DETAILED ACTION
The following is a final office action in response to the Amendments filed on April 03, 2026.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8, 9, 13-15, and 20 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 103 Rejections
Applicant’s arguments filed in the communications on 04/03/2026 have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rao et al. (USPGPub 2020/0073692) in view of Delecroix et al. (US Patent 12,316,540).
As per claim 1, Rao teaches a computing device (Rao, see paragraph [0005], Containerization is a virtualization scheme based on operation system-level virtualization) comprising:
processing circuitry (Rao, see paragraph [0026], switches 18 may each include one or more processors and a memory)
a containerized virtual router configured to execute on the processing circuitry and configured to implement a data plane for the containerized router (Rao, see paragraph [0086], mvirtual router agent 216 for minion nodes) manages the configuration of virtual networks implemented in the data plane in part by virtual routers)
a containerized routing protocol process configured to execute on the processing circuitry and configured to implement a control plane for the containerized router, wherein the containerized routing protocol process is configured to execute a routing protocol (Roa, see paragraph [0086], Virtual router agent 216 communicates, to network modules 206, interface configuration data for virtual network interfaces to enable an orchestration control plane element (i.e., network module 206) to configure the virtual network interfaces according to the configuration state determined by the network controller 24, thus bridging the gap between the orchestration control plane and virtual network control plane) and
a process configured to program a virtual private cloud (VPC) route table in a VPC (Rao, see paragraph [0103], virtual private clouds (VPCs) for cloud service providers (CSPs). The private cloud, VPC, and IaaS use cases may involve a multi-tenant virtualized data centers) gateway based on routing information received by the containerized routing protocol process via the routing protocol (Rao, see paragraph [0034], a separate forwarding table (a routing-instance) per virtual network. That forwarding table contains the IP prefixes (in the case of a layer 3 overlays) or the MAC addresses (in the case of layer 2 overlays) of the virtual machines or other virtual execution elements (e.g., pods of containers)).
Rao doesn’t explicitly teach the VPC gateway being separate from the computing device.
In analogous art Delecroix teaches the VPC gateway being separate from the computing device (Delecroix, see column 10 line 38-44, The controller 140 also programs VPC route tables with the appropriate route entries to direct the management and control plane traffic to the VPC endpoint. Finally, the controller 140 brings up a Secure Socket Layer (SSL) Virtual Private Network (VPN) overlay for UDP between the gateways and the visibility platform. (e.g., multi-cloud visibility instance 150).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the teaching of Delacroix and apply it on the teaching of Rao as doing so would prevent scalability issues and decrease cost. (Delecroix, see column 2 line 9-13).
As per claim 2, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 1, wherein to program the VPC route table in the VPC gateway, the process is configured to program the VPC route table to direct all network traffic from the VPC gateway to the computing device. (Rao, see paragraph [0120], Containers 229A may communicate via either of virtual network interfaces 212A, 212B to exchange packets with other pods of the cluster on the corresponding networks, or externally to the virtual networks and pods of the cluster using, e.g., a gateway.)
As per claim 3, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 2, wherein to program the VPC route table the process configured to program the VPC route table is to indicate a forwarding next hop is the computing device. (Roa, see paragraph [0079], configures a default route in each of pods 202 to cause the virtual machines 224 to use virtual router 220 as an initial next hop for outbound packets).
As per claim 4, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 1, wherein the containerized virtual router is configured to receive network traffic from the VPC gateway and forward the network traffic towards an on-premises network. (Roa, see paragraph [0103], private clouds (VPCs) for cloud service providers (CSPs). The private cloud, VPC, and IaaS use cases may involve a multi-tenant virtualized data centers)
As per claim 5, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 1, wherein the routing protocol comprises a border gateway protocol. (Roa, see paragraph [0035], The control plane protocol between the control plane nodes of the network controller 24 or a physical gateway router (or switch) may be BGP (and may be Netconf for management).)
As per claim 6, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 1, wherein the process is configured to program the VPC route table via an interface of the VPC gateway. (Rao, see paragraph [0100], API server 320 may invoke the scheduler 322 to schedule a virtual execution element, which may select a minion node and returns an identifier for the selected minion node to API server 320, which may write the identifier to the configuration store 328 in association with the virtual execution element. API server 320 may invoke the orchestration agent 209 )
As per claim 7, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 1, wherein the VPC gateway is coupled to one or more border gateway protocol (BGP) virtual devices via one or more respective links. (Roa, see paragraph [0035], The control plane protocol between the control plane nodes of the network controller 24 or a physical gateway router (or switch) may be BGP (and may be Netconf for management).)
As per claim 8, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 7, wherein the one or more BGP virtual devices comprise one or more container groups, each associated with a corresponding worker. (Rao, see paragraph [0006], sometimes referred to as “pods” for some orchestration platforms, e.g., Kubernetes)
As per claim 9, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 8, wherein each worker node comprises at least one service pod, the service pod being associated with a service other than BGP protocol. (Rao, see paragraph [0006], sometimes referred to as “pods” for some orchestration platforms, e.g., Kubernetes)
As per claim 10, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 7, wherein the one or more respective links comprise one or more respective Ethernet links. (Rao, see paragraph [0031], Virtual Private Networks (L3VPNs) and Ethernet Virtual Private Networks (EVPNs) networks using a datacenter)
As per claim 11, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 1, wherein the VPC gateway is not capable of learning routes directly from BGP. (Roa, see paragraph [0035], The control plane protocol between the control plane nodes of the network controller 24 or a physical gateway router (or switch) may be BGP (and may be Netconf for management).)
As per claim 12, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 1, wherein the VPC gateway comprises a physical device or a virtual device. (Rao, see paragraph [0035], he control plane protocol between the control plane nodes of the network controller 24 or a physical gateway router (or switch) may be BGP)
As per claim 13, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 1, wherein the VPC gateway comprises a first VPC gateway, the VPC route table comprises a first VPC route table, and wherein the process is configured to program the first VPC route table is further configured to program a second VPC route table in a second VPC gateway, wherein the second VPC route table is different than the first VPC route table. (Rao, see paragraph [0120], Containers 229A may communicate via either of virtual network interfaces 212A, 212B to exchange packets with other pods of the cluster on the corresponding networks, or externally to the virtual networks and pods of the cluster using, e.g., a gateway.)
As per claim 14, Rao-delecroix teaches the computing device of claim 1, wherein, the containerized routing protocol process is configured to apply a policy to routes to obtain filtered routes and wherein to program the VPC route table the process is configured to program the vpc route table based on the filtered routes (Roa, see paragraph [0086], Virtual router agent 216 communicates, to network modules 206, interface configuration data for virtual network interfaces to enable an orchestration control plane element (i.e., network module 206) to configure the virtual network interfaces according to the configuration state determined by the network controller 24, thus bridging the gap between the orchestration control plane and virtual network control plane).
As per claim 15, Rao teaches a computer network method performed by a computing device comprising:
connecting, by a process configured to program a virtual private cloud (VPC) route table in a VPC gateway based on routing information received by a containerized routing protocol process via a routing protocol, to the VPC gateway; (Rao, see paragraph [0086], mvirtual router agent 216 for minion nodes) manages the configuration of virtual networks implemented in the data plane in part by virtual routers. Also see paragraph [0103], virtual private clouds (VPCs) for cloud service providers (CSPs). The private cloud, VPC) and
programming, by the process configured to program the VPC route table, the VPC route table in the VPC gateway. (Rao, see paragraph [0103], virtual private clouds (VPCs) for cloud service providers (CSPs). The private cloud, VPC, and IaaS use cases may involve a multi-tenant virtualized data centers) gateway based on routing information received by the containerized routing protocol process via the routing protocol (Rao, see paragraph [0034], a separate forwarding table (a routing-instance) per virtual network. That forwarding table contains the IP prefixes (in the case of a layer 3 overlays) or the MAC addresses (in the case of layer 2 overlays) of the virtual machines or other virtual execution elements (e.g., pods of containers)).
Rao doesn’t explicitly teach the VPC gateway being separate from the computing device.
In analogous art Delecroix teaches the VPC gateway being separate from the computing device (Delecroix, see column 10 line 38-44, The controller 140 also programs VPC route tables with the appropriate route entries to direct the management and control plane traffic to the VPC endpoint. Finally, the controller 140 brings up a Secure Socket Layer (SSL) Virtual Private Network (VPN) overlay for UDP between the gateways and the visibility platform. (e.g., multi-cloud visibility instance 150).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the teaching of Delacroix and apply it on the teaching of Rao as doing so would prevent scalability issues and decrease cost. (Delecroix, see column 2 line 9-13).
As per claim 16, Rao-delecroix teaches the method of claim 15, wherein programming the VPC route table in the VPC gateway comprises programming the VPC route table to direct all network traffic from the VPC gateway to a containerized virtual router of the computing device. (Rao, see paragraph [0120], Containers 229A may communicate via either of virtual network interfaces 212A, 212B to exchange packets with other pods of the cluster on the corresponding networks, or externally to the virtual networks and pods of the cluster using, e.g., a gateway.)
As per claim 17, Rao-delecroix teaches the method of claim 16, wherein programming the VPC route table comprises programming the VPC route table to indicate a forwarding next hop is the computing device. (Roa, see paragraph [0079], configures a default route in each of pods 202 to cause the virtual machines 224 to use virtual router 220 as an initial next hop for outbound packets).
As per claim 18, Rao-delecroix teaches the method of claim 15, further comprising: receiving network traffic, by a containerized virtual router, from the VPC gateway based on the VPC route table; and forwarding, by the containerized virtual router, the network traffic towards an on- premises network. (Roa, see paragraph [0103], private clouds (VPCs) for cloud service providers (CSPs). The private cloud, VPC, and IaaS use cases may involve a multi-tenant virtualized data centers)
As per claim 19, Rao-delecroix teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the routing protocol comprises a border gateway protocol. (Roa, see paragraph [0035], The control plane protocol between the control plane nodes of the network controller 24 or a physical gateway router (or switch) may be BGP (and may be Netconf for management).)
As per claim 20, Rao teaches Non-transitory computer-readable storage media, comprising instructions, that are to configure processing circuitry, of a computing device cause the processing circuitry to:
connect, by a process configured to program a virtual private cloud (VPC) route table in a VPC gateway based on routing information received by a containerized routing protocol process via a routing protocol, to the VPC gateway; (Rao, see paragraph [0086], mvirtual router agent 216 for minion nodes) manages the configuration of virtual networks implemented in the data plane in part by virtual routers. Also see paragraph [0103], virtual private clouds (VPCs) for cloud service providers (CSPs). The private cloud, VPC) and
program, by the process configured to program the VPC route table, the VPC route table in the VPC gateway. (Rao, see paragraph [0034], a separate forwarding table (a routing-instance) per virtual network. That forwarding table contains the IP prefixes (in the case of a layer 3 overlays) or the MAC addresses (in the case of layer 2 overlays) of the virtual machines or other virtual execution elements (e.g., pods of containers)).
Rao doesn’t explicitly teach the VPC gateway being separate from the computing device.
In analogous art Delecroix teaches the VPC gateway being separate from the computing device (Delecroix, see column 10 line 38-44, The controller 140 also programs VPC route tables with the appropriate route entries to direct the management and control plane traffic to the VPC endpoint. Finally, the controller 140 brings up a Secure Socket Layer (SSL) Virtual Private Network (VPN) overlay for UDP between the gateways and the visibility platform. (e.g., multi-cloud visibility instance 150).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the teaching of Delacroix and apply it on the teaching of Rao as doing so would prevent scalability issues and decrease cost. (Delecroix, see column 2 line 9-13).
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 HERMON ASRES whose telephone number is (571)272-4257. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM to 5PM.
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 at (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.
/HERMON ASRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights