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 .
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 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9-10, 12, 14-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C as being unpatentable over KANG et al. (Patent No : US 2024/0349162 A1), hereinafter, KANG in view of Mickael MONDET et al. (Patent No: US 2023/0318982 A1), hereinafter, MONDET.
Regarding Claim 1, KANG teaches,
A method comprising: receiving, from a session management function (SMF), one or more packet filters; -Fig. 7; Paragraph [0050-0055] (Fig. 7 shows SMF connected to network nodes and sends packet filter configuration. [0055] recites, “The message may comprise an indication of a packet filter configured by a session management function (SMF) of the CN. Alternatively or in addition, the message may be sent through an access and mobility management function (AMF) using a non-access stratum (NAS).”)
receiving a plurality of packets of a packet flow; -Fig. 9; Paragraph [0007-0008] (Fig. 9 shows receiving plurality of packets of encoded video sequence (packet flow) for example. [0007-0008] recites, “FIG. 9 illustrates a conventional relation of an encoded video sequence and IP packets 902. The encoder (e.g., an XR encoder) produces video frames 904-1, 904-2, 904-3, e.g., a frame every 20 milliseconds (ms). For simplicity, an intra-frame (I-Frame)-only sequence is shown. Each of the video frames 904-1, 904-2, 904-3 is split into N IP packets 902 in FIG. 9, where the number, N, of IP packets 902 is determined by dividing the frame size by the maximal (or maximum, e.g., possible and/or allowed) IP payload size. The maximal IP payload size is conventionally smaller than a network maximum transmission unit (MTU).”)
and determining information about an application data unit (ADU) that includes a set of packets of the plurality of packets; -Fig. 15; Paragraph [0252-0253] (Fig. 15 shows the ADU structure consisting of plurality of IP packets. [0252-0253] recites, “FIG. 15 illustrates the splitting of an ADU 1202 into multiple IP packets 1204. The application may determine the ADU size, e.g., on a need basis. For example, when using video frames as ADUs 1202, an I-frame may typically be of much larger size than a P- or B-frame. In the example of FIG. 15, the first IP packet of an ADU 1202 may comprise an indication of an ADU start and also an indication of an ADU size (e.g., comprised within the first information element), as indicated at reference sign 1502. All IP packets belonging to the same ADU may be marked accordingly (e.g., within the first information element), e.g. using an ADU sequence number as indicated at reference sign 1504. The splitting of ADUs 1202 as exemplified in FIG. 15 may be denoted as “N6 view”, e.g., for transmitting the IP packets 1204 over the N6 interface from the device 200 to the device 100.”)
wherein determining the information about the ADU is based on a header of a first packet of the set of packets, -Fig. 15; Paragraph [0252-0254] ([0252] recites,” FIG. 15 illustrates the splitting of an ADU 1202 into multiple IP packets 1204. The application may determine the ADU size, e.g., on a need basis. For example, when using video frames as ADUs 1202, an I-frame may typically be of much larger size than a P- or B-frame.”[0254] recites, “The extended IP packet 1206 in FIG. 16A may comprise the first IP packet 1204 of the ADU 1202, as indicated by the ADU start marker at reference sign 1612. The extended IP packet 1206 of FIG. 16B may comprise an IP packet 1204 from the body of the ADU 1202, as indicated by, e.g., including an ADU sequence number, at reference sign 1614. Any of the extended IP packets 1206 may comprise encrypted payload 1602, a QUIC header 1604 (which may be, e.g., partially encrypted), an UDP header 1606, an IP header 1608 and a GTP header 1610-1 for the first IP packet 1206 and a GTP header 1610-2 for the IP packets 1206 from the ADU body.” As shown in Fig. 15, 16; ADU information (size, start etc. are determined from the header of first packet of the set of IP packets)
wherein the header is a real-time protocol (RTP) header, a secure RTP (SRTP) header, a real-time control protocol (RTCP) header, or a secure RTCP (SRTCP) header, wherein the first packet is an RTP packet, an SRTP packet, an RTCP packet, or an SRTCP packet, Fig. 17; Paragraph [0256-0258] ([0257] recites, “Option 2 in FIG. 17 indicates that the first information element and/or the ADU information is conveyed as RTP extension headers 1706 comprising the extension at reference sign 1704”)
wherein the order of the first packet is an initial packet of the set of packets of the ADU, and wherein the second field of the first packet has a value that further indicates a number of packets in the ADU; -Fig. 15; Paragraph [0253] ([0253] recites, “In the example of FIG. 15, the first IP packet of an ADU 1202 may comprise an indication of an ADU start and also an indication of an ADU size (e.g., comprised within the first information element), as indicated at reference sign 1502. All IP packets belonging to the same ADU may be marked accordingly (e.g., within the first information element), e.g. using an ADU sequence number as indicated at reference sign 1504.”)
and mapping the set of packets to a quality of service (QoS) flow based on the information and the one or more packet filters. -Paragraph [0192-0193] ([0192] recites, “ When IP packets arrive at the (e.g., 5G) CN in the direction towards the end terminal 702 (e.g., a wireless device and/or XR device), the UPF interface 100 adds header information (e.g., comprising the second information element) to deliver the packets to RAN (e.g., network node 300) with additional core information, e.g., QoS flow identity (QFI) marking. E.g., at reference sign 406, deep packet inspection (DPI) and/or stateful packet inspection (SPI) is performed. [0193] recites, “At reference sign 408, based on the first information element, at the device 100 the second information element is generated and included in an extended IP packet, which comprises the IP packet. The second information element may, e.g., comprise the QFI marking.” Each set of one or more packets are assigned (mapped) with QoS flow identity (QFI))
Although implicit, KANG does not explicitly mention,
and wherein the header of the first packet includes a first field to indicate sequence number of the first packet among all of the plurality of packets of the packet flow and a second field to indicate an order of the first packet within the set of packets of the ADU;
However, in an analogous invention, MONDET teaches,
and wherein the header of the first packet includes a first field to indicate sequence number of the first packet among all of the plurality of packets of the packet flow and a second field to indicate an order of the first packet within the set of packets of the ADU; -Paragraph [0136, 0188] ([0136] recites, “…the indication of the IP packet number or IP sequence number may be included in a configurable-sized field in the ADU metadata header. [0188] recites, “the plurality of fields include at least one of a 1-bit field indicating that the one or more IP packets are associated with the ADU traffic flow, a first multiple-bit field indicating a QoS flow associated with the one or more IP packets, a second multiple-bit field indicating an ADU in which the one or more IP packets are included, a first configurable-sized field indicating a size of the ADU, a second configurable-sized field indicating a quantity of IP packets included in the ADU, or a third configurable-sized field indicating a respective IP packet number for each of the one or more IP packets.” As explained above, the header includes configurable size field to include size of the ADU (number of packets within the ADU) and also IP packet number for each of the packets within the ADU which determines the order of the packet. KANG shows somewhat similar structure in Fig. 15 (1502, 1504) that indicates start packet and also packets belonging to a particular ADU )
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Quality of Service Indication of Application Data Units” proposed by KANG with the concept of MONDET to include “the header of the first packet includes a first field to indicate sequence number of the first packet among all of the plurality of packets of the packet flow and a second field to indicate an order of the first packet within the set of packets of the ADU” One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to efficiently provide communications for different types of services with different service standards [0093].
Regarding Claim 2, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, based on the information, a type of the ADU or that the set of packets are included in the ADU. -Fig. 5 (unit 506); Paragraph [0176] ([0176] recites, “In a step 506, at least one IP packet comprising data and/or at least one information unit of the ADU is generated. The at least one IP packet further comprises a first information element indicative of a packaging of data and/or information units of the ADU into IP packets….”)
Regarding Claim 4, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein the set of packets is a first set, the ADU is a first ADU, and the method further comprises: adding first user plane (UP) header markings to the first set of packets to indicate correspondence to the first ADU; -Fig. 15; Paragraph [0252-0253] (Fig. 15 shows how ADU (1202) is divided into multiple packets (1204) and marker of ADU number is attached to the IP packet header (start and size) (1502, 1504) [0252-0253] recites, “FIG. 15 illustrates the splitting of an ADU 1202 into multiple IP packets 1204. The application may determine the ADU size, e.g., on a need basis. For example, when using video frames as ADUs 1202, an I-frame may typically be of much larger size than a P- or B-frame. n the example of FIG. 15, the first IP packet of an ADU 1202 may comprise an indication of an ADU start and also an indication of an ADU size (e.g., comprised within the first information element), as indicated at reference sign 1502. All IP packets belonging to the same ADU may be marked accordingly (e.g., within the first information element), e.g. using an ADU sequence number as indicated at reference sign 1504. The splitting of ADUs 1202 as exemplified in FIG. 15 may be denoted as “N6 view”, e.g., for transmitting the IP packets 1204 over the N6 interface from the device 200 to the device 100.”)
determining a second set of one or more packets of the plurality of packets corresponds to a second ADU; and adding second UE header markings to the second set of one or more packets to indicate correspondence to the second ADU. -Fig. 15, 16A, 16B (As explained above, ADUs are marked by ADU sequence number with start packet and size. Therefore, multiple ADUs can be distinguished)
Regarding Claim 6, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein determining the information about the ADU is based on the RTP header of an RTP packet or the SRTP packet and the method further comprises: processing an RTP header extension of the RTP packet or the SRTP packet to determine one or more parameters that describe the ADU; -Fig. 17; Paragraph [0013] [0258]([0258] recites, “Option 3 in FIG. 17 indicates that the first information element and/or the ADU information is conveyed as IP extension headers 1608 comprising the extension at reference sign 1704. The benefit of option 3 is that the ADU information may be used together with any higher layer protocol, e.g., QUIC and/or RTP.” [0013] recites, “..The application layer may comprise at least one of an advanced video cording and/or high efficiency video coding (AVC/HEVC) layer, a real-time transmission protocol (RTP) layer, and/or a quick UDP internet connections (QUIC) layer..”)
and determining a type of the ADU based on the one or more parameters, wherein the type comprises: an intra-coded picture (I) frame or slice, a predicted picture (P) frame or slice, a bidirectional predicted picture (B) frame or slice, a switching (S) frame or slice, a switching I (SI) frame or slice, a switching P (SP) frame or slice, an instantaneous decoding refresh (IDR) frame, a non-IDR frame, an intra-random access picture (IRAP) frame, or a non-IRAP frame. -Fig. 11, Paragraph[0197-0199] ([0197] recites, “ video frames 1106, 1108, 1110 are schematically illustrated in FIG. 11 as examples of the ADUs.” [0198] recites, “Bidirectional frames (also denoted as bidirectional coded pictures and/or briefly B-frames) 1110 are conventionally not used in low-latency encoding. The frame sizes can decrease (e.g., as compared to conventional encoding and decoding) for more modern coder-decoders (also briefly denoted as codecs), however, at least one of the following principles may remain: I-frames 1106 are typically very large, and the frame size depends on the image complexity. P-frames 1108 are typically much smaller then I-frames 1106. When there is only little change between two consecutive frames, the frame size of a P-frame 1108 is very small. A P-frame 1108 may have the size of an I-frame 1106 (e.g., only) when the scene completely changes, e.g. at a scene cut. B-frames 1110 are typically even smaller than P-frames 1108 and may follow the same principles as P-frames 1108.”)
Regarding Claim 7, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein: determining the information about the ADU is based on a first marker bit in an RTP header of a first RTP/SRTP packet of the set of one or more packets and a second marker bit in an RTP header of a second RTP/SRTP packet of the set of one or more packets; -Fig. 15, Paragraph [0252] ([0252] recites, “FIG. 15 illustrates the splitting of an ADU 1202 into multiple IP packets 1204. The application may determine the ADU size, e.g., on a need basis. For example, when using video frames as ADUs 1202, an I-frame may typically be of much larger size than a P- or B-frame.” As shown in Fig. 15 (unit 1502, 1504 for first and second IP packets) ADU marker is set in one or more IP packet indicating which ADU it belongs to.)
the first marker bit to indicate the first RTP/SRTP packet is a first packet of the set of one or more packets; and the second marker bit to indicate the second RTP/SRTP packet is last packet of the set of one or more packets. -Fig. 15, [0253] ([0253] recites, “ In the example of FIG. 15, the first IP packet of an ADU 1202 may comprise an indication of an ADU start and also an indication of an ADU size (e.g., comprised within the first information element), as indicated at reference sign 1502. All IP packets belonging to the same ADU may be marked accordingly (e.g., within the first information element), e.g. using an ADU sequence number as indicated at reference sign 1504. The splitting of ADUs 1202 as exemplified in FIG. 15 may be denoted as “N6 view”, e.g., for transmitting the IP packets 1204 over the N6 interface from the device 200 to the device 100”)
Regarding Claim 9, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein determining the information about the ADU is based on the RTP header of the RTP packet or an SRTP packet header and the method further comprises: detecting a value in a payload type field of the RTP header; and determining a type of the ADU based on the value. -Fig. 10, 16A, 16B; (This claim is not a feature. It is known to any ordinary person of skill in the art that any encapsulated packets, lower layer information (type, characteristics) is embedded in the upper layer header and extracted from the header. As shown in the protocol stack encapsulation Fig. 10, RTP layer in the application layer. ADU type is embedded in RTP header and is extracted from it. Fig. 16A, 16B shows the encapsulation process. Unit 1612, 1614 shows ADU type (number) encapsulated in the header.)
Regarding Claim 10, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein individual packets of the set of one or more packets are RTP/SRTP packets that include common timestamps and payload types in respective RTP headers and the method further comprises: determining the set of one or more RTP/SRTP packets corresponds to the ADU based on the common timestamps and payload types in the respective RTP headers. -Fig. 9, Paragraph [0007-0008][0037] ([0037] recites, “The packaging of the information units of the ADU into IP packets (e.g., according to the first method aspect) may comprise at least one of a size of the ADU; an indication of a boundary of the ADU; a start and/or end of the ADU; a number of IP packets comprising information units of the ADU; a time of generating and/or sending the ADU at an application layer of an E2E protocol stack, optionally wherein the E2E protocol stack comprises an E2E encryption protocol stack; a latency requirement of the ADU; a retransmission regulation associated to the ADU; and a periodicity of generating ADUs.” As described above ADU packaging information may include time of generating and/or sending the ADU, i.e., timestamps of generating. Therefore, packets within a frame that are generated at some time have the same timestamps for the packets within the frame. Fig. 9 shows video frames (e.g., I-Frame (payload type) only generated every 20 ms and each frame contains N IP packets (902). [0007-0008] recites, “FIG. 9 illustrates a conventional relation of an encoded video sequence and IP packets 902. The encoder (e.g., an XR encoder) produces video frames 904-1, 904-2, 904-3, e.g., a frame every 20 milliseconds (ms). For simplicity, an intra-frame (I-Frame)-only sequence is shown. Each of the video frames 904-1, 904-2, 904-3 is split into N IP packets 902 in FIG. 9, where the number, N, of IP packets 902 is determined by dividing the frame size by the maximal (or maximum, e.g., possible and/or allowed) IP payload size. The maximal IP payload size is conventionally smaller than a network maximum transmission unit (MTU).”)
Regarding Claim 12, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein determining the information about the ADU is based further on an RTP payload and the method further comprises: parsing an RTP payload header of the RTP payload to determine the information, wherein the information includes a type of the ADU, a starting packet of the ADU, or an ending packet of the ADU. -Fig. 14, 15 ; [0037](Fig. 14 shows the flow from Application layer where in step 11 (506), for each packet new ADU header is inserted and in step 12 (406) ADU header is parsed. As shown in Fig. 15, ADU structure including multiple IP packets with start packet marker of ADU type #X for (1502) [0037] recites, “The packaging of the information units of the ADU into IP packets (e.g., according to the first method aspect) may comprise at least one of a size of the ADU; an indication of a boundary of the ADU; a start and/or end of the ADU; a number of IP packets comprising information units of the ADU; a time of generating and/or sending the ADU at an application layer of an E2E protocol stack, optionally wherein the E2E protocol stack comprises an E2E encryption protocol stack; a latency requirement of the ADU; a retransmission regulation associated to the ADU; and a periodicity of generating ADUs.”)
Regarding Claim 14, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a hint track associated with the packet flow; and determining the information about the ADU based on the hint track. -Fig. 9 (Although, the reference is referencing XR services and as in Fig. 9 receives video sequence for packet flow, it can be used the same way, receive hint track associated with the packet flow and determine ADU based on the hint track)
Regarding Claim 15, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein: the network node is a user plane function (UPF) and the one or more packet filters comprise packet detection rules; -Fig. 14, Paragraph [0288] ([0288] recites, “The XR application server may notify the (e.g., 5G) telecommunications system, that the information (e.g., application information) is inserted into the traffic flow and that the UPF should start looking for related information for specific traffic (e.g., described by regular packet detection rules)”.
or the network node is a user equipment (UE) and the one or more packet filters comprise quality of service rules. -Fig. 14; Paragraph [0234] (UE parses ADU. [0234] recites, “ The further ADU parsing information comprises packet inspection instructions (e.g. where to find an ADU size, and/or any information comprised in the first information element), and/or QoS enforcement rules (QER).”)
Regarding Claim 16, KANG teaches,
One or more non-transitory, computer-readable media having instructions that, when executed cause processor circuitry to: -Fig. 9, Paragraph [0265]([0265] recites, “The one or more processors 1904 may be a combination of one or more of a microprocessor, controller, microcontroller, central processing unit, digital signal processor, application specific integrated circuit, field programmable gate array, or any other suitable computing device, resource, or combination of hardware, microcode and/or encoded logic operable to provide, either alone or in conjunction with other components of the device 100, such as the memory 1906, gateway or UPF functionality…”)
receive application data unit (ADU) rules; -Paragraph [0204]([0204] recites, “ UPF 100 should start looking for related information, e.g., first information elements, for specific traffic (e.g., described by conventional packet detection rules” i.e., ADU rules)
receive a plurality of packets of a data stream in one or more quality of service (QoS) flows; -Fig. 15, Paragraph [0051-0052] (Fig. 15 shows ADU structure consisting of multiple packets with one or more QoS flows. [0051-0052] recites, “The QoS requirement (e.g., according to the first method aspect) may comprise at least one QoS flow identifier (QFI). The QFI may differ for different pieces of information comprised in the ADU.”)
wherein the plurality of packets include a set of packets of an ADU, wherein a first packet of the set of packets includes a real-time protocol (RTP) header, a secure RTP (SRTP) header, a real-time control protocol (RTCP) header, or a secure RTCP (SRTCP) header -Fig. 17; Paragraph [0256-0258] ([0257] recites, “Option 2 in FIG. 17 indicates that the first information element and/or the ADU information is conveyed as RTP extension headers 1706 comprising the extension at reference sign 1704”)
wherein the order of the first packet is an initial packet of the set of packets of the ADU, and wherein the second field of the first packet has a value that further indicates a number of packets in the ADU; -Fig. 15; Paragraph [0253] ([0253] recites, “In the example of FIG. 15, the first IP packet of an ADU 1202 may comprise an indication of an ADU start and also an indication of an ADU size (e.g., comprised within the first information element), as indicated at reference sign 1502. All IP packets belonging to the same ADU may be marked accordingly (e.g., within the first information element), e.g. using an ADU sequence number as indicated at reference sign 1504.”)
and transmit the plurality of packets over an access network based on the field and the ADU rules. -Fig. 14 (Fig. 14 shows the flow diagram of packet flow over access network from XR server based on ADU rules)
Although implicit, KANG does not explicitly teach,
with a first field to indicate a sequence number of the first packet among all packets of the data stream and a second field to indicate an order of the first packet within the set of packets of the ADU;
However, in an analogous invention, MONDET teaches,
with a first field to indicate a sequence number of the first packet among all packets of the data stream and a second field to indicate an order of the first packet within the set of packets of the ADU; -Paragraph [0136, 0188] ([0136] recites, “…the indication of the IP packet number or IP sequence number may be included in a configurable-sized field in the ADU metadata header. [0188] recites, “the plurality of fields include at least one of a 1-bit field indicating that the one or more IP packets are associated with the ADU traffic flow, a first multiple-bit field indicating a QoS flow associated with the one or more IP packets, a second multiple-bit field indicating an ADU in which the one or more IP packets are included, a first configurable-sized field indicating a size of the ADU, a second configurable-sized field indicating a quantity of IP packets included in the ADU, or a third configurable-sized field indicating a respective IP packet number for each of the one or more IP packets.” As explained above, the header includes configurable size field to include size of the ADU (number of packets within the ADU) and also IP packet number for each of the packets within the ADU which determines the order of the packets. KANG shows somewhat similar structure in Fig. 15 (1502, 1504) that indicates start packet and also packets belonging to a particular ADU )
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Quality of Service Indication of Application Data Units” proposed by KANG with the concept of MONDET to include “with a first field to indicate a sequence number of the first packet among all packets of the data stream and a second field to indicate an order of the first packet within the set of packets of the ADU;” One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to efficiently provide communications for different types of services with different service standards [0093].
Regarding Claim 17, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 16.
KANG further teaches,
The one or more non-transitory, computer-readable media of claim 16, wherein the ADU rules comprise: packet filters with traffic detection rules or application layer attributes; -Paragraph [0227] ([0227] recites, “the device 100 (e.g., comprising the UPF) tagging data streams, comprising ADU information (e.g., within the second information element) with a QoS and/or QFI, so that (e.g., NG) RAN (e.g., comprising the device 300) can easily detect the data stream; the device 100 (e.g., comprising the UPF) detecting IP packets comprising ADU information (e.g., within the first information element) based on a pre-configured packet filter and/or a packet filter configured by the CN”)
a quality of service (QoS) flow association; a frame-level QoS; an ADU-based QoS; -Paragraph [0227] (As explained in [0227] tagging of data streams with a QoS and/or QFI which can be flow level, frame level or ADU based association)
or an extended reality (XR)-specific QoS. -Paragraph [0006] ([0006] recites, “E2E encryption is conventionally applied to XR services, e.g., split rendering or View-Point-Dependent (VPD) rendering. Conventionally, the payload of transport protocols, e.g., TCP or UDP 806, are encrypted, so that intermediate network nodes 704 cannot execute a man-in-the-middle attack. However, the encryption also blinds transparent proxy and deep packet inspection (DPI) functions from mobile operators, which are typically looking deep into the payload to derive the correct quality of service (QoS)”)
Regarding Claim 18, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of claim 16.
KANG further teaches,
The one or more non-transitory, computer-readable media of claim 16, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the processor circuitry to: determine a type of the ADU; -Fig. 11; Paragraph [0110] [0197] ([0110] recites, “The device comprises processing circuitry (e.g., at least one processor and a memory). Said memory comprises instructions executable by said at least one processor whereby the device is operative to perform any one of the steps of the first method aspect “ [0197] recites, “FIG. 11 depicts a (e.g., probability) distribution 1102 of exemplary ADU sizes and/or frame sizes (e.g., in units of kilo Bytes, kB, at reference sign 1104) of different ADU and/or frame types, e.g., according to the MPEG-2 standard of the Moving picture experts group (MPEG). E.g., a resolution may comprise 720×576 pixels, a frame rate may comprise 25 frames per second (25 fps), and/or a data rate may comprise 7.5 Megabits per second (7.5 Mbps). Alternatively or in addition, video frames 1106, 1108, 1110 are schematically illustrated in FIG. 11 as examples of the ADUs.”
and transmit the set of packets over the access network based on the type. -Fig. 13; Paragraph [0205] ([0205] recites, “he CN of FIG. 13 further comprises an access and mobility management function (or briefly: access and mobility function, AMF) 1304. Alternatively or in addition, IP packets are sent from the application server 200 through the NAT/FW 1302 to the UPF 100 in FIG. 13.”)
Regarding Claim 19, KANG teaches,
An apparatus comprising: processing circuitry to: -Fig. 19; Paragraph [0264] (Paragraph [0264] recites, “FIG. 19 shows a schematic block diagram for an embodiment of the device 100. The device 100 comprises processing circuitry, e.g., one or more processors 1904 for performing the method 400 and memory 1906 coupled to the processors 1904. For example, the memory 1906 may be encoded with instructions that implement at least one of the modules 104, 106, 108 and 110.”)
generate one or more packet filters to facilitate identification of information corresponding to an application data unit (ADU) that includes a set of packets of a data stream; -Paragraph [0227] ([0227] recites, “the device 100 (e.g., comprising the UPF) tagging data streams, comprising ADU information (e.g., within the second information element) with a QoS and/or QFI, so that (e.g., NG) RAN (e.g., comprising the device 300) can easily detect the data stream; the device 100 (e.g., comprising the UPF) detecting IP packets comprising ADU information (e.g., within the first information element) based on a pre-configured packet filter and/or a packet filter configured by the CN”)
wherein a first packet of the set of packets includes a real-time protocol (RTP) header, a secure RTP (SRTP) header, a real-time control protocol (RTCP) header, or a secure RTCP (SRTCP) header Fig. 17; Paragraph [0256-0258] ([0257] recites, “Option 2 in FIG. 17 indicates that the first information element and/or the ADU information is conveyed as RTP extension headers 1706 comprising the extension at reference sign 1704”)
wherein the order of the first packet is an initial packet of the set of packets of the ADU, and wherein the second field of the first packet has a value that further indicates a number of packets in the ADU; --Fig. 15; Paragraph [0253] ([0253] recites, “In the example of FIG. 15, the first IP packet of an ADU 1202 may comprise an indication of an ADU start and also an indication of an ADU size (e.g., comprised within the first information element), as indicated at reference sign 1502. All IP packets belonging to the same ADU may be marked accordingly (e.g., within the first information element), e.g. using an ADU sequence number as indicated at reference sign 1504.”)
and output the one or more packet filters for transmission to a user plane function (UPF) or a user equipment (UE); -Paragraph [0087] ([0087] recites, “..a communication interface configured to forward user data to a cellular or ad hoc radio network for transmission to a user equipment (UE); and a user plane function (UPF) is provided. The UPF comprises a radio interface and processing circuitry…”)
and interface circuitry coupled to the processing circuitry to transmit the one or more packet filters. -Paragraph [0110][0227] ([0110] recites, “The device comprises processing circuitry (e.g., at least one processor and a memory). Said memory comprises instructions executable by said at least one processor whereby the device is operative to perform any one of the steps..”[0227] recites, “ the device 100 (e.g., comprising the UPF) detecting IP packets comprising ADU information (e.g., within the first information element) based on a pre-configured packet filter and/or a packet filter configured by the CN, e.g., by SMF 1306; and/or the device 100 (e.g., comprising the UPF) extracting ADU information (e.g., within the first information element) from DL IP packets received on an N6 interface and including and/or copying that ADU information (e.g., comprised in the second information element) into an general packet radio service (GPRS) Tunneling Protocol User plane (GTP-U) extension header of the DL GTP-U packets.”)
Although implicit, KANG does not explicitly mention,
header with a first field to indicate a sequence number of the first packet among all packets of the data stream and a second field to indicate an order of the first packet within the set of packets of the ADU;
However, in an analogous invention, MONDET teaches,
header with a first field to indicate a sequence number of the first packet among all packets of the data stream and a second field to indicate an order of the first packet within the set of packets of the ADU; -Paragraph [0136, 0188] ([0136] recites, “…the indication of the IP packet number or IP sequence number may be included in a configurable-sized field in the ADU metadata header. [0188] recites, “the plurality of fields include at least one of a 1-bit field indicating that the one or more IP packets are associated with the ADU traffic flow, a first multiple-bit field indicating a QoS flow associated with the one or more IP packets, a second multiple-bit field indicating an ADU in which the one or more IP packets are included, a first configurable-sized field indicating a size of the ADU, a second configurable-sized field indicating a quantity of IP packets included in the ADU, or a third configurable-sized field indicating a respective IP packet number for each of the one or more IP packets.” As explained above, the header includes configurable size field to include size of the ADU (number of packets within the ADU) and also IP packet number for each of the packets within the ADU which determines the order of the packets. KANG shows somewhat similar structure in Fig. 15 (1502, 1504) that indicates start packet and also packets belonging to a particular ADU )
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Quality of Service Indication of Application Data Units” proposed by KANG with the concept of MONDET to include “header with a first field to indicate a sequence number of the first packet among all packets of the data stream and a second field to indicate an order of the first packet within the set of packets of the ADU” One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to efficiently provide communications for different types of services with different service standards [0093].
Regarding Claim 20, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 19.
KANG further teaches,
The apparatus of claim 19, wherein: the information is to identify a type of the ADU or to identify the set of packets of the data stream as belonging to the ADU; -Fig. 11, 15 ; Paragraph [0197] ([0197] recites, “FIG. 11 depicts a (e.g., probability) distribution 1102 of exemplary ADU sizes and/or frame sizes (e.g., in units of kilo Bytes, kB, at reference sign 1104) of different ADU and/or frame types, e.g., according to the MPEG-2 standard of the Moving picture experts group (MPEG). E.g., a resolution may comprise 720×576 pixels, a frame rate may comprise 25 frames per second (25 fps), and/or a data rate may comprise 7.5 Megabits per second (7.5 Mbps). Alternatively or in addition, video frames 1106, 1108, 1110 are schematically illustrated in FIG. 11 as examples of the ADUs.” Fig. 15 shows multiple data stream belonging to ADU)
the one or more packet filters are quality of service (QoS) rules transmitted to a UE; -Paragraph [0234] (UE parses ADU and the rules are transmitted to UE. [0234] recites, “The further ADU parsing information comprises packet inspection instructions (e.g. where to find an ADU size, and/or any information comprised in the first information element), and/or QoS enforcement rules (QER).”)
or the one or more packet filters are packet detection rules transmitted to a UPF. -Paragraph [0288] ([0288] recites, “The XR application server may notify the (e.g., 5G) telecommunications system, that the information (e.g., application information) is inserted into the traffic flow and that the UPF should start looking for related information for specific traffic (e.g., described by regular packet detection rules)”)
Regarding Claim 21, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 19.
KANG further teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein the value of the second field of the first packet is equal to the number of packets in the ADU or is equal to the number of packets in the ADU minus one, and the method further comprises decrementing the value of the second field for subsequent packets of the ADU. -Fig. 15; Paragraph [0253] ([0253] recites, “In the example of FIG. 15, the first IP packet of an ADU 1202 may comprise an indication of an ADU start and also an indication of an ADU size (e.g., comprised within the first information element), as indicated at reference sign 1502. All IP packets belonging to the same ADU may be marked accordingly (e.g., within the first information element), e.g. using an ADU sequence number as indicated at reference sign 1504.” It is easily understandable to an ordinary person with the skill in the art that the second and subsequent packets within the ADU will have size field gradually decremented as previous packets have been already utilized)
Claim 22 is the apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 21. The applicant’s attention is directed towards claim 21 above which is rejected. Claim 21 is rejected under the same rational as Claim 21.
Claims 3, 11, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KANG in view of MONDET and further in view of Jheng et al. (Patent No: US 2018/0324631 A1), hereinafter, Jheng.
Regarding Claim 3, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG does not explicitly teach,
The method of claim 1, wherein the set of packets is a first set, the information is first information, the QoS flow is a first QoS flow, the ADU is a first ADU, and the method further comprises: determining second information about a second ADU that includes a second set of one or more packets of the plurality of packets; and mapping the second set of one or more packets to a second QoS flow based on the second information and the one or more packet filters.
However, Jheng teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein the set of packets is a first set, the information is first information, the QoS flow is a first QoS flow, the ADU is a first ADU, and the method further comprises: determining second information about a second ADU that includes a second set of one or more packets of the plurality of packets; -Fig. 9A; Paragraph [0079-0082) (Fig. 9A shows different IP data flows (ADU) generated at application layer and are assigned QoS which may be same or different for different ADU flows. [0079] recites, “…The UPF 912 may perform the same functions as the base station for modifying the QoS treatment of packets based on a request from the device; however the UPF 912 may not change the scheduling priority over the radio, but instead may change the QoS packet marking to match the modified QoS treatment when forwarding the packets to the base station (which causes the base station to modify the scheduling priority). Further, the UPF 912 is able to map one or more IP flows 906a-906n from an application or service layer 902 to one or more QoS flows….”
and mapping the second set of one or more packets to a second QoS flow based on the second information and the one or more packet filters. -Fig. 9; Paragraph [0080-0081] (Fig. 9A shows the mapping of how IP packet flows are mapped to different QoS flows and assigns QFI based on packet filters. [0080-0081] recites, “As shown in FIG. 9A, both the UPF 912 and the UE 926 also define packet filters 911 that allow the NAS level 908 at the UE 926 and the UPF 912 to decide which IP flow to map onto which QoS flow 916. This filtering may be performed based on source and destination IP address and port number. It is therefore flexible so that the network can map packets of different kinds of applications to different QoS flows 916. Further, once the UPF 912 performs the classification and marking of the downlink user plane packets included in the IP flows 906a-906n to different QoS flows 916, the UPF 912 assigns a QFI 914 and adds it to a header of each payload packet 910 for every QoS flow 916 and transmits all QoS flows 916 of one or more PDU sessions 918 to a base station 920. For each PDU session, a single tunnel may be established between the UPF 912 and the base station 920 for exchanging the packets associated with different QoS flows 916 of the PDU session 918.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Quality of Service Indication of Application Data Units” proposed by KANG with the concept of Jheng to include “determining second information about a second ADU that includes a second set of one or more packets of the plurality of packets; and mapping the second set of one or more packets to a second QoS flow based on the second information and the one or more packet filters.” One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to make improvement in mapping packets to different QoS flows [0071].
Regarding Claim 11, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG does not explicitly teach,
The method of claim 1, wherein determining the information about the ADU is based on the RTP header of an RTP/SRTP packet and the method further comprises: identifying a predetermined packetization rule implemented at an application layer; and determining the set of one or more packets corresponds to the ADU based on the predetermined packetization rule.
However, Jheng teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein determining the information about the ADU is based on the RTP header of an RTP/SRTP packet and the method further comprises: identifying a predetermined packetization rule implemented at an application layer; -Fig. 10; Paragraph [0091] ([0091] recites, “…These rules may be explicitly signaled over a N1 interface..” As shown in Fig. 10, rule implemented in Application layer 1002.)
and determining the set of one or more packets corresponds to the ADU based on the predetermined packetization rule. -Fig. 10; Table 2; Paragraph [0091] ([0091] recites, “ FIG. 10 illustrates NAS level mappings of IP flows to QoS flows and AS level mappings of QoS flows to data bearers based on corresponding mapping tables, which may be performed by an apparatus 1000. The apparatus 1000 may be either a UE (e.g. UE 926) or a base station (e.g., base station 920). As shown, in FIG. 10, the apparatus 1000 receives a plurality of packets belonging to one or more IP flows, which in turn belong to one or more PDU sessions (e.g., a first PDU session 1004). At NAS level, the apparatus 1000 performs the classification and marking of DL/UL traffic, i.e. the association of IP flows to QoS flows 1008, based on packet filters 1006 and based on QoS rules. These rules may be explicitly signaled over a N1 interface (at PDU session establishment or QoS flow establishment), pre-configured in the UE or implicitly derived by the UE from reflective QoS. A QoS rule may include a QoS rule identifier, the QFI of the QoS flow, and a QoS flow template (i.e. the set of packet filters 1006 and corresponding precedence values associated with the QoS flow 1008). One QoS flow can have one or more QoS rules.” The NAS (Application) layer implements pre-configured QoS rules explicitly signaled over N1 interface, determines packets of ADU based on QoS rules and maps IP flows to QoS flows.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Quality of Service Indication of Application Data Units” proposed by KANG with the concept of Jheng to include “identifying a predetermined packetization rule implemented at an application layer; and determining the set of one or more packets corresponds to the ADU based on the predetermined packetization rule. ” One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to make improvement in mapping packets to different QoS flows [0071].
Regarding Claim 13, KANG and MONDET teach the limitations of Claim 1.
KANG does not explicitly teach,
The method of claim 1, wherein determining the information about the ADU is based on the RTCP header or the SRTCP header and the QoS flow is dedicated to the set of one or more packets or is shared with additional packets that have packet forwarding treatment common with the set of one or more packets.
However, Jheng teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein determining the information about the ADU is based on the RTCP header or the SRTCP header and the QoS flow is dedicated to the set of one or more packets or is shared with additional packets that have packet forwarding treatment common with the set of one or more packets. -Fig. 10; Paragraph [0091][0094], Table 3 ([0091] recites, “ FIG. 10 illustrates NAS level mappings of IP flows to QoS flows and AS level mappings of QoS flows to data bearers based on corresponding mapping tables, which may be performed by an apparatus 1000. The apparatus 1000 may be either a UE (e.g. UE 926) or a base station (e.g., base station 920). As shown, in FIG. 10, the apparatus 1000 receives a plurality of packets belonging to one or more IP flows, which in turn belong to one or more PDU sessions (e.g., a first PDU session 1004). At NAS level, the apparatus 1000 performs the classification and marking of DL/UL traffic, i.e. the association of IP flows to QoS flows 1008, based on packet filters 1006 and based on QoS rules….”Multiple packets may be assigned to same QoS flow and mapped to same QFI. Packets with the same QFI get same packet forwarding treatment as shown in Fig. 10)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Quality of Service Indication of Application Data Units” proposed by KANG with the concept of Jheng to include “the QoS flow is dedicated to the set of one or more packets or is shared with additional packets that have packet forwarding treatment common with the set of one or more packets.” One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to make improvement in mapping packets to different QoS flows [0071].
Response to Argument(s)
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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 AHMED SAIFUDDIN whose telephone number is (703)756-4581. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-6:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, KHALED M KASSIM can be reached on 571-270-3770. 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.
/AHMED SAIFUDDIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights