DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending in this Office Action.
Claims 1-9 are elected without traverse.
Claims 1-9 are rejected.
Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from consideration without traverse.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed in the amendment filed 11/21/2025, have been fully considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejections. The reasons set forth below.
Drawings
The formal drawings received on 02/22/2023 have been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Julien (US 8284771) in view of Hejza (US 6577628), and further in view of Ayoub (US 20140185615) and Lacroute (US 20130142197).
1. Julien teaches:
A switch, comprising: – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-10 (The terms "switch fabric" and "switch" are used interchangeably herein.)
a plurality of ports, – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-10 (An FE may have a number of input and output ports. An Ethernet switch chipset is a type of FE and, currently, there are several vendors offering Ethernet switch chipsets with up to 128 ports, each port capable of supporting bitrates of at least 10 Gbps.)
each port being associated with a different plane of a plurality of planes of a network; – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-10 (Assuming that each processor blade has more than one port available towards the switch fabric, each port could be connected to a different plane of the switch fabric. A multi-stage architecture design would scale the same way as for the one-stage architecture design, i.e., more planes 504 being provided depending on the number of ports available on each processor blade 506.)
switching hardware to selectively interconnect the plurality of ports; and – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-10 (Such a crossbar device 608 can electronically or optically interconnect all of the desired output ports of the first stage FEs 604 with all of the desired input ports of the second stage FEs 606.)
Julien does not explicitly teach:
a switching engine to use a forwarding table for controlling the switching hardware, the forwarding table being segmented into: a first range of addresses used for a first type of traffic, the first range of addresses being contiguous and including a different sub-range of addresses for each plane of the plurality of planes; and a second range of addresses used for a second type of traffic, the second range of addresses being outside of the first range of addresses and accessible by all of the plurality of planes.
However, Hejza teaches:
a switching engine to use a forwarding table for controlling the switching hardware, – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-11 (The packet forwarding devices, e.g., the switches 170 and routers 140, of the ISP 100 should be QoS-enabled network devices. The packet forwarding devices include forwarding databases that are able to aggregate ranges of network addresses, for example, in one forwarding database entry, thereby allowing the same forwarding behavior to be applied to one or more types of traffic identified by the range of network addresses.)
the forwarding table being segmented into: – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-11 (The packet forwarding devices include forwarding databases that are able to aggregate ranges of network addresses. The network address space can then be divided into priority pools 410, 415, and 420.)
a first range of addresses used for a first type of traffic, – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-11 (The packet forwarding devices will forward packet traffic from a client having a medium or high priority address according to the forwarding rules associated with the medium or high priority service level, respectively. The network address space can then be divided into priority pools 410, 415, and 420.)
the first range of addresses being contiguous and including a different sub-range of addresses for each plane of the plurality of planes; and – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-11 (A number of priority pools of contiguous network addresses can be defined. The network address space can then be divided into priority pools 410, 415, and 420.)
a second range of addresses used for a second type of traffic, – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-11 (Packet forwarding devices (configured as described below) forward packet traffic from a client having a low priority address according to the forwarding rules associated with the low priority service level. The network address space can then be divided into priority pools 410, 415, and 420.)
the second range of addresses being outside of the first range of addresses and accessible by all of the plurality of planes. – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-11 (A number of priority pools of contiguous network addresses can be defined. The network address space can then be divided into priority pools 410, 415, and 420.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Julien with Hejza to include a switching engine to use a forwarding table for controlling the switching hardware, the forwarding table being segmented into: a first range of addresses used for a first type of traffic, the first range of addresses being contiguous and including a different sub-range of addresses for each plane of the plurality of planes; and a second range of addresses used for a second type of traffic, the second range of addresses being outside of the first range of addresses and accessible by all of the plurality of planes, as taught by Hejza, on lines 15-67 in column 1, on lines 1-67 in column 2, to be able to offer customers various levels of service at different price points.
Combination of Julien and Hejza does not explicitly teach:
the first range of addresses including a different sub-range of addresses for each plane of the plurality of planes; and the second range of addresses being accessible by all of the plurality of planes.
However, Ayoub teaches:
the first range of addresses including a different sub-range of addresses for each plane of the plurality of planes; and – in paragraphs [0006]-[0045] (Assigning respective local identifiers to the ports in the subnet, such that each port receives a respective local identifier that is unique within the subnet to serve as an address for traffic within the subnet that is directed to the port.)
the second range of addresses being accessible by all of the plurality of planes. – in paragraphs [0006]-[0045] (In addition to the local identifiers, respective port identifiers are assigned to the ports, such that at least one of the port identifiers is shared by a plurality of the ports.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Julien and Hejza with Ayoub to include the first range of addresses including a different sub-range of addresses for each plane of the plurality of planes; and the second range of addresses being accessible by all of the plurality of planes, as taught by Ayoub, in paragraphs [0001]-[0026], to provide a network infrastructure in a data center that consists of high speed and low latency.
Combination of Julien, Hejza, and Ayoub does not explicitly teach:
range of addresses for the plurality of planes.
However, Lacroute teaches:
range of addresses for the plurality of planes; – in paragraphs [0024]-[0045] (FIG. 7A illustrates port addresses NEXT_PORT_1A through NEXT_PORT_NA associated with virtual plane A.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Julien, Hejza, and Ayoub with Lacroute to include range of addresses for the plurality of planes, as taught by Lacroute, in paragraphs [0002]-[0024], to provide a technique for implementing virtual switch planes in physical switch fabrics of network devices.
Claim 2. The switch of claim 1 – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Hejza teaches:
wherein the first type of traffic includes high priority traffic and – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-11 (The packet forwarding devices will forward packet traffic from a client having a medium or high priority address according to the forwarding rules associated with the medium or high priority service level, respectively. The network address space can then be divided into priority pools 410, 415, and 420.)
the second type of traffic includes low priority traffic. – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-11 (Packet forwarding devices (configured as described below) forward packet traffic from a client having a low priority address according to the forwarding rules associated with the low priority service level. The network address space can then be divided into priority pools 410, 415, and 420.)
5. The switch of claim 2 – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Lacroute teaches:
wherein a number of plurality of planes is equal to four. – in paragraphs [0024]-[0045] (Interface cards 105 interconnect with switch ICs 110 of each of the parallel switch planes (only interconnections to switch plane 1 are shown) and divide the received bandwidth over the n planes of the switch fabric 100 (four planes shown).)
6. The switch of claim 1 – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Hejza teaches:
wherein the second range of addresses is contiguous. – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-11 (A number of priority pools of contiguous network addresses can be defined. The network address space can then be divided into priority pools 410, 415, and 420.)
8. The switch of claim 1 – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Julien teaches:
wherein the switching hardware comprises optical communication components for communicating optical signals – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-10 (As more or fewer FEs are added to or removed from the switch fabric dynamically, a reconfigurable crossbar device makes the required interconnections between the FEs as required by a desired switching configuration. By using a reconfigurable crossbar device to interconnect the FEs, the interconnect topologies of the links between the different FEs can be dynamically changed. An electrical or an optical crossbar can be used in such embodiments.)
9. The switch of claim 1 – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Julien teaches:
wherein the switching hardware comprises electrical communication components for communicating electrical signals – on lines 1-67 in columns 2-10 (As more or fewer FEs are added to or removed from the switch fabric dynamically, a reconfigurable crossbar device makes the required interconnections between the FEs as required by a desired switching configuration. By using a reconfigurable crossbar device to interconnect the FEs, the interconnect topologies of the links between the different FEs can be dynamically changed. An electrical or an optical crossbar can be used in such embodiments.)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Julien (US 8284771) in view of Hejza (US 6577628), and further in view of Ayoub (US 20140185615), Lacroute (US 20130142197), and Bower (US 20170346761).
3. The switch of claim 2 – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of Julien, Hejza, Ayoub, and Lacroute does not explicitly teach:
wherein the high priority traffic includes high bandwidth traffic, and wherein the low priority traffic includes network management traffic.
However, Bower teaches:
wherein the high priority traffic includes high bandwidth traffic, and – in paragraphs [0037]-[0047] (When it is determined by the central management server that the management task has a high priority, a high bandwidth amount is implemented for the management task by the management server by performing throttling at a baseboard management controller (BMC).)
wherein the low priority traffic includes network management traffic. – in paragraphs [0037]-[0047] (When it is determined by the central management server that the management task has a low priority, a low bandwidth amount is implemented for the management task by the management server by performing throttling at the baseboard management controller (BMC).)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Julien, Hejza, Ayoub, and Lacroute with Bower to include wherein the high priority traffic includes high bandwidth traffic, and wherein the low priority traffic includes network management traffic, as taught by Bower, in paragraphs [0002]-[0005], to improve latency at both the management server and managed endpoints.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Julien (US 8284771) in view of Hejza (US 6577628), and further in view of Ayoub (US 20140185615), Lacroute (US 20130142197), Bower (US 20170346761), and Cloonan (US 9210453).
4. The switch of claim 3 – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of Julien, Hejza, Ayoub, Lacroute, and Bower explicitly does not teach:
wherein the high bandwidth traffic is identified based on packet header information.
However, Cloonan teaches:
wherein the high bandwidth traffic is identified based on packet header information. – on lines 1-67 in column 7 (Scout packets can contain header segments designating a level of priority treatment that the scout packet is to receive from the various network elements in a network environment 100. For example, a CMTS 125 can provide a mechanism referred to as service flow treatment, in which a network operator can instruct the CMTS to offer a high priority/high bandwidth service and service flow to specified subscribers (e.g., a high-paying subscriber) while offering a low priority/low bandwidth service and service flow to other specified subscribers (e.g., a low-paying subscriber).)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Julien, Hejza, Ayoub, Lacroute, and Bower with Cloonan to include wherein the high bandwidth traffic is identified based on packet header information, as taught by Cloonan, on lines 20-67 in column 1, to provide a technique for measuring a level of quality of experience and locating sources of problems for service types in a network.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Julien (US 8284771) in view of Hejza (US 6577628), and further in view of Ayoub (US 20140185615), Lacroute (US 20130142197), and Okuno (US 20060253606).
7. The switch of claim 1 – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of Julien, Hejza, Ayoub, and Lacroute does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first range of addresses comprises addresses from a local forwarding table, and the second range of addresses comprises addresses from a plurality of shared forwarding tables.
However, Okuno teaches:
wherein the first range of addresses comprises addresses from a local forwarding table, and the second range of addresses comprises addresses from a plurality of shared forwarding tables. – in paragraph [0018] (The first routing table is a local routing table dedicated to the own line card to record as a group of transfer information items to be frequently used. The second routing table is a shared distributed routing table in which transfer information items are recorded such that the transfer information items are mutually different from those of the other line cards.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Julien, Hejza, Ayoub, and Lacroute with Okuno to include wherein the first range of addresses comprises addresses from a local forwarding table, and the second range of addresses comprises addresses from a plurality of shared forwarding tables, as taught by Okuno, in paragraphs [0002]-[0021], to provide a technique of configuring a routing table (route search table) used in a packet transfer apparatus arranged at a network relay point.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD RAZA whose telephone number is (571)272-7734. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 A.M.-5:00 P.M..
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vivek Srivastava can be reached on (571)272-7304. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/MUHAMMAD RAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449