As a result, both of the devices A and B reset the transmission between the device A and the device B, Para. 45, FIG. 8. FIG. 8 shows a packet transmission after sending the reset pattern RST) through the network (FIG. 1, which illustrates a diagram of two devices 100 and 200 (labeled "Device 1" and "Device 2", respectively) for performing serial transport communication, Para. 16, FIG. 1), wherein (a) each of the second plurality of packets comprises a respective sequence number of a cyclic sequence number space (the sequence numbers in the sequence number field SEQ of the first packets are cyclic, Para. 28, FIG. 5).
Although Wan teaches a transmit node, Wan fails to teach a transmit node for packet or frame replication, and although Wan teaches transmitting a first plurality of packets in a stream of packets through a network, and teaches transmitting a second plurality of packets in the stream of packets through the network, Wan fails to teach transmitting a plurality of packets via at least two disjoint paths.
Cai teaches a transmit node for packet or frame replication (The SER 16 duplicates the incoming packets into two or more flows (step 64) and transmits the packets over diverse data paths (step 66), Para. 29, FIG. 4).
Cai teaches transmitting a plurality of packets via at least two disjoint paths (SER 16 transmits two data streams 24, 26 on tree T1 and tree T2, respectively. The tree topologies T1, T2, preferably have SER-to-RER disjointness. If the two paths 24, 26 are completely disjoint (i.e., do not share any network segment), the data is protected from any single failure in the transport network 34, Para. 25, FIG. 1. The SER 16 duplicates the incoming packets into two or more flows (step 64) and transmits the packets over diverse data paths (step 66), Para. 29, FIG. 4).
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 Cai with the teachings of Wan since Cai provides a technique for duplicating certain packets and transmitting them over disjoint and diverse paths, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan to permit certain packet transmissions after an unsuccessful recovery to be performed with duplication and over disjoint and diverse paths to increase the robustness of those transmissions and permit higher success of recovery.
In regard to Claim 10, Wan teaches A transmit node (the control logic CTRLCKT-A typically sets the sequence number field SEQ of a first packet of a plurality of first packets sent from the device A, Para. 28, FIG. 1), the transmit node comprising: a network interface (a transport driver 130, Para. 16, FIG. 1); and processing circuitry associated with the network interface (a serial transport protocol 120 to perform communication, Para. 16, FIG. 1), the processing circuitry configured to cause the transmit node to: determine that a sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset (When it is detected that recovering the transmission between the device A and the device B is unsuccessful, the control logic CTRLCKT-A controls the device A to send a reset pattern RST to notifying the device B that resetting the transmission between the device A and the device B is required, Para. 44).
Wan teaches responsive to determining that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset (When it is detected that recovering the transmission between the device A and the device B is unsuccessful, Para. 44), transmit a first plurality of packets in a stream of packets (a plurality of first packets sent from the device A, Para. 28, FIG. 5. FIG. 8 illustrates a reset scheme involved with the method 300 shown in FIG. 3, where the sequence-number/acknowledgement scheme shown in FIG. 5 and the associated operations of the control logic CTRLCKT-A and CTRLCKT-B, Para. 43, FIGS. 3, 5, 8) through a network (FIG. 1, which illustrates a diagram of two devices 100 and 200 (labeled "Device 1" and "Device 2", respectively) for performing serial transport communication, Para. 16, FIG. 1), wherein: (a) each of the first plurality of packets comprises a respective sequence number from a linear sequence number space (the sequence number may vary from 0 to 7, Para. 25. As shown in the upper half of FIG. 5, the sequence numbers in the respective headers of some of the first packets are 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . (labeled "SEQ=0", "SEQ=1", "SEQ=2", "SEQ=3", . . . in the headers of the first row of packets), respectively, Para. 28, FIG. 5) and (b) at least a first packet (FIG. 8 shows a packet of device A comprising a sequence number labeled "SEQ=0", Para. 43) from among the first plurality of packets that was sent (As shown in the upper half of FIG. 5, the sequence numbers in the respective headers of some of the first packets are 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . (labeled "SEQ=0", "SEQ=1", "SEQ=2", "SEQ=3", . . . in the headers of the first row of packets), respectively, Para. 28, FIG. 5) after the reset (a reset pattern RST, Para. 44, FIG. 8) further comprises an explicit indicator of the reset (FIG. 8 shows a sequence number labeled "SEQ=0" within a packet of device A, Para. 43. The control logic CTRLCKT-A controls the device A to send a reset pattern RST to notifying the device B that resetting the transmission between the device A and the device B is required, Para. 44, FIGS. 5, 8), wherein the explicit indicator is a sequence reset flag (the respective header of the first packet (labeled "SEQ=0", . . . in the header of the first row of packets), Para. 28, FIGS. 5, 8).
Wan teaches determine that an end of the linear sequence number space has been reached (the sequence formed with the sequence numbers of the first packets can be {{0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, . . . }, Para. 28, FIG. 5) or that use of the linear sequence number space has been otherwise disabled.
Wan teaches responsive to determining that the end of the linear sequence number space has been reached (the sequence formed with the sequence numbers of the first packets can be {{0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, . . . }, Para. 28, FIG. 5) or that the use of the linear sequence number space has been otherwise disabled, transmit a second plurality of packets in the stream of packets (the control logic CTRLCKT-B controls the device B to send another reset pattern RST to notifying the device A that the reset pattern RST sent from the device A is received. As a result, both of the devices A and B reset the transmission between the device A and the device B, Para. 45, FIG. 8. FIG. 8 shows a packet transmission after sending the reset pattern RST) through the network (FIG. 1, which illustrates a diagram of two devices 100 and 200 (labeled "Device 1" and "Device 2", respectively) for performing serial transport communication, Para. 16, FIG. 1), wherein (a) each of the second plurality of packets comprises a respective sequence number of a cyclic sequence number space (the sequence numbers in the sequence number field SEQ of the first packets are cyclic, Para. 28, FIG. 5).
Although Wan teaches A transmit node, Wan fails to teach A transmit node for packet or frame replication, and although Wan teaches transmit a first plurality of packets in a stream of packets through a network, and teaches transmit a second plurality of packets in the stream of packets through the network, Wan fails to teach transmit a plurality of packets via at least two disjoint paths.
Cai teaches A transmit node for packet or frame replication (The SER 16 duplicates the incoming packets into two or more flows (step 64) and transmits the packets over diverse data paths (step 66), Para. 29, FIG. 4).
Cai teaches transmit a plurality of packets via at least two disjoint paths (SER 16 transmits two data streams 24, 26 on tree T1 and tree T2, respectively. The tree topologies T1, T2, preferably have SER-to-RER disjointness. If the two paths 24, 26 are completely disjoint (i.e., do not share any network segment), the data is protected from any single failure in the transport network 34, Para. 25, FIG. 1. The SER 16 duplicates the incoming packets into two or more flows (step 64) and transmits the packets over diverse data paths (step 66), Para. 29, FIG. 4).
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 Cai with the teachings of Wan since Cai provides a technique for duplicating certain packets and transmitting them over disjoint and diverse paths, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan to permit certain packet transmissions after an unsuccessful recovery to be performed with duplication and over disjoint and diverse paths to increase the robustness of those transmissions and permit higher success of recovery.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wan in view of Cai, and further in view of Goseling et al. (Pub. No.: US 20170188203 A1), hereafter referred to as Goseling.
In regard to Claim 2, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Wan in view of Cai teaches the first plurality of packets.
Wan in view of Cai fails to teach each of the first plurality of packets further comprises an explicit indication that the linear sequence number space is being used.
Goseling teaches each of the first plurality of packets further comprises an explicit indication that the linear sequence number space is being used (To identify the linear combination of data packets in the network coded data packet, the network coded data packet need only contain sequence information, e.g. a sequence number of the network coded data packet in the transmission cycle. From the sequence information, an identifier (e.g. the ESI) can be derived that specifies the linear combination of data packets in the network coded data packet, Para. 23).
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 Goseling with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Goseling provides a technique for indicating a linear combination within sequence information, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit a plurality of first packets to contain information identifying a linear combination utilized with respect to sequence numbers in respective headers.
Claim(s) 3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wan in view of Cai, and further in view of Shimezawa et al. (Pub. No.: US 20220150905 A1), hereafter referred to as Shimezawa.
In regard to Claim 3, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Wan in view of Cai teaches the network.
Wan in view of Cai fails to teach the network is a Time-Sensitive Networking, TSN, network.
Shimezawa teaches the network is a Time-Sensitive Networking, TSN, network (Some messages for transmission may be time sensitive and be associated with strict deadlines and the communications network may therefore be required to provide time sensitive networking (TSN), Para. 37).
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 Goseling with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Goseling provides a technique for utilizing time sensitive networking for time sensitive messages, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit devices to accommodate transmissions that are appropriate to time sensitive packets.
In regard to Claim 5, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Wan in view of Cai teaches the transmit node.
Wan in view of Cai fails to teach the steps of determining that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, transmitting the first plurality of packets in the stream of packets, determining that the end of the linear sequence number space has been reached or that the use of the linear sequence number space has been otherwise disabled, and transmitting the second plurality of packets in the stream of packets are performed by a Frame Replication and Elimination for Reliability, FRER, function of the transmit node.
Shimezawa teaches the steps of determining that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, transmitting the first plurality of packets in the stream of packets, determining that the end of the linear sequence number space has been reached or that the use of the linear sequence number space has been otherwise disabled, and transmitting the second plurality of packets in the stream of packets are performed by a Frame Replication and Elimination for Reliability, FRER, function of the transmit node (The requirements for Ultra Reliable & Low Latency Communications (URLLC) services are for a reliability of 1-10−5 (99.999%) or higher for one transmission of a 32 byte packet with a user plane latency of 1 ms, Para. 34. The sequence number may reset periodically or (if the sequence number is represented by a fixed number of bits) when the sequence number exceeds the maximum possible value that can be represented, Para. 93. If, as shown by the ‘X’ superimposed on the first data 808a in FIG. 9, the first data 808a has not been successfully received, then the communications device 104 may discard the new data 902 without attempting to decode it, Para. 176, FIG. 9).
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 Goseling with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Goseling provides a technique for utilizing time sensitive networking for time sensitive messages that ensures high reliability and resets sequence numbers when appropriate, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit devices to utilize high reliability transmissions for time sensitive packets through the necessary resets of sequence numbers.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wan in view of Cai, and further in view of Jakoby et al. (Patent No.: US 9673921 B1), hereafter referred to as Jakoby.
In regard to Claim 4, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Wan in view of Cai teaches the sequence generation function.
Wan in view of Cai fails to teach resetting the sequence generation function, wherein resetting the sequence generation function comprises resetting a sequence number history, a history window, or both the sequence number history and the history window.
Jakoby teaches resetting the sequence generation function, wherein resetting the sequence generation function comprises resetting a sequence number history, a history window, or both the sequence number history and the history window (the histogram data block 208 (through the processor) may be configured to set its own histogram moving window time; to be able to clear histogram history, to restart its histogram count, Col. 3, line 64 to Col. 4, line 2).
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 Jakoby with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Jakoby provides a technique to restart a histogram count of histogram moving window time, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit a device to reset its successful history of transmissions after an unsuccessful recovery.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wan in view of Cai, and further in view of Coutinho et al. (Pub. No.: US 20170206238 A1), hereafter referred to as Coutinho.
In regard to Claim 6, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Wan in view of Cai teaches the network.
Wan in view of Cai fails to teach the network is a Deterministic Networking, DetNet, network.
Coutinho teaches the network is a Deterministic Networking, DetNet, network (a network of moving things may provide an automatic and adaptable system that is able to dynamically adapt the level of data validation checks performed in the network, and to personalize them based on the type of data (e.g., real-time), or traffic characteristics (e.g., deterministic), Para. 186).
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 Coutinho with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Coutinho provides a technique for utilizing deterministic networking for real-time messages, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit devices to for utilizing deterministic networking for real-time packets.
In regard to Claim 7, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Wan in view of Cai teaches the first plurality of packets.
Wan in view of Cai fails to teach the steps of determining that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, transmitting the first plurality of packets in the stream of packets, determining that the end of the linear sequence number space has been reached or that the use of the linear sequence number space has been otherwise disabled, and transmitting the second plurality of packets in the stream of packets are performed by a Packet Replication and Elimination Function, PRER, of the transmit node
Coutinho teaches the steps of determining that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, transmitting the first plurality of packets in the stream of packets, determining that the end of the linear sequence number space has been reached or that the use of the linear sequence number space has been otherwise disabled, and transmitting the second plurality of packets in the stream of packets are performed by a Packet Replication and Elimination Function, PRER, of the transmit node (The sequence number used by a network element may be reset at certain points in time such as, for example, when the network element is reinitialized. The occurrence of sequence number resets may be cross-checked against an events database that is maintained for each network element, Para. 175. At block 1016, the incorrectly received data may be discarded, Para. 203, FIG. 10).
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 Coutinho with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Coutinho provides a technique that ensures high reliability and resets sequence numbers when appropriate, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit devices to utilize high reliability transmissions for time sensitive packets through the necessary resets of sequence numbers.
Claim(s) 22 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ambati et al. (Pub. No.: US 20160277358 A1) in view of Cai et al. (Pub. No.: US 20110051727 A1) and Wan et al. (Pub. No.: US 20120287772 A1), hereafter respectively referred to as Ambati, Cai, and Wan.
In regard to Claim 22, Ambati teaches A method performed by a receive node (a receiver that receives packets, Para. 35, FIG. 6) for packet or frame elimination (If a replay attack is detected, then decision 726 branches to the ‘yes’ branch whereupon, at step 728, the core discards the packet, Para. 38, FIG. 7), the method comprising: determining that (A decision is made by the receiving process as to whether a distribution label is present in the received packet, such as in the IP header options (decision 620), Para. 36, FIG. 6) the packet comprises an explicit indication that a linear sequence number space (at step 560, the flow-based sequence number is incremented and the process copies the flow-based sequence number into IPSEC security (ESP/AH) header, Para. 33, FIG. 5. At step 570, the sender performs IPSEC encapsulation and copies the distribution label into IP options of the outer IP header. The distribution label being in the outer IP header allows the receiver to both detect that the incoming packet includes a flow-based sequence context, Para. 34, FIG. 5), rather than a cyclic sequence number space, is being used (If a distribution label was provided by the sender and is present in the received packet, then decision 620 branches to the ‘yes’ branch whereupon predefined process 630 is performed to distribute the packet among the receiver's cores based on the flow label included in the distribution label, Para. 36, FIG. 6).
Ambati teaches determining whether the sequence number of the packet is outside of a reset ignore range, iRIR, associated with use of the linear sequence number space (In the example, the sliding window context allows flow-based sequence numbers of 5, 6, or 7. Therefore, the flow sequence number transmitted by the sender (seq. no. 5) falls within the sliding window and would be accepted. A packet with a sequence number falling outside the sliding window context would be discarded, Para. 24, FIG. 1).
Ambati teaches responsive to determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the linear sequence number space is being used (A decision is made by the core as to whether the flow-based sequence context is a replay attack by comparing the sliding flow-based sequence context maintained by the core to the flow-based sequence number found in the received packet (decision 726). If a replay attack is detected, then decision 726 branches to the ‘yes’ branch whereupon, at step 728, the core discards the packet. On the other hand, if a replay attack is not detected, then decision 726 branches to the ‘no’ branch whereupon, at step 730, IP security and other processing of the packet is performed, Para. 38, FIG. 7) and the sequence number of the packet is outside of the iRIR, accepting the packet (a sliding window is maintained for the flow-based sequence context so that flow-based sequence numbers falling within the range of the sliding window are accepted, Para. 24).
Ambati fails to teach receiving a packet from one of a plurality of replicated streams that traverse disjoint paths from a transmit node to the receive node through a network, the packet comprising a sequence number.
Cai teaches receiving a packet from one of a plurality of replicated streams that traverse disjoint paths from a transmit node to the receive node through a network (SER 16 transmits two data streams 24, 26 on tree T1 and tree T2, respectively. The tree topologies T1, T2, preferably have SER-to-RER disjointness. If the two paths 24, 26 are completely disjoint (i.e., do not share any network segment), the data is protected from any single failure in the transport network 34, Para. 25, FIG. 1. The SER 16 duplicates the incoming packets into two or more flows (step 64) and transmits the packets over diverse data paths (step 66), Para. 29, FIG. 4), the packet comprising a sequence number (The packets 50, 58 contain the same RTP header 54 and data (payload) 56. Information in the RTP header (e.g., sequence number, timestamp) is used to identify duplicate packets, Para. 26, FIG. 3).
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 Cai with the teachings of Ambati since Cai provides a technique for duplicating certain packets and transmitting them over disjoint and diverse paths, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Ambati to permit certain packet transmissions to be performed with duplication and over disjoint and diverse paths to increase the robustness of those transmissions and permit higher success of reception.
Ambati in view of Cai fails to teach determining whether the packet comprises an explicit indication that a sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, wherein the explicit indication is a sequence reset flag; and responsive to determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, accepting the packet.
Wan teaches determining whether the packet comprises an explicit indication that a sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset (FIG. 8 shows a sequence number labeled "SEQ=0" within a packet of device A, Para. 43. The control logic CTRLCKT-A controls the device A to send a reset pattern RST to notifying the device B that resetting the transmission between the device A and the device B is required, Para. 44, FIG. 8), wherein the explicit indication is a sequence reset flag (the respective header of the first packet (labeled "SEQ=0", . . . in the header of the first row of packets), Para. 28, FIGS. 5, 8).
Wan teaches responsive to determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, accepting the packet (FIG. 8 shows a sequence number labeled "SEQ=0" within a packet of device A, Para. 43. The control logic CTRLCKT-B controls the device B to send another reset pattern RST to notifying the device A that the reset pattern RST sent from the device A is received. As a result, both of the devices A and B reset the transmission between the device A and the device B, Para. 45, FIG. 8. FIG. 8 shows a packet transmission after sending the reset pattern RST).
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 Wan with the teachings of Ambati in view of Cai since Wan provides a technique to reset a connection involving sequence numbers, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Ambati in view of Cai to permit connections to be reset for maintenance of packet streams involving sequence numbers.
In regard to Claim 29, Ambati teaches A receive node (a receiver that receives packets, Para. 35, FIG. 6) for packet or frame elimination (If a replay attack is detected, then decision 726 branches to the ‘yes’ branch whereupon, at step 728, the core discards the packet, Para. 38, FIG. 7), the receive node comprising: a network interface (receiver side security gateway 170, Para. 22, FIG. 1); and processing circuitry associated with the network interface (receiver system 160 can utilize multi-core processors, Para. 19, FIG. 1), the processing circuitry configured to cause the receive node to: determine that (A decision is made by the receiving process as to whether a distribution label is present in the received packet, such as in the IP header options (decision 620), Para. 36, FIG. 6) the packet comprises an explicit indication that a linear sequence number space (at step 560, the flow-based sequence number is incremented and the process copies the flow-based sequence number into IPSEC security (ESP/AH) header, Para. 33, FIG. 5. At step 570, the sender performs IPSEC encapsulation and copies the distribution label into IP options of the outer IP header. The distribution label being in the outer IP header allows the receiver to both detect that the incoming packet includes a flow-based sequence context, Para. 34, FIG. 5), rather than a cyclic sequence number space, is being used (If a distribution label was provided by the sender and is present in the received packet, then decision 620 branches to the ‘yes’ branch whereupon predefined process 630 is performed to distribute the packet among the receiver's cores based on the flow label included in the distribution label, Para. 36, FIG. 6).
Ambati teaches determine whether the sequence number of the packet is outside of a reset ignore range, iRIR, associated with use of the linear sequence number space (In the example, the sliding window context allows flow-based sequence numbers of 5, 6, or 7. Therefore, the flow sequence number transmitted by the sender (seq. no. 5) falls within the sliding window and would be accepted. A packet with a sequence number falling outside the sliding window context would be discarded, Para. 24, FIG. 1).
Ambati teaches responsive to determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the linear sequence number space is being used (A decision is made by the core as to whether the flow-based sequence context is a replay attack by comparing the sliding flow-based sequence context maintained by the core to the flow-based sequence number found in the received packet (decision 726). If a replay attack is detected, then decision 726 branches to the ‘yes’ branch whereupon, at step 728, the core discards the packet. On the other hand, if a replay attack is not detected, then decision 726 branches to the ‘no’ branch whereupon, at step 730, IP security and other processing of the packet is performed, Para. 38, FIG. 7) and the sequence number of the packet is outside of the iRIR, accept the packet (a sliding window is maintained for the flow-based sequence context so that flow-based sequence numbers falling within the range of the sliding window are accepted, Para. 24).
Ambati fails to teach receive a packet from one of a plurality of replicated streams that traverse disjoint paths from a transmit node to the receive node through a network, the packet comprising a sequence number.
Cai teaches receive a packet from one of a plurality of replicated streams that traverse disjoint paths from a transmit node to the receive node through a network (SER 16 transmits two data streams 24, 26 on tree T1 and tree T2, respectively. The tree topologies T1, T2, preferably have SER-to-RER disjointness. If the two paths 24, 26 are completely disjoint (i.e., do not share any network segment), the data is protected from any single failure in the transport network 34, Para. 25, FIG. 1. The SER 16 duplicates the incoming packets into two or more flows (step 64) and transmits the packets over diverse data paths (step 66), Para. 29, FIG. 4), the packet comprising a sequence number (The packets 50, 58 contain the same RTP header 54 and data (payload) 56. Information in the RTP header (e.g., sequence number, timestamp) is used to identify duplicate packets, Para. 26, FIG. 3).
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 Cai with the teachings of Ambati since Cai provides a technique for duplicating certain packets and transmitting them over disjoint and diverse paths, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Ambati to permit certain packet transmissions to be performed with duplication and over disjoint and diverse paths to increase the robustness of those transmissions and permit higher success of reception.
Ambati in view of Cai fails to teach determine whether the packet comprises an explicit indication that a sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, wherein the explicit indication is a sequence reset flag; and responsive to determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, accept the packet.
Wan teaches determine whether the packet comprises an explicit indication that a sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset (FIG. 8 shows a sequence number labeled "SEQ=0" within a packet of device A, Para. 43. The control logic CTRLCKT-A controls the device A to send a reset pattern RST to notifying the device B that resetting the transmission between the device A and the device B is required, Para. 44, FIG. 8), wherein the explicit indication is a sequence reset flag (the respective header of the first packet (labeled "SEQ=0", . . . in the header of the first row of packets), Para. 28, FIGS. 5, 8).
Wan teaches responsive to determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, accept the packet (FIG. 8 shows a sequence number labeled "SEQ=0" within a packet of device A, Para. 43. The control logic CTRLCKT-B controls the device B to send another reset pattern RST to notifying the device A that the reset pattern RST sent from the device A is received. As a result, both of the devices A and B reset the transmission between the device A and the device B, Para. 45, FIG. 8. FIG. 8 shows a packet transmission after sending the reset pattern RST).
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 Wan with the teachings of Ambati in view of Cai since Wan provides a technique to reset a connection involving sequence numbers, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Ambati in view of Cai to permit connections to be reset for maintenance of packet streams involving sequence numbers.
Claim(s) 23-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ambati in view of Cai, Wan, and further in view of Jakoby et al. (Patent No.: US 9673921 B1), hereafter referred to as Jakoby.
In regard to Claim 23, as presented in the rejection of Claim 22, Ambati in view of Cai and Wan teaches the packet.
Ambati in view of Cai and Wan fails to teach responsive to determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the linear sequence number space is being used and that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset and the sequence number of the packet is outside of the iRIR, updating a history window and a history associated with the linear sequence number space based on the sequence number of the packet.
Jakoby teaches responsive to determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the linear sequence number space is being used and that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset and the sequence number of the packet is outside of the iRIR, updating a history window and a history associated with the linear sequence number space based on the sequence number of the packet (the histogram data block 208 (through the processor) may be configured to set its own histogram moving window time; to be able to clear histogram history, to restart its histogram count, Col. 3, line 64 to Col. 4, line 2).
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 Jakoby with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Jakoby provides a technique to restart a histogram count of histogram moving window time, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit a device to reset its successful history of transmissions after an unsuccessful recovery.
In regard to Claim 24, as presented in the rejection of Claim 22, Ambati in view of Cai and Wan teaches the packet.
Ambati in view of Cai and Wan fails to teach upon determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the linear sequence number space is being used and that the packet either does not comprise the explicit indication that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset or the sequence number of the packet is not outside of the iRIR: determining whether the sequence number of the packet is within a history window, iHSW, associated with the use of the linear sequence number space; determining whether the sequence number of the packet is already in a history associated with the use of the linear sequence number space that comprises sequence numbers from the linear sequence number space that have already been received; and responsive to determining that the sequence number of the packet is within the iHSW and determining that the sequence number of the packet is not already in the history, accepting the packet.
Jakoby teaches upon determining that the packet comprises the explicit indication that the linear sequence number space is being used and that the packet either does not comprise the explicit indication that the sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset or the sequence number of the packet is not outside of the iRIR: determining whether the sequence number of the packet is within a history window, iHSW, associated with the use of the linear sequence number space; determining whether the sequence number of the packet is already in a history associated with the use of the linear sequence number space that comprises sequence numbers from the linear sequence number space that have already been received; and responsive to determining that the sequence number of the packet is within the iHSW and determining that the sequence number of the packet is not already in the history, accepting the packet (the histogram data block 208 (through the processor) may be configured to set its own histogram moving window time; to be able to clear histogram history, to restart its histogram count, Col. 3, line 64 to Col. 4, line 2).
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 Jakoby with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Jakoby provides a technique to restart a histogram count of histogram moving window time, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit a device to reset its successful history of transmissions after an unsuccessful recovery.
In regard to Claim 25, as presented in the rejection of Claim 22, Ambati in view of Cai and Wan teaches the packet.
Ambati in view of Cai and Wan fails to teach responsive to determining that the sequence number of the packet is within the iHSW and determining that the sequence number of the packet is already in the history, discarding the packet.
Jakoby teaches responsive to determining that the sequence number of the packet is within the iHSW and determining that the sequence number of the packet is already in the history, discarding the packet (the histogram data block 208 (through the processor) may be configured to set its own histogram moving window time; to be able to clear histogram history, to restart its histogram count, Col. 3, line 64 to Col. 4, line 2).
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 Jakoby with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Jakoby provides a technique to restart a histogram count of histogram moving window time, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit a device to reset its successful history of transmissions after an unsuccessful recovery.
In regard to Claim 26, as presented in the rejection of Claim 22, Ambati in view of Cai and Wan teaches the packet.
Ambati in view of Cai and Wan fails to teach responsive to determining that the sequence number of the packet is within the iHSW and determining that the sequence number of the packet is not already in the history, updating the iHSW and the history associated with the linear sequence number space based on the sequence number of the packet.
Jakoby teaches responsive to determining that the sequence number of the packet is within the iHSW and determining that the sequence number of the packet is not already in the history, updating the iHSW and the history associated with the linear sequence number space based on the sequence number of the packet (the histogram data block 208 (through the processor) may be configured to set its own histogram moving window time; to be able to clear histogram history, to restart its histogram count, Col. 3, line 64 to Col. 4, line 2).
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 Jakoby with the teachings of Wan in view of Cai since Jakoby provides a technique to restart a histogram count of histogram moving window time, which can be introduced into the arrangement of Wan in view of Cai to permit a device to reset its successful history of transmissions after an unsuccessful recovery.
Response to Arguments
I. Arguments for the Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 103
Pages 10-11 of the Remarks presents the argument that To at least these and related ends, independent claim 1, recites in part: at least a first packet from among the first plurality of packets that was sent after the reset further comprises an explicit indicator of the reset, wherein the explicit indicator is a sequence reset flag. Wan and Cai fail to teach or suggest at least these recited elements of claim 1. This argument is not persuasive. Wan teaches in Para. 44 and FIG. 8: “device A to send a reset pattern RST to notifying the device B that resetting the transmission between the device A and the device B is required” (emphasis added). A reset pattern RST of Wan can be considered a type of reset of Claim 1. No limitation of Claim 1 precludes this interpretation. Therefore, reset pattern RST of Wan is substantively the same as a reset of Claim 1.
FIG. 8 of Wan shows a packet, among a sequence of packets, with a header labeled "SEQ=0" transmitted after reset pattern RST, and this is substantively the same as a first packet from among the first plurality of packets that was sent after the reset of Claim 1.
Wan teaches in Para. 28 and FIGS. 5 and 8: “the sequence numbers in the respective headers of some of the first packets are 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . (labeled "SEQ=0", "SEQ=1", "SEQ=2", "SEQ=3", . . . in the headers of the first row of packets), respectively” (emphasis added). The shows that a first packet of a sequence of packets has a label "SEQ=0". Wan teaches in Para. 43, FIGS. 3, 5 and 8: “FIG. 8 illustrates a reset scheme involved with the method 300 shown in FIG. 3 according to an embodiment of the present invention, where the sequence-number/acknowledgement scheme shown in FIG. 5” (emphasis added). FIG. 8 of Wan shows that, after a reset pattern RST, a header labeled "SEQ=0" in a first packet of a packet sequence is transmitted. Therefore, this indicates that a reset of a sequence of packets involves starting with a packet labeled "SEQ=0" in its header. A label of "SEQ=0" of a packet header indicating a start of a number sequence after reset pattern RST, is substantively the same as an explicit indicator of the reset of Claim 1.
The packet in FIG. 8 of Wan, among a sequence of packets, that is transmitted after reset pattern RST, includes a label of "SEQ=0", and this is substantively the same as a first packet from among the first plurality of packets that was sent after the reset further comprises an explicit indicator of the reset of Claim 1.
A header labeled "SEQ=0" in a packet after reset pattern RST in FIG. 8 of Wan, is substantively the same as the explicit indicator is a sequence reset flag of Claim 1. As a result, a packet of Wan, among a sequence of packets in FIG. 8, that is transmitted after reset pattern RST, and that includes a "SEQ=0" label by comprising a header labeled "SEQ=0", is substantively the same as a first packet from among the first plurality of packets that was sent after the reset further comprises an explicit indicator of the reset, wherein the explicit indicator is a sequence reset flag of Claim 1.
Page 12 of the Remarks presents the argument that The reset pattern RST is clearly a separate control signal and is not a sequence reset flag, which the application describes as being part of a header of a packet. This argument is not persuasive. The rejection of Claim 1 presents a header labeled "SEQ=0" in a packet after reset pattern RST in FIG. 8 of Wan, as teaching the explicit indicator is a sequence reset flag of Claim 1.
Page 12 of the Remarks presents the argument that But more importantly, in Wan, the reset pattern RST precedes the retransmission of the unsuccessful transmission as described above in paragraphs [0044] and [0045]. This argument is not persuasive. FIG. 8 of Wan shows reset pattern RST after a re-sent packet that is a retried version (labeled "RETRY", on the header) of the packet whose header is labeled "SEQ=1".
Page 12 of the Remarks presents the argument that The reset pattern RST is sent from device A to device B only after it is determined that the transmission is unsuccessful, and then after the RST pattern is received by device B, it sends another RST pattern to notify device A that the RST pattern was received. Then, the transmission is reset. This argument is not persuasive. FIG. 8 of Wan shows a packet, among a sequence of packets, with a header labeled "SEQ=0" transmitted after reset pattern RST, and this is substantively the same as a first packet from among the first plurality of packets that was sent after the reset of Claim 1. If the Specification of the Application includes features clarifying a reset that preclude such an interpretation, these features are not positively recited in the language of Claim 1.
Page 12 of the Remarks presents the argument that By contrast, in claim 1, the sequence reset flag is in the first packet AFTER the reset has already occurred to let the receiving node know that the reset occurred already. This argument is not persuasive. A packet in FIG. 8 of Wan comprising a header labeled "SEQ=0", is transmitted AFTER reset pattern RST, and is substantively the same as a first packet … that was sent after the reset further comprises an explicit indicator of the reset, wherein the explicit indicator is a sequence reset flag of Claim 1.
Page 12 of the Remarks presents the argument that Wan therefore does not disclose at least a first packet from among the first plurality of packets that was sent after the reset further comprises an explicit indicator of the reset, wherein the explicit indicator is a sequence reset flag. This argument is not persuasive. A packet of Wan, among a sequence of packets in FIG. 8, that is transmitted after reset pattern RST, and that includes a "SEQ=0" label by comprising a header labeled "SEQ=0", is substantively the same as a first packet from among the first plurality of packets that was sent after the reset further comprises an explicit indicator of the reset, wherein the explicit indicator is a sequence reset flag of Claim 1.
Page 15 of the Remarks presents the argument that Wan therefore does not disclose determining whether the packet comprises an explicit indication that a sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, wherein the explicit indication is a sequence reset flag and Ambati and Cai fail to cure the deficiencies of Wan. This argument is not persuasive. A packet of Wan, among a sequence of packets in FIG. 8, that is transmitted after reset pattern RST, and that includes a "SEQ=0" label by comprising a header labeled "SEQ=0", is substantively the same as the packet comprises an explicit indication that a sequence generation function at the transmit node has been reset, wherein the explicit indication is a sequence reset flag of Claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSHUA Y SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-1826. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:30am-7pm ET.
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, CHIRAG G SHAH can be reached at (571)272-3144. 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.
Joshua Smith
/J.S./
5-29-2026
/CHIRAG G SHAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights