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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 27-30, 39-40, 42-43, and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Allan (US 2019/0116053 A1).
Regarding claim 27 and 39, Allan discloses an apparatus and method, comprising: at least one processor (442); and at least one memory (448) including instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to: determine a rendezvous point mapping that maps a list of multicast group for which a node is interested in operating as a rendezvous point to an identifier of the node to be used as an identifier of the rendezvous point (paragraph [0032]- [0035]; [0007]; [0009]-[0011]; [0023]; and so on, explaining selecting rendezvous point associating or mapping or tagging an identifier of a node used as the rendezvous point to multicast groups); determine a routing protocol to be used by the node for advertising the rendezvous point mapping (paragraph [0033]-[0035]; [0038]-[0039]; [0041]-[0042]; [0044]; [0064]; [0007]-[0011]; and etc., illustrating a routing protocol, such as control plane protocol, e.g. IGP and so on are identified or used to advertise rendezvous point); generate, based on the routing protocol, a routing protocol message including the rendezvous point mapping (paragraph [0038]-[0039]; [0041]-[0042]; [0044]; and so on, explaining advertisement to advertise rendezvous point is made using a control protocol such as control plane protocol, for example an interior gateway protocol (IGP)); and advertise the routing protocol message including the rendezvous point mapping (paragraph [007]; [0033]; [0038]-[0039]; [0041]-[0042]; [0044]; [0064]; and etc., describing advertising the advertisement message related to such as IGP the rendezvous point).
Regarding claim 40 and 52, Allan discloses an apparatus and method, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to: receive a routing protocol message including a rendezvous point mapping that maps a list of multicast groups for which a node is interested in operating as a rendezvous point to an identifier of the node to be used as an identifier of the rendezvous point (paragraph [0041]-[0042]; [0032]- [0035]; [0007]; [0009]-[0011]; [0023]; and so on); identify, from the routing protocol message, a routing protocol used to format the routing protocol message (paragraph [0042]; [0039]; extract, from the routing protocol message based on the routing protocol, the rendezvous point mapping (paragraph [0042]-[0043]; [0039]-[0040]; and etc.); and process the rendezvous point mapping (paragraph [0044]; [0040]; and so on).
Regarding claim 28, Allan discloses wherein, to determine the rendezvous point mapping, the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to: obtain the list of multicast groups for which the node is interested in operating as the rendezvous point (paragraph [0032]- [0035]; [0007]; [0009]-[0011]; [0023]; and so on); obtain the identifier of the node to be used as the identifier of the rendezvous point (paragraph [007]-[0011]; [0023]; [00332]-[0035]; [0038]-[0041]; [0043]; and etc.); and generate the rendezvous point mapping by associating the list of multicast groups for which the node is interested in operating as the rendezvous point to the identifier of the node to be used as the identifier of the rendezvous point (paragraph [0030]-[0038]; [0007]-[0011]; [0023]; and so on).
Regarding claim 29, Allan discloses wherein the node has a plurality of neighbor nodes associated therewith, wherein, to advertise the routing protocol message including the rendezvous point mapping, the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to: forward the routing protocol message including the rendezvous point mapping toward each of the neighbor nodes associated therewith (paragraph [007]-[0011]; [0030]-[0039]; [0041]-[0042]; [0044]; [0064]; [0023]; and etc.).
Regarding claim 30 and 43, Allan discloses wherein the routing protocol includes one of an Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) protocol, an OSPF version 3 (OSPFv3) protocol, an Intermediate-System-to-Intermediate-System (IS-IS) protocol, a Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), or a BGP-Link State (BGP-LS) protocol (paragraph [0064]).
Regarding claim 42, Allan discloses wherein the routing protocol message is received from a neighbor node, wherein the routing protocol message is advertised to at least one other neighbor node (paragraph [0038]-[0044]; and so on).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 31-32 and 44-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allan in view of Wijnands et al. (US 2015/0085635 A1).
Regarding claim 31-32 and 44-45, Allan discloses wherein the routing protocol includes an Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) protocol (paragraph [0064]).
Allan does not disclose wherein the routing protocol message includes an Opaque Link State Advertisement (LSA), wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within a payload of the Opaque LSA, and wherein the Opaque LSA Header includes an LSA Type field and an LSA Identifier field, wherein the LSA Type field includes a value based on flooding scope, wherein the LSA Identifier field is split into an Opaque Type field and an Opaque Identifier field, wherein the Opaque Type field includes a value indicative that the Opaque LSA includes rendezvous point mapping information.
Wijnands teaches wherein the routing protocol message includes an Opaque Link State Advertisement (LSA), wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within a payload of the Opaque LSA, and wherein the Opaque LSA Header includes an LSA Type field and an LSA Identifier field, wherein the LSA Type field includes a value based on flooding scope, wherein the LSA Identifier field is split into an Opaque Type field and an Opaque Identifier field, wherein the Opaque Type field includes a value indicative that the Opaque LSA includes rendezvous point mapping information (e.g. paragraph [0052]; [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein the routing protocol message includes an Opaque Link State Advertisement (LSA), wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within a payload of the Opaque LSA, and wherein the Opaque LSA Header includes an LSA Type field and an LSA Identifier field, wherein the LSA Type field includes a value based on flooding scope, wherein the LSA Identifier field is split into an Opaque Type field and an Opaque Identifier field, wherein the Opaque Type field includes a value indicative that the Opaque LSA includes rendezvous point mapping information as taught by Wjnands into Allan in order to improve rate of communication.
Claims 33 and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allan in view of Wijnands, and further in view of Shepherd et al. (US 2015/0131660 A1).
Regarding claim 33 and 46, as applied above, the modified communication of Allan discloses the payload of the Opaque LSA. However, the modified communication of Allan does not disclose wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within a sub-Type-Length-Value (sub-TLV) included within the payload of the Opaque LSA, wherein the sub-TL V includes a rendezvous point address field that includes the identifier of the node to be used as the identifier of the rendezvous point, wherein the sub-TLV includes a set of one or more multicast address fields that include respective multicast addresses for the respective multicast groups for which the node is interested in operating as the rendezvous point.
Shepherd teaches wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within a sub-Type-Length-Value (sub-TLV) included within the payload of the Opaque LSA, wherein the sub-TL V includes a rendezvous point address field that includes the identifier of the node to be used as the identifier of the rendezvous point, wherein the sub-TLV includes a set of one or more multicast address fields that include respective multicast addresses for the respective multicast groups for which the node is interested in operating as the rendezvous point (paragraph [0034]; [0057]; [0064]-[0067]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within a sub-Type-Length-Value (sub-TLV) included within the payload of the Opaque LSA, wherein the sub-TL V includes a rendezvous point address field that includes the identifier of the node to be used as the identifier of the rendezvous point, wherein the sub-TLV includes a set of one or more multicast address fields that include respective multicast addresses for the respective multicast groups for which the node is interested in operating as the rendezvous point as taught by Shepherd into the modified communication of Allan in order to reduce congestion.
Claims 34-35 and 47-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allan in view of Appalla et al. (US 2013/0077628 A1).
Regarding claim 34-35 and 47-48, Allan discloses wherein the routing protocol includes an Intermediate-System-to-Intermediate-System (IS-IS) protocol (paragraph [0064]). Allan does not disclose wherein the routing protocol message includes an IS-IS Protocol Data Unit (PDU), wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within a Type-Length-Value (TLV) of the IS-IS PDU, and wherein the TLV of the IS-IS PDU includes a Type field that encodes a value indicative that the IS-IS PDU includes rendezvous point mapping information and a Value field that includes the rendezvous point mapping.
Appalla teaches wherein the routing protocol message includes an IS-IS Protocol Data Unit (PDU), and wherein the TLV of the IS-IS PDU includes a Type field that encodes a value indicative that the IS-IS PDU includes rendezvous point mapping information and a Value field that includes the rendezvous point mapping (paragraph [0005]-[0015]; [0037]-[0038]; [0045]-[0053]; [0056]; [0067]-[0071]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein the routing protocol message includes an IS-IS Protocol Data Unit (PDU), and wherein the TLV of the IS-IS PDU includes a Type field that encodes a value indicative that the IS-IS PDU includes rendezvous point mapping information and a Value field that includes the rendezvous point mapping as taught by Appalla into Allan in order to decrease error and dropping of data.
Claims 37 and 50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allan in view of Aggarwal et al. (US 8571029 B1).
Regarding claim 37 and 50, Allan discloses wherein the routing protocol includes a Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) (paragraph [0064]). Allan does not disclose wherein the routing protocol message includes a BGP message including Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI), wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within the NLRI.
Aggarwal teaches wherein the routing protocol message includes a BGP message including Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI), wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within the NLRI (col. 29, lines 37-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein the routing protocol message includes a BGP message including Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI), wherein the rendezvous point mapping is included within the NLRI as taught by Aggarwal into Allan in order to improve path selection and reduce looping.
Claim 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allan in view of Kumar et al. (US 2021/0091968 A1).
Regarding claim 41, as applied above, Allan discloses wherein, to process the rendezvous point mapping. Allan does not disclose the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to: add the rendezvous point mapping to a group to rendezvous point mapping database.
Kumar teaches the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to: add the rendezvous point mapping to a group to rendezvous point mapping database (paragraph [0110]-[0111]; [0123]; [0129]; [0131]; and etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to: add the rendezvous point mapping to a group to rendezvous point mapping database as taught by Kumar into Allan in order to reduce overloading.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 36, 38, 49, and 51 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIBROM T HAILU whose telephone number is (571)270-1209. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, HUY D VU can be reached at (571)272-3155. 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.
/KIBROM T HAILU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461