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 .
The claims 1-20 are pending in this application. This is a non-final office action in response to Application Number 18/181,643 filed on 10 March 2023. The applicant of record is VMWare LLC and the inventor of record is Ankit Kumar Sinha.
Claim Interpretation
The claims have been considered according to the latest Patent Eligibility Guidelines and are considered eligible.
Claims 1, 4-5, 8, 11-12, 15, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Examiner notes that both parent claim 1 and dependent claim 4 recite the language “when a response to the one or more DAD packets is received within the timeout period” (claims 1, 8, 15: next to last limitation; claims 4, 11: first limitation).
Examiner notes that both parent claim 1 and dependent claim 5 recite the language “when a response to the one or more DAD packets is not received within the timeout period” (claims 1, 8, 15: last limitation; claims 5, 12, 18: first limitation).
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jose et al. (U.S. Patent 10,250,497) in view of Thomas et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 2017/0289094).
Regarding claim 1, Jose disclosed a method of operating a first gateway comprising:
maintaining a standby state for a second gateway in an active state (examiner notes that the language of this limitation allows for the interpretation that the second gateway has both an active state and a standby state, that the second gateway is switched from active to standby, or that there is an active gateway and a standby gateway | see Jose Fig. 1A two routers are part of VRRP group; Fig. 1E one router is the master router and the second router is a backup router; 6:10-16: “These two or more network devices will be referred to collectively as a “VRRP group.” However, these two or more network devices may perform functions that correspond to the functions described herein based on parameters other than VRRP (e.g., a master/slave relationship, a redundancy group, etc.).”; 6:32-33: “network device 210 may include a firewall, a router, a gateway…” | 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2. For example, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status based on information in the notification message indicating that R1 is assigned the master status. In addition, R2 may assign the backup status in the VRRP group to R2. By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.”);
identifying a loss of a heartbeat connection with the second gateway (see Jose 2:56-3:3: “In some cases, the second network device may fail to detect the presence of other network devices associated with the VRRP group (e.g., peers)...Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message)…” | 11:6-15 “However, in some cases, network device 210-1 may fail to detect the presence of peers of the VRRP group. In some implementations, network device 210-1 may send the neighbor solicitation message based on failing to detect other peers of the VRRP group. That is, in some cases, network device 210-1 may fail to detect the presence of other network devices 210 that are part of the VRRP group…” | examiner notes that it would have been well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that heartbeats are used to maintain a connection, such that a connection loss includes the loss of a heartbeat);
in response to identifying the loss of the heartbeat connection, applying a packet filter in a data plane, wherein the packet filter permits Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) packets (see Jose 2:56-3:3: “In some cases, the second network device may fail to detect the presence of other network devices associated with the VRRP group (e.g., peers). As such, multiple network devices may be associated with a master status of the VRRP group simultaneously. Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message)….” | 11:6-15 “However, in some cases, network device 210-1 may fail to detect the presence of peers of the VRRP group. In some implementations, network device 210-1 may send the neighbor solicitation message based on failing to detect other peers of the VRRP group. That is, in some cases, network device 210-1 may fail to detect the presence of other network devices 210 that are part of the VRRP group. Additionally, in this situation, multiple network devices 210 may be masters of the VRRP group simultaneously. As such, another master of the VRRP group may reply to the neighbor solicitation message with a neighbor advertisement message that may cause the VIP address of the VRRP group to be falsely marked as duplicate and/or cause network device 210-1 from joining the VRRP group.”) and blocks remaining packets (see Thomas combination below);
communicating one or more DAD packets in the data plane (see Jose Fig. 4, 10:56-67: “As further shown in FIG. 4, process 400 may include providing a neighbor solicitation message (block 410). For example, network device 210-1 may provide a neighbor solicitation message to other network devices 210 (e.g., network device 210-N, another network device 210 in addition to network device 210-N, etc.) that are associated with the VRRP group (i.e., the VRRP group with which network device 210-1 is associated) after network device 210-1 activates within the VRRP group (e.g., as a member of the VRRP group). In some implementations, the message may be associated with a duplicate address detection process.”);
determining whether a response to the one or more DAD packets is received (examiner notes that the claims do not describe the type of response received, such that “determining whether a response to the one or more DAD packets is received” can be interpreted as determining whether or not any response is received and can also be interpreted as determining whether or not a particular type of response is received (e.g., receiving ACK or NACK - determining whether or not the device has received a response indicating that a duplicate address is detected) | see Jose 2:56-3:3: “…Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message). The second network device may receive a message from the first network device indicating that the first network device is using the address of the VRRP group (e.g., receive a neighbor advertisement message).” | 11:6-15 “…another master of the VRRP group may reply to the neighbor solicitation message with a neighbor advertisement message that may cause the VIP address of the VRRP group to be falsely marked as duplicate and/or cause network device 210-1 from joining the VRRP group.”) within a timeout period (see Thomas combination below);
when a response to the one or more DAD packets is received within the timeout period (see Thomas combination below regarding “within the timeout period”), returning to the standby state (see Jose 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2. For example, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status based on information in the notification message indicating that R1 is assigned the master status. In addition, R2 may assign the backup status in the VRRP group to R2. By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.” | 2:56-3:3: “In some cases, the second network device may fail to detect the presence of other network devices associated with the VRRP group (e.g., peers). As such, multiple network devices may be associated with a master status of the VRRP group simultaneously. Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message). The second network device may receive a message from the first network device indicating that the first network device is using the address of the VRRP group (e.g., receive a neighbor advertisement message).” | 10:36-44: “In some implementations, network device 210-1 may be associated with a non-activated status (e.g., a non-operational status, a non-connected status, a deactivated status, etc.) in the VRRP group prior to network device 210-1 activating (e.g., in the VRRP group). By being associated with the non-activated status, network device 210-1 may not be connected to receive traffic from a device (e.g., host device 220, etc.) associated with network 230 and/or extended network 240.”); and
when a response to the one or more DAD packets is not received within the timeout period (see Thomas combination below regarding “within the timeout period”), moving to the active state (see Jose 6:10-16: “These two or more network devices will be referred to collectively as a “VRRP group.” However, these two or more network devices may perform functions that correspond to the functions described herein based on parameters other than VRRP (e.g., a master/slave relationship, a redundancy group, etc.).” | 10:36-44: “In some implementations, network device 210-1 may be associated with a non-activated status (e.g., a non-operational status, a non-connected status, a deactivated status, etc.) in the VRRP group prior to network device 210-1 activating (e.g., in the VRRP group). By being associated with the non-activated status, network device 210-1 may not be connected to receive traffic from a device (e.g., host device 220, etc.) associated with network 230 and/or extended network 240.” | 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2. For example, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status based on information in the notification message indicating that R1 is assigned the master status. In addition, R2 may assign the backup status in the VRRP group to R2. By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.”).
Jose did not explicitly disclose that the packet filter also “blocks remaining packets” when DAD packets are communicated among peer nodes and that responses to DAD packets are determined to be received or not received “within a timeout period”.
However in a related art, Thomas disclosed detecting activation of an additional layer 2 interface (see Fig. 1B #130), activating a filter in which packets are dropped (see Fig. 1B #140, [0042]) and DAD is performed (see Fig. 1B #150), and determining whether or not a duplicate address is detected (see Fig. 1C #160). The packet filter includes a rule that the network traffic is buffered for a threshold amount of time or until DAD is complete (see [0042]). The DAD process is considered complete after a threshold amount of time has passed since transmitting a DAD message (see [0045]). When the duplicate address is detected, the filter is maintained (see Thomas Fig. 1C #160 “duplicate address detected? Yes: Mark as duplicate and maintain filter”) and traffic is prevented from being transmitted (see [0047]), however when no duplicate address is detected, the traffic filter is deactivated (see Thomas Fig. 1C #160 “duplicate address detected? No: Deactivate filter”) and traffic is permitted to be transmitted (see [0050]).
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 Jose and Thomas to further clarify the DAD process includes blocking other traffic in accordance with a threshold time. Expanding upon Jose’s DAD process being performed upon activation of a new member link with Thomas’ teachings regarding a DAD process being performed upon activation of a new interface would reduce network errors and improve network communications (see Thomas [0049]).
Regarding claim 2, Jose-Thomas disclosed the method of claim 1, wherein the standby state comprises a state to drop incoming packets in the data plane (see Jose 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2…By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.” | Although not receiving traffic implies that incoming packets are dropped, Thomas also disclosed activating a filter such that packets are dropped except for DAD packets (see Thomas Fig. 1B #130 “detect activation of additional layer 2 interface”; #140 “activate filter…on additional layer 2 interface (drop packets)”; #150 “perform duplicate address detection with second host devices on VLAN”).).
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 Jose and Thomas to further clarify the DAD process includes blocking other traffic in accordance with a threshold time. Expanding upon Jose’s DAD process being performed upon activation of a new member link with Thomas’ teachings regarding a DAD process being performed upon activation of a new interface would reduce network errors and improve network communications (see Thomas [0049]).
Regarding claim 3, Jose-Thomas disclosed the method of claim 1, wherein the active state comprises a state to process incoming packets from the data plane (see Jose Fig. 1A two routers are part of VRRP group; Fig. 1E one router is the master router and the second router is a backup router; 6:10-16: “These two or more network devices will be referred to collectively as a “VRRP group.” However, these two or more network devices may perform functions that correspond to the functions described herein based on parameters other than VRRP (e.g., a master/slave relationship, a redundancy group, etc.).”; 6:32-33: “network device 210 may include a firewall, a router, a gateway…” | 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2…By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.”, i.e. active state receives packets and backup state does not receive packets).
Regarding claim 4, Jose-Thomas disclosed the method of claim 1 further comprising:
when a response to the one or more DAD packets is received within the timeout period (see Thomas [0042]: the packet filter includes a rule that the network traffic is buffered for a threshold amount of time or until DAD is complete | [0045]: the DAD process is considered complete after a threshold amount of time has passed since transmitting a DAD message):
determining when a time associated with the loss of heartbeat exceeds a threshold (see Jose 4:28-35: “As further shown in FIG. 1A, and by reference number 105, R1 may activate as a member of the VRRP group. For example, R1 may come online, start, receive power, restart, reboot, return to power, etc. In some implementations, R1 may activate after R1 deactivates (e.g., goes offline, is removed from power, experiences an outage, malfunctions, etc.). For example, R1 may reboot after R1 experiences an outage. As further shown in Fig. 1A, R1 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device…”; examiner notes that it is well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that reactivating after deactivation due to an outage would exceed a keep-alive threshold);
communicating one or more second DAD packets in the data plane (examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the DAD process would be able to be repeated | see Jose Fig. 4, 10:56-67: “As further shown in FIG. 4, process 400 may include providing a neighbor solicitation message (block 410). For example, network device 210-1 may provide a neighbor solicitation message to other network devices 210 (e.g., network device 210-N, another network device 210 in addition to network device 210-N, etc.) that are associated with the VRRP group (i.e., the VRRP group with which network device 210-1 is associated) after network device 210-1 activates within the VRRP group (e.g., as a member of the VRRP group). In some implementations, the message may be associated with a duplicate address detection process.”);
determining whether a response to the one or more second DAD packets is received (examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the DAD process would be able to be repeated | see Jose 2:56-3:3: “…Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message). The second network device may receive a message from the first network device indicating that the first network device is using the address of the VRRP group (e.g., receive a neighbor advertisement message).” | 11:6-15 “…another master of the VRRP group may reply to the neighbor solicitation message with a neighbor advertisement message that may cause the VIP address of the VRRP group to be falsely marked as duplicate and/or cause network device 210-1 from joining the VRRP group.”) within a second timeout period (examiner notes that there is no relationship between the earlier described “the timeout period” and “a second timeout period” | see Thomas [0042]: the packet filter includes a rule that the network traffic is buffered for a threshold amount of time or until DAD is complete | [0045]: the DAD process is considered complete after a threshold amount of time has passed since transmitting a DAD message); and
when a response to the one or more second DAD packets is received within the second timeout period (see Thomas [0042]: the packet filter includes a rule that the network traffic is buffered for a threshold amount of time or until DAD is complete | [0045]: the DAD process is considered complete after a threshold amount of time has passed since transmitting a DAD message), returning to the standby state (see Jose 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2. For example, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status based on information in the notification message indicating that R1 is assigned the master status. In addition, R2 may assign the backup status in the VRRP group to R2. By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.” | 2:56-3:3: “In some cases, the second network device may fail to detect the presence of other network devices associated with the VRRP group (e.g., peers). As such, multiple network devices may be associated with a master status of the VRRP group simultaneously. Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message). The second network device may receive a message from the first network device indicating that the first network device is using the address of the VRRP group (e.g., receive a neighbor advertisement message).” | 10:36-44: “In some implementations, network device 210-1 may be associated with a non-activated status (e.g., a non-operational status, a non-connected status, a deactivated status, etc.) in the VRRP group prior to network device 210-1 activating (e.g., in the VRRP group). By being associated with the non-activated status, network device 210-1 may not be connected to receive traffic from a device (e.g., host device 220, etc.) associated with network 230 and/or extended network 240.”); and
when a response to the one or more second DAD packets is not received within the second timeout period (see Thomas [0042]: the packet filter includes a rule that the network traffic is buffered for a threshold amount of time or until DAD is complete | [0045]: the DAD process is considered complete after a threshold amount of time has passed since transmitting a DAD message), moving to the active state (see Jose 6:10-16: “These two or more network devices will be referred to collectively as a “VRRP group.” However, these two or more network devices may perform functions that correspond to the functions described herein based on parameters other than VRRP (e.g., a master/slave relationship, a redundancy group, etc.).” | 10:36-44: “In some implementations, network device 210-1 may be associated with a non-activated status (e.g., a non-operational status, a non-connected status, a deactivated status, etc.) in the VRRP group prior to network device 210-1 activating (e.g., in the VRRP group). By being associated with the non-activated status, network device 210-1 may not be connected to receive traffic from a device (e.g., host device 220, etc.) associated with network 230 and/or extended network 240.” | 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2. For example, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status based on information in the notification message indicating that R1 is assigned the master status. In addition, R2 may assign the backup status in the VRRP group to R2. By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.”).
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 Jose and Thomas to further clarify the DAD process includes blocking other traffic in accordance with a threshold time. Expanding upon Jose’s DAD process being performed upon activation of a new member link with Thomas’ teachings regarding a DAD process being performed upon activation of a new interface would reduce network errors and improve network communications (see Thomas [0049]).
Regarding claim 5, Jose-Thomas disclosed the method of claim 1 further comprising:
when a response to the one or more DAD packets is not received within the timeout period (see Thomas [0042]: the packet filter includes a rule that the network traffic is buffered for a threshold amount of time or until DAD is complete | [0045]: the DAD process is considered complete after a threshold amount of time has passed since transmitting a DAD message | examiner notes that although both the parent claim and this claim describe “when a response to the one or more DAD packets is not received within the timeout period”, the actions following this language describe conflicting instructions– move to the active state (claim 1) and move to the standby state when a connection has been reestablished (claim 5).):
identifying a reestablishment of the heartbeat connection with the second gateway (Jose Fig. 1A two routers are part of VRRP group; Fig. 1E one router is the master router and the second router is a backup router; 6:10-16: “These two or more network devices will be referred to collectively as a “VRRP group.” However, these two or more network devices may perform functions that correspond to the functions described herein based on parameters other than VRRP (e.g., a master/slave relationship, a redundancy group, etc.).”; 6:32-33: “network device 210 may include a firewall, a router, a gateway…” | 4:28-35: “As further shown in FIG. 1A, and by reference number 105, R1 may activate as a member of the VRRP group. For example, R1 may come online, start, receive power, restart, reboot, return to power, etc. In some implementations, R1 may activate after R1 deactivates (e.g., goes offline, is removed from power, experiences an outage, malfunctions, etc.). For example, R1 may reboot after R1 experiences an outage…”, i.e. reestablishment of the heartbeat connection);
in response to the reestablishment of the heartbeat connection, moving to the standby state (see Jose 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2. For example, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status based on information in the notification message indicating that R1 is assigned the master status. In addition, R2 may assign the backup status in the VRRP group to R2. By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.”).
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 Jose and Thomas to further clarify the DAD process includes blocking other traffic in accordance with a threshold time. Expanding upon Jose’s DAD process being performed upon activation of a new member link with Thomas’ teachings regarding a DAD process being performed upon activation of a new interface would reduce network errors and improve network communications (see Thomas [0049]).
Regarding claim 6, Jose-Thomas disclosed the method of claim 1, wherein identifying the loss of the heartbeat connection with the second gateway comprises identifying when a heartbeat packet from the second gateway is not received during a heartbeat timeout (see Jose 2:56-3:3: “In some cases, the second network device may fail to detect the presence of other network devices associated with the VRRP group (e.g., peers)... | examiner notes that connection loss due to heartbeat timeouts are well-known in the art).
Regarding claim 7, Jose-Thomas disclosed the method of claim 1, wherein communicating the one or more DAD packets in the data plane comprises communicating the one or more DAD packets via one or more ports of the first gateway associated with the data plane (see Jose Fig. 4, 10:56-67: “As further shown in FIG. 4, process 400 may include providing a neighbor solicitation message (block 410). For example, network device 210-1 may provide a neighbor solicitation message to other network devices 210 (e.g., network device 210-N, another network device 210 in addition to network device 210-N, etc.) that are associated with the VRRP group (i.e., the VRRP group with which network device 210-1 is associated) after network device 210-1 activates within the VRRP group (e.g., as a member of the VRRP group). In some implementations, the message may be associated with a duplicate address detection process.” | examiner notes that packets are inherently communicated via ports when multiple devices communicate).
Regarding claim 8, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 1 above. Jose disclosed, as recited in claim 8: A computing apparatus comprising:
a storage system (see Jose 8:18-33: controller includes a processor in communication with memory storing instructions for use by the controller);
a processing system operatively coupled to the storage system (see Jose 8:18-33: controller includes a processor in communication with memory storing instructions for use by the controller); and
program instructions stored on the storage system to operate a first gateway that, when executed by the processing system (see Jose 8:18-33: controller includes a processor in communication with memory storing instructions for use by the controller), direct the computing apparatus:
maintain a standby state for a second gateway in an active state (examiner notes that the language of this limitation allows for the interpretation that the second gateway has both an active state and a standby state, that the second gateway is switched from active to standby, or that there is an active gateway and a standby gateway | see Jose Fig. 1A two routers are part of VRRP group; Fig. 1E one router is the master router and the second router is a backup router; 6:10-16: “These two or more network devices will be referred to collectively as a “VRRP group.” However, these two or more network devices may perform functions that correspond to the functions described herein based on parameters other than VRRP (e.g., a master/slave relationship, a redundancy group, etc.).”; 6:32-33: “network device 210 may include a firewall, a router, a gateway…” | 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2. For example, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status based on information in the notification message indicating that R1 is assigned the master status. In addition, R2 may assign the backup status in the VRRP group to R2. By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.”);
identify a loss of a heartbeat connection with the second gateway (see Jose 2:56-3:3: “In some cases, the second network device may fail to detect the presence of other network devices associated with the VRRP group (e.g., peers)...Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message)…” | 11:6-15 “However, in some cases, network device 210-1 may fail to detect the presence of peers of the VRRP group. In some implementations, network device 210-1 may send the neighbor solicitation message based on failing to detect other peers of the VRRP group. That is, in some cases, network device 210-1 may fail to detect the presence of other network devices 210 that are part of the VRRP group…” | examiner notes that it would have been well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that heartbeats are used to maintain a connection, such that a connection loss includes the loss of a heartbeat);
in response to identifying the loss of the heartbeat connection, apply a packet filter in a data plane, wherein the packet filter permits Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) packets (see Jose 2:56-3:3: “In some cases, the second network device may fail to detect the presence of other network devices associated with the VRRP group (e.g., peers). As such, multiple network devices may be associated with a master status of the VRRP group simultaneously. Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message)….” | 11:6-15 “However, in some cases, network device 210-1 may fail to detect the presence of peers of the VRRP group. In some implementations, network device 210-1 may send the neighbor solicitation message based on failing to detect other peers of the VRRP group. That is, in some cases, network device 210-1 may fail to detect the presence of other network devices 210 that are part of the VRRP group. Additionally, in this situation, multiple network devices 210 may be masters of the VRRP group simultaneously. As such, another master of the VRRP group may reply to the neighbor solicitation message with a neighbor advertisement message that may cause the VIP address of the VRRP group to be falsely marked as duplicate and/or cause network device 210-1 from joining the VRRP group.”) and blocks remaining packets (see Thomas combination below);
communicate one or more DAD packets in the data plane (see Jose Fig. 4, 10:56-67: “As further shown in FIG. 4, process 400 may include providing a neighbor solicitation message (block 410). For example, network device 210-1 may provide a neighbor solicitation message to other network devices 210 (e.g., network device 210-N, another network device 210 in addition to network device 210-N, etc.) that are associated with the VRRP group (i.e., the VRRP group with which network device 210-1 is associated) after network device 210-1 activates within the VRRP group (e.g., as a member of the VRRP group). In some implementations, the message may be associated with a duplicate address detection process.”);
determine whether a response to the one or more DAD packets is received (examiner notes that the claims do not describe the type of response received, such that “determining whether a response to the one or more DAD packets is received” can be interpreted as determining whether or not any response is received and can also be interpreted as determining whether or not a particular type of response is received (e.g., receiving ACK or NACK - determining whether or not the device has received a response indicating that a duplicate address is detected) | see Jose 2:56-3:3: “…Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message). The second network device may receive a message from the first network device indicating that the first network device is using the address of the VRRP group (e.g., receive a neighbor advertisement message).” | 11:6-15 “…another master of the VRRP group may reply to the neighbor solicitation message with a neighbor advertisement message that may cause the VIP address of the VRRP group to be falsely marked as duplicate and/or cause network device 210-1 from joining the VRRP group.”) within a timeout period (see Thomas combination below);
when a response to the one or more DAD packets is received within the timeout period (see Thomas combination below regarding “within the timeout period”), return to the standby state (see Jose 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2. For example, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status based on information in the notification message indicating that R1 is assigned the master status. In addition, R2 may assign the backup status in the VRRP group to R2. By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.” | 2:56-3:3: “In some cases, the second network device may fail to detect the presence of other network devices associated with the VRRP group (e.g., peers). As such, multiple network devices may be associated with a master status of the VRRP group simultaneously. Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message). The second network device may receive a message from the first network device indicating that the first network device is using the address of the VRRP group (e.g., receive a neighbor advertisement message).” | 10:36-44: “In some implementations, network device 210-1 may be associated with a non-activated status (e.g., a non-operational status, a non-connected status, a deactivated status, etc.) in the VRRP group prior to network device 210-1 activating (e.g., in the VRRP group). By being associated with the non-activated status, network device 210-1 may not be connected to receive traffic from a device (e.g., host device 220, etc.) associated with network 230 and/or extended network 240.”); and
when a response to the one or more DAD packets is not received within the timeout period (see Thomas combination below regarding “within the timeout period”), move to the active state (see Jose 6:10-16: “These two or more network devices will be referred to collectively as a “VRRP group.” However, these two or more network devices may perform functions that correspond to the functions described herein based on parameters other than VRRP (e.g., a master/slave relationship, a redundancy group, etc.).” | 10:36-44: “In some implementations, network device 210-1 may be associated with a non-activated status (e.g., a non-operational status, a non-connected status, a deactivated status, etc.) in the VRRP group prior to network device 210-1 activating (e.g., in the VRRP group). By being associated with the non-activated status, network device 210-1 may not be connected to receive traffic from a device (e.g., host device 220, etc.) associated with network 230 and/or extended network 240.” | 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2. For example, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status based on information in the notification message indicating that R1 is assigned the master status. In addition, R2 may assign the backup status in the VRRP group to R2. By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.”).
Jose did not explicitly disclose that the packet filter also “blocks remaining packets” when DAD packets are communicated among peer nodes and that responses to DAD packets are determined to be received or not received “within a timeout period”.
However in a related art, Thomas disclosed detecting activation of an additional layer 2 interface (see Fig. 1B #130), activating a filter in which packets are dropped (see Fig. 1B #140, [0042]) and DAD is performed (see Fig. 1B #150), and determining whether or not a duplicate address is detected (see Fig. 1C #160). The packet filter includes a rule that the network traffic is buffered for a threshold amount of time or until DAD is complete (see [0042]). The DAD process is considered complete after a threshold amount of time has passed since transmitting a DAD message (see [0045]). When the duplicate address is detected, the filter is maintained (see Thomas Fig. 1C #160 “duplicate address detected? Yes: Mark as duplicate and maintain filter”) and traffic is prevented from being transmitted (see [0047]), however when no duplicate address is detected, the traffic filter is deactivated (see Thomas Fig. 1C #160 “duplicate address detected? No: Deactivate filter”) and traffic is permitted to be transmitted (see [0050]).
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 Jose and Thomas to further clarify the DAD process includes blocking other traffic in accordance with a threshold time. Expanding upon Jose’s DAD process being performed upon activation of a new member link with Thomas’ teachings regarding a DAD process being performed upon activation of a new interface would reduce network errors and improve network communications (see Thomas [0049]).
Regarding claim 9, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 2 above. Jose-Thomas disclosed, as recited in claim 9: The computing apparatus of claim 8, wherein the standby state comprises a state to drop incoming packets in the data plane (see Jose 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2…By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.” | Although not receiving traffic implies that incoming packets are dropped, Thomas also disclosed activating a filter such that packets are dropped except for DAD packets (see Thomas Fig. 1B #130 “detect activation of additional layer 2 interface”; #140 “activate filter…on additional layer 2 interface (drop packets)”; #150 “perform duplicate address detection with second host devices on VLAN”).).
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 Jose and Thomas to further clarify the DAD process includes blocking other traffic in accordance with a threshold time. Expanding upon Jose’s DAD process being performed upon activation of a new member link with Thomas’ teachings regarding a DAD process being performed upon activation of a new interface would reduce network errors and improve network communications (see Thomas [0049]).
Regarding claim 10, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 3 above. Jose-Thomas disclosed, as recited in claim 10: The computing apparatus of claim 8, wherein the active state comprises a state to process incoming packets from the data plane (see Jose Fig. 1A two routers are part of VRRP group; Fig. 1E one router is the master router and the second router is a backup router; 6:10-16: “These two or more network devices will be referred to collectively as a “VRRP group.” However, these two or more network devices may perform functions that correspond to the functions described herein based on parameters other than VRRP (e.g., a master/slave relationship, a redundancy group, etc.).”; 6:32-33: “network device 210 may include a firewall, a router, a gateway…” | 5:35-53: “As shown by reference number 140, R1 may provide a notification message to R2 that includes information indicating that R1 is assigned the master status….As shown in FIG. 1E, and by reference number 145, R2 may remove the assignment of the master status from R2 and assign a backup status to R2…By being assigned the backup status, R2 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device.”, i.e. active state receives packets and backup state does not receive packets).
Regarding claim 11, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 4 above. Jose-Thomas disclosed, as recited in claim 11: The computing apparatus of claim 8, wherein the program instructions further direct the computing apparatus to:
when a response to the one or more DAD packets is received within the timeout period (see Thomas [0042]: the packet filter includes a rule that the network traffic is buffered for a threshold amount of time or until DAD is complete | [0045]: the DAD process is considered complete after a threshold amount of time has passed since transmitting a DAD message):
determine when a time associated with the loss of heartbeat exceeds a threshold (see Jose 4:28-35: “As further shown in FIG. 1A, and by reference number 105, R1 may activate as a member of the VRRP group. For example, R1 may come online, start, receive power, restart, reboot, return to power, etc. In some implementations, R1 may activate after R1 deactivates (e.g., goes offline, is removed from power, experiences an outage, malfunctions, etc.). For example, R1 may reboot after R1 experiences an outage. As further shown in Fig. 1A, R1 may not be connected to receive traffic from the host device…”; examiner notes that it is well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that reactivating after deactivation due to an outage would exceed a keep-alive threshold);
communicate one or more second DAD packets in the data plane (examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the DAD process would be able to be repeated | see Jose Fig. 4, 10:56-67: “As further shown in FIG. 4, process 400 may include providing a neighbor solicitation message (block 410). For example, network device 210-1 may provide a neighbor solicitation message to other network devices 210 (e.g., network device 210-N, another network device 210 in addition to network device 210-N, etc.) that are associated with the VRRP group (i.e., the VRRP group with which network device 210-1 is associated) after network device 210-1 activates within the VRRP group (e.g., as a member of the VRRP group). In some implementations, the message may be associated with a duplicate address detection process.”);
determine whether a response to the one or more second DAD packets is received (examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the DAD process would be able to be repeated | see Jose 2:56-3:3: “…Additionally, in some cases, the second network device may perform a duplicate address detection process to provide a message to the devices associated with the network to determine if the address of the VRRP group is available for use by the second network device or if the address is being used by another device (e.g., may provide a neighbor solicitation message). The second network device may receive a message from the first network device indicating that the first network device is using the address of the VRRP group (e.g., receive a