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 .
Priority
No priority claim has been filed. Therefore, the claims will be examined using an effective filing date of 29 January 2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 03 April 2026 complies with all applicable rules and regulations. Therefore, the information referred to therein has been considered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 21 May 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
After further consideration of the independent claim amendments the examiner has determined that they are taught by the combination of the cited prior art. In this case, the original disclosure does not disclose an explicit determination, by the management controller, that the hardware resources are unable to generate and transmit the reprovisioning request. The examiner has interpreted that the limitation is implicitly disclosed by virtue of the management controller performing operations while the hardware resources are powered off and, thus, unable to generate or transmit any data. See the 35 USC 103 section below for a detailed analysis.
In response to applicant’s arguments that “one having ordinary skill in the art would further have recognized that it would be necessary (namely, for the principle of operation for Khatri's system) for the remote access controller 255 to have its own separate and independent network adapter 225c rather than share a network module with the motherboard of HIS 200 as per the Office's proposed modification of Khatri”, stated on page 11, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
See MPEP 2143.01(VI)—"If the proposed modification or combination of the prior art would change the principle of operation of the prior art invention being modified, then the teachings of the references are not sufficient to render the claims prima facie obvious… The court reversed the rejection holding the ‘suggested combination of references would require a substantial reconstruction and redesign of the elements shown in [the primary reference] as well as a change in the basic principle under which the [primary reference] construction was designed to operate.’”
Khatri discloses network controller 225 may be a replaceable expansion card or adapter that is coupled to a motherboard connector of IHS 200, or network controller 225 may be an integrated component of IHS 200 (Col. 11, lines 23-27).
Khatri further discloses in support of remote monitoring functions, network adapter 225c may support connections with remote access controller 255 using wired and/or wireless network connections via a variety of network technologies (Col. 14, line 67-Col. 15, line 3).
BeSerra discloses the BMC 420 may be adapted to communicate with the management console network 456 using the NIC 446 of the server computer 400, wherein the NIC 446 may implement two separate communication channels (e.g., CH1 and CH2), with CH1 being used by the LAN 454 for communications with the server computer 400, and CH2 being used for dedicated communication between the console network 456 and the BMC 420 using the communication paths 448 and 414 (Fig. 4, el. 454, 456; Col. 11, lines 1-9).
Aldebert discloses that Network Controller-Sideband Interface (NC-SI) port controller (NPC) is a circuit that can provide a connection between a baseboard management controller (BMC) and a network interface controller (NC) for local and remote management traffic (Para. 13).
Aldebert further discloses Transmit backbone unit (XBB) unit 16 can receive the packets from a host and can prepare them for transmission by the MAC 4 (via the switch 12). The MAC 4 can also pass traffic between the network 2 and a BMC 17. This traffic is known as pass-through traffic because it does not carry a local NC command or NC response. Pass-through packets from the BMC 17 to be transmitted over the network 2 can be received by an NPC unit 23 and can be passed from the NPC unit 23 to MAC 4, and packets received by the MAC 4 destined for the BMC can be handled by the NPC unit before being passed to the BMC, wherein the NC can include the HEA 3, MAC 4, switch 12, and NC-SI port controller (NPC) 23, but may not include the BMC 17 (Figs. 1, 2, el. 3, 4, 12, 23; Para. 16).
Firstly, the independent claims do not clearly indicate what is encompassed by the “single network module”. A “module” is a software or hardware element that is a part of a larger element. This could be a physical or logical module. For example, Khatri’s two separate network adapters could make up a logical “single network module”.
Secondly, the separate network adapters of Khatri are not integral to the principle operation of the device.
Thirdly, modifying Khatri’s logical “single network module” to include the physical “single network module” of Aldebert would provide the benefit of reducing the number of components in the device by eliminating the need to have a dedicated network controller on the management controller.
Applicant further states, on page 11, “[a]pplicant submits that since the network controller 225 is managed by the motherboard of HIS 200, one having ordinary skill would have recognized that the network controller 225 would also be inoperable when the motherboard of HIS 200 is inoperable or unpowered”. Khatri discloses that “remote access controller 255 may operate from a different power plane from the processors 205 and other components of IHS 200, thus allowing the remote access controller 255 to operate, and management tasks to proceed, while the processing cores of IHS 200 are powered off” (Col. 12, lines 35-40). Khatri does not explicitly state that the RAC operates when the motherboard is powered off. However, Khatri also discloses that the remote access controller may be coupled to the motherboard but still be operable if the motherboard is unpowered. Therefore, the network adapter of the RAC maintains power for the communication with the remote device. The combination of Khatri, BeSerra, and Aldebert then discloses that a physical single network module allows the management controller to operate to communicate with the remote device when power to the processing cores is off.
The examiner suggests amending the independent claims to indicate what is encompassed by the “hardware resources” and to indicate what is encompassed by the “single network module”.
Therefore, the combination is valid.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 5, line 1—“the reprovisioning” lacks sufficient antecedent basis for the claim. Claims 1-4 include instances of a “request for reprovisioning”, but not an actual reprovisioning step. This objection may be overcome by amending line 1 to state --reprovisioning--, for example.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 9, 10, 12-18, 21, 23, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khatri et al. (US 11,574,080 B1) in view of BeSerra et al. (US 10,599,504 B1) and further in view of Aldebert et al. (US 2017/0052914 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Khatri teaches a method for managing a data processing system, e.g., Information Handling System (IHS) 200 (Fig. 2, el. 200), the method comprising:
making, by a management controller, e.g., Remote Access Controller (RAC) 255 (Fig. 2, el. 255), of the data processing system, an identification of an occurrence of a hardware event for the data processing system that impairs operation of hardware resources of the data processing system, e.g., the validation process may be initialized upon the customer installing new and/or replacement hardware components in the IHS, wherein a pre-boot validation environment 505 in which the validation process 510 runs may include an environment that is executed by the remote access controller of the IHS based on validated firmware instructions (Fig. 5, el. 505, 510; Fig. 6, el. 615; Col. 19, lines 40-64); where a private key of a remote access controller is used to digitally sign the inventory in an inventory certificate, replacement of a motherboard to which the remote access controller is mounted results in that private key no longer being available for use in validating the detected inventory of the IHS against the signed inventory from the certificate (Col. 23, lines 42-56); at block 730, the IHS generates a certificate signing request (CSR) that includes the detected hardware inventory of the IHS, wherein this CSR may be generated by the remote access controller of the IHS (Col. 24, lines 21-24),
wherein the data processing system comprises a single network module, e.g., network controller 225 (Fig. 2, el. 225), that is shared by both of the management controller and the hardware resources,…and the single network module is further adapted to separately advertise network endpoints for the management controller and the hardware resources…, e.g., processor(s) 205 may also be coupled to a network controller 225 via in-band bus 215, such as provided by a Network Interface Controller (NIC) that allows the IHS 200 to communicate via an external network (Fig. 2, el. 215, 215; Col. 11, lines 19-22); network adapter 255c may support connections with remote access controller 255 using wired and/or wireless network connections via a variety of network technologies Fig. 2, el. 255, 255c; Col. 15, lines 1-3); each I2C bus 275a-d may be comprised of a clock line and data line that couple the remote access controller 255 to I2C endpoints 220a, 225a, 230a, 280a which may be referred to as modular field replaceable units (FRUs) (Fig. 2, el. 225a, 275b; Col. 15, lines 43-46); In providing sideband management capabilities, the I2C co-processor 255b may each interoperate with corresponding endpoint I2C controllers 220a, 225a, 230a, 280a that implement the I2C communications of the respective managed devices 220, 225, 230 (Fig. 2, el. 225, 255b; Col. 15, lines 54-58); and
based on the identification:
determining, by the management controller and based on the hardware event, that the hardware resources of the data processing system are unable to generate and transmit a request for reprovisioning of the data processing system to manage the hardware event that impairs the operation of the hardware resources, e.g., remote access controller 255 may operate from a different power plane from the processors 205 and other components of IHS 200, thus allowing the remote access controller 255 to operate, and management tasks to proceed, while the processing cores of IHS 200 are powered off (Col. 12, lines 35-40);
the validation process may be initialized upon the customer installing new and/or replacement hardware components in the IHS, where the validation process 510 may run within a pre-boot validation environment 505, such as a PXE (Preboot eXecution Environment) validation environment, where a pre-boot validation environment 505 in which the validation process 510 runs may include an environment that is executed by the remote access controller of the IHS based on validated firmware instructions (Fig. 5, el. 505; Col. 19, lines 44-61);
a replacement motherboard installed by a trusted entity 805 may be configured to initiate, at 830 and 720, the described validation process 815 upon the IHS being initialized for the first time, and once the validation process 815 of the IHS is booted, the validation process triggers procedures, at 830, for generation of an inventory certificate for validation of the hardware of the IHS, now using the replacement motherboard, and as described with regard to FIGS. 5 and 6, at 835, an inventory of the detected hardware components of the IHS is generated by the validation process 815 (Fig. 7, el. 720; Fig. 8, el. 815, 830, 835; Col. 24, lines 6-16);
at block 730, the IHS generates a certificate signing request (CSR) that includes the detected hardware inventory of the IHS, where this CSR may be generated by the remote access controller of the IHS in the same manner as described with regard to the factory provisioning process of FIGS. 4 and 5, and at 840 and 735, the CSR is transmitted to a remote validation service 820, wherein the remote access controller may transmit the CSR to a remote validation service 820 without the operating system of the IHS being booted and may utilize out-of-band data collection and networking (Fig. 7, el. 730, 735; Fig. 8, el. 840; Col. 24, lines 21-40);
Examiner note: the original disclosure does not disclose an explicit determination, by the management controller, that the hardware resources are unable to generate and transmit the reprovisioning request. The examiner has interpreted that the limitation is implicitly disclosed by virtue of the management controller performing operations while the hardware resources are powered off and, thus, unable to generate or transmit any data.
providing, by the management controller via an out-of-band channel to a remote system, e.g., remote validation service 820 (Fig. 8, el. 820), and while an operating system (OS) of the data processing system that is hosted by the hardware resources is in an inoperable or incomplete state, the request for reprovisioning of the data processing system in lieu of the hardware resources, e.g., at 840 and 735, the CSR is transmitted to a remote validation service 820, wherein the remote access controller may transmit the CSR to a remote validation service 820 without the operating system of the IHS being booted and may utilize out-of-band data collection and networking (Fig. 7, el. 735; Fig. 8, el. 840; Col. 24, lines 32-40);
upon initiation of a transfer of a service identity an IHS, at 865, the validation process 815 of the IHS generates a CSR that serves as a request for transfer of a service identity to the IHS and that specifies the service identity to be transferred to the IHS, wherein an IHS may include cryptographic capabilities, such as via a remote access controller, that support generation of a CSR (Fig. 8, el. 865; Col. 25, lines 59-65);
the validation process may be initialized upon the customer installing new and/or replacement hardware components in the IHS, where the validation process 510 may run within a pre-boot validation environment 505, such as a PXE (Preboot eXecution Environment) validation environment, where a pre-boot validation environment 505 in which the validation process 510 runs may include an environment that is executed by the remote access controller of the IHS based on validated firmware instructions (Fig. 5, el. 505; Col. 19, lines 44-61),
obtaining, by the management controller and via the out-of-band channel and from the remote system, a response to the request for reprovisioning, e.g., at block 745 and at 850, the remote validation service 820 transmits the new signed inventory certificate to the IHS, wherein the remote access controller that generated the CSR may receive the new signed inventory certificate from the remote validation service 820 (Fig. 7, el. 745; Fig. 8, el. 850; Col. 25, lines 9-13); at 765 and 885, the updated inventory certificate to which the service identifier has now been bound is transmitted to the IHS, where it may be received and stored by the validation process 815 or the IHS (Fig. 7, el. 765; Fig. 8, el. 885; Col. 25, lines 45-48), and
based on the response to the request for reprovisioning:
obtaining, by the management controller and via the out-of-band channel and from the remote system, system data for the data processing system, the system data being usable to manage the hardware event, e.g., at block 745 and at 850, the remote validation service 820 transmits the new signed inventory certificate to the IHS, wherein the remote access controller that generated the CSR may receive the new signed inventory certificate from the remote validation service 820 (Fig. 7, el. 745; Fig. 8, el. 850; Col. 25, lines 9-13); at 765 and 885, the updated inventory certificate to which the service identifier has now been bound is transmitted to the IHS, where it may be received and stored by the validation process 815 or the IHS (Fig. 7, el. 765; Fig. 8, el. 885; Col. 25, lines 45-48); wherein the remote access controller may utilize out-of-band data collection and networking (Col. 24, lines 32-40);
performing, by the data processing system, an update process using the system data in order to mitigate the hardware event that impairs the operation of the hardware resources to obtain updated hardware resources, e.g., at 890 and 770, the validation process 815 confirms the updated inventory certificate has been generated by a trusted entity and that the inventory specified therein corresponds to the root of trusted hardware of the IHS, and at 775, the IHS may be fully initialized and deployed for operation, where the IHS may now be managed both locally and remotely through the use of the service identifier transferred from the failed motherboard, thus supporting uninterrupted use and administration of the IHS (Fig. 7, el. 770, 775; Fig. 8, el. 890; Col. 25, lines 48-57); and
providing, by the data processing system, a computer-implemented service using the updated hardware resources, e.g., at 890 and 770, the validation process 815 confirms the updated inventory certificate has been generated by a trusted entity and that the inventory specified therein corresponds to the root of trusted hardware of the IHS, and at 775, the IHS may be fully initialized and deployed for operation, where the IHS may now be managed both locally and remotely through the use of the service identifier transferred from the failed motherboard, thus supporting uninterrupted use and administration of the IHS (Fig. 7, el. 770, 775; Fig. 8, el. 890; Col. 25, lines 48-57).
Khatri does not explicitly teach the single network module being the only network module installed in the data processing system and is adapted to receive all remote communications directed to the data processing system, and
the single network module is further adapted to separately advertise network endpoints for the management controller and the hardware resources such that first remote communications of the remote communications meant for the hardware resources never flow through the management controller and second remote communications of the remote communications meant for the management controller never flow through the hardware resources.
BeSerra teaches wherein the data processing system, e.g., server computer 400 (Fig. 4, el. 400), comprises a single network module, e.g., network interface card (NIC) 446 (Fig. 4, el. 446), that is shared by both of the management controller, e.g., baseboard management controller (BMC) 420 (Fig. 4, el. 420), and the hardware resources, e.g., processor 440, server memory 410 (Fig. 4, el. 410, 440),…and the single network module is further adapted to separately advertise network endpoints for the management controller and the hardware resources such that first remote communications of the remote communications meant for the hardware resources never flow through the management controller and second remote communications of the remote communications meant for the management controller never flow through the hardware resources, e.g., the BMC 420 may be adapted to communicate with the management console network 456 using the NIC 446 of the server computer 400, wherein the NIC 446 may implement two separate communication channels (e.g., CH1 and CH2), with CH1 being used by the LAN 454 for communications with the server computer 400, and CH2 being used for dedicated communication between the console network 456 and the BMC 420 using the communication paths 448 and 414 (Fig. 4, el. 454, 456; Col. 11, lines 1-9); a separate IP address can be used for each of the server computer 400 and the BMC 420 (Col. 11, lines 22-24); example communications using the console network 456 include receiving system notifications or alerts from the BMC 420, dispatching (or uploading) software (e.g., patching software) to the BMC memory 422 and communicating information about the state of the memory as provided by the refresh control code 424 (Col. 10, lines 61-66).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Khatri to include the single network module is further adapted to separately advertise network endpoints for the management controller and the hardware resources such that first remote communications of the remote communications meant for the hardware resources never flow through the management controller and second remote communications of the remote communications meant for the management controller never flow through the hardware resources, using the known method of utilizing a single NIC that has a channel for communications with the server and a channel for communications with the BMC, wherein the server and the BMC each have separate IP addresses, as taught by BeSerra, in combination with the reprovisioning system of Khatri, for the purpose of allowing dedicated network communication channels, thereby aiding in the reduction of routing errors.
Khatri in view of BeSerra does not explicitly teach the single network module being the only network module installed in the data processing system and is adapted to receive all remote communications directed to the data processing system.
Aldebert teaches wherein the data processing system, e.g., device 1 (Figs. 1, 2, el. 1), comprises a single network module, e.g., a network interface controller (NC) (Para. 13), that is shared by both of the management controller, e.g., baseboard management controller (BMC) 17 (Figs. 1, 2, el. 17), and the hardware resources, the single network module being the only network module installed in the data processing system and is adapted to receive all remote communications directed to the data processing system, e.g., Network Controller-Sideband Interface (NC-SI) port controller (NPC) is a circuit that can provide a connection between a baseboard management controller (BMC) and a network interface controller (NC) for local and remote management traffic (Para. 13);
pass-through packets from the BMC 17 to be transmitted over the network 2 can be received by an NPC unit 23 and can be passed from the NPC unit 23 to MAC 4, and packets received by the MAC 4 destined for the BMC can be handled by the NPC unit before being passed to the BMC, wherein the NC can include the HEA 3, MAC 4, switch 12, and NC-SI port controller (NPC) 23, but may not include the BMC 17 (Figs. 1, 2, el. 3, 4, 12, 23; Para. 16), and
the single network module is further adapted to separately advertise network endpoints for the management controller and the hardware resources such that first remote communications of the remote communications meant for the hardware resources never flow through the management controller and second remote communications of the remote communications meant for the management controller never flow through the hardware resources, e.g., the MAC 4 can receive data from the network 2 via its communication line and can transmit the data to a line buffer 5, wherein this buffer forms part of a receive backbone (RBB) 6, wherein the RBB manages the movement of data from the MAC by converting, aligning, and storing the data into the line buffer 5, wherein once the RBB 6 stores the data, the RBB 6 transmits the data to a second buffer 7, wherein the second buffer 7 forms part of a (BaRT-based finite state machine (BFSM))-based parser filter and checksum (BPFC) 8 (Para. 14);
the role of BPFC 8 is to analyze the packets in the second buffer 7 and make various decisions before they are forwarded to the main part of the device, i.e. the host (Para. 15);
packets received by the MAC 4 destined for the BMC can be handled by the NPC unit before being passed to the BMC, wherein the NC can include the HEA 3, MAC 4, switch 12, and NC-SI port controller (NPC) 23, but may not include the BMC 17 (Figs. 1, 2, el. 3, 4, 12, 23; Para. 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Khatri in view of BeSerra to include the single network module being the only network module installed in the data processing system and is adapted to receive all remote communications directed to the data processing system, using the known method of having a single network interface controller that receives data from an external network and routes the data to either the main part of the host system or the BMC, as taught by Aldebert, in combination with the reprovisioning system of Khatri in view of BeSerra, for the purpose of eliminating the need to have a dedicated network controller on the management controller.
Regarding claim 2, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the hardware event comprises modification of a component of the hardware resources, e.g., the validation process may be initialized upon the customer installing new and/or replacement hardware components in the IHS, wherein a pre-boot validation environment 505 in which the validation process 510 runs may include an environment that is executed by the remote access controller of the IHS based on validated firmware instructions (Khatri-Fig. 5, el. 505, 510; Fig. 6, el. 615; Col. 19, lines 40-64).
Regarding claim 3, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the modification causes an encryption key previously stored by the data processing system to become unusable by the data processing system, e.g., where a private key of a remote access controller is used to digitally sign the inventory in an inventory certificate, replacement of a motherboard to which the remote access controller is mounted results in that private key no longer being available for use in validating the detected inventory of the IHS against the signed inventory from the certificate (Khatri-Col. 23, lines 42-56); by encrypting a private key using the Hardware Root key (HRK) of IHS 200, the hardware inventory information that is signed using this private key is further anchored to the root of trust of IHS 200, and if a root of trust cannot be established through validation of the remote access controller cryptographic functions that are used to access the hardware root key, the private key used to sign inventory information cannot be retrieved, wherein the HRK may include a root key that is programmed into a fuse bank, or other immutable memory such as one-time programmable registers, during factory provisioning of IHS 200 (Khatri-Col. 13, lines 41-48).
Regarding claim 4, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 3, wherein the request for reprovisioning comprises an identifier for the component of the hardware resources, e.g., the remote validation service 820 may identify the motherboard that is reported in this hardware inventory, wherein based on the identity of the motherboard reported in the CSR, the validation service 820 may confirm that the motherboard is a genuine component that was supplied to the customer or a trusted third party (Khatri-Fig. 8, el. 820; Col. 24, lines 52-58); upon initiation of a transfer of a service identity an IHS, at 865, the validation process 815 of the IHS generates a CSR that serves as a request for transfer of a service identity to the IHS and that specifies the service identity to be transferred to the IHS, wherein an IHS may include cryptographic capabilities, such as via a remote access controller, that support generation of a CSR (Khatri-Fig. 8, el. 865; Col. 25, lines 59-65),
the component having been replaced as a first part of the hardware event and the component being replaced as the first part of the hardware event causes the hardware resources to differ from that expected by the remote system, e.g., the validation process may be initialized upon the customer installing new and/or replacement hardware components in the IHS, wherein a pre-boot validation environment 505 in which the validation process 510 runs may include an environment that is executed by the remote access controller of the IHS based on validated firmware instructions (Khatri-Fig. 5, el. 505, 510; Fig. 6, el. 615; Col. 19, lines 40-64); upon collection of the detected hardware components of the initialized IHS, at block 570, the inventory certificate validation process compares the collected inventory information against the inventory information that is parsed from the signed inventory certificate (Khatri-Fig. 5, el. 570; Col. 21, lines 53-57).
Regarding claim 5, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the reprovisioning comprises registering the data processing system using the identifier for the component, e.g., the remote validation service 820 may identify the motherboard that is reported in this hardware inventory, and based on the identity of the motherboard reported in the CSR, the validation service 820 may confirm that the motherboard is a genuine component that was supplied to the customer or a trusted third party (Khatri-Fig. 8, el. 820; Col. 24, lines 52-58), and
an updated ownership voucher established with the remote system as a second part of the hardware event, e.g., in response to the received CSR, at 845 and 740, the validation service 820 generates a new signed inventory certificate that specifies the hardware inventory reported in the CSR, including the replacement motherboard (Khatri-Fig. 7, el. 740; Fig. 8, el. 845; Col. 24, lines 64-67).
Regarding claim 9, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the network endpoints are used by remote systems to address the first remote communications to the hardware resources and the second remote communications to the management controller, e.g., processor(s) 205 may also be coupled to a network controller 225 via in-band bus 215, such as provided by a Network Interface Controller (NIC) that allows the IHS 200 to communicate via an external network (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 215, 215; Col. 11, lines 19-22); network adapter 255c may support connections with remote access controller 255 using wired and/or wireless network connections via a variety of network technologies (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 255, 255c; Col. 15, lines 1-3); each I2C bus 275a-d may be comprised of a clock line and data line that couple the remote access controller 255 to I2C endpoints 220a, 225a, 230a, 280a which may be referred to as modular field replaceable units (FRUs) (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 225a, 275b; Col. 15, lines 43-46); In providing sideband management capabilities, the I2C co-processor 255b may each interoperate with corresponding endpoint I2C controllers 220a, 225a, 230a, 280a that implement the I2C communications of the respective managed devices 220, 225, 230 (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 225, 255b; Col. 15, lines 54-58);
the BMC 420 may be adapted to communicate with the management console network 456 using the NIC 446 of the server computer 400, wherein the NIC 446 may implement two separate communication channels (e.g., CH1 and CH2), with CH1 being used by the LAN 454 for communications with the server computer 400, and CH2 being used for dedicated communication between the console network 456 and the BMC 420 using the communication paths 448 and 414 (BeSerra-Fig. 4, el. 454, 456; Col. 11, lines 1-9).
Regarding claim 10, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the out-of-band channel runs through the single network module and an in-band channel that services the hardware resources also runs through the single network module, e.g., processor(s) 205 may also be coupled to a network controller 225 via in-band bus 215, such as provided by a Network Interface Controller (NIC) that allows the IHS 200 to communicate via an external network (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 215, 215; Col. 11, lines 19-22); network adapter 255c may support connections with remote access controller 255 using wired and/or wireless network connections via a variety of network technologies (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 255, 255c; Col. 15, lines 1-3); each I2C bus 275a-d may be comprised of a clock line and data line that couple the remote access controller 255 to I2C endpoints 220a, 225a, 230a, 280a which may be referred to as modular field replaceable units (FRUs) (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 225a, 275b; Col. 15, lines 43-46); in providing sideband management capabilities, the I2C co-processor 255b may each interoperate with corresponding endpoint I2C controllers 220a, 225a, 230a, 280a that implement the I2C communications of the respective managed devices 220, 225, 230 (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 225, 255b; Col. 15, lines 54-58);
the BMC 420 may be adapted to communicate with the management console network 456 using the NIC 446 of the server computer 400, wherein the NIC 446 may implement two separate communication channels (e.g., CH1 and CH2), with CH1 being used by the LAN 454 for communications with the server computer 400, and CH2 being used for dedicated communication between the console network 456 and the BMC 420 using the communication paths 448 and 414 (BeSerra-Fig. 4, el. 454, 456; Col. 11, lines 1-9).
Regarding claim 12, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the occurrence of the hardware event is managed while the hardware resources are inoperable due to being unpowered, e.g., remote access controller 255 may operate from a different power plane from the processors 205 and other components of IHS 200, thus allowing the remote access controller 255 to operate, and management tasks to proceed, while the processing cores of IHS 200 are powered off (Khatri-Col. 12, lines 35-40); the remote access controller may transmit the CSR to a remote validation service 820 without the operating system of the IHS being booted and may utilize out-of-band data collection and networking, and may execute validated instructions to generate and transmit the CSR to the remote validation service 820, wherein the validation process 815 may be configured to halt further booting of an IHS until a new inventory certificate is provided in response to the generated CSR (Khatri-Col. 24, lines 35-43).
Regarding claim 13, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 1. Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert further teaches a non-transitory machine-readable medium, e.g., system memory 210 (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 210), having instructions stored therein, which when executed by a processor, e.g., processors 205 (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 205); the service processor 255a of remote access controller 255 may rely on an I2C co-processor 255b to implement sideband I2C communications between the remote access controller 255 and managed components 220, 225, 230, 280 of the IHS (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 255a, 255b; Col. 15, lines 30-34), cause the processor to perform operations for managing a data processing system, e.g., Information Handling System (IHS) 200 (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 200).
Regarding claim 14, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 2.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 3.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 4.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 1. Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert further teaches a data processing system, e.g., Information Handling System (IHS) 200 (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 200), comprising: a processor, e.g., processors 205 (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 205); the service processor 255a of remote access controller 255 may rely on an I2C co-processor 255b to implement sideband I2C communications between the remote access controller 255 and managed components 220, 225, 230, 280 of the IHS (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 255a, 255b; Col. 15, lines 30-34); and a memory, e.g., system memory 210 (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 210), coupled to the processor to store instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform operations for managing the data processing system.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 2.
Regarding claim 21, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 1.
Khatri further teaches wherein the single network module is physically installed within the data processing system separate from the management controller, e.g., processor(s) 205 may also be coupled to a network controller 225 via in-band bus 215, such as provided by a Network Interface Controller (NIC) that allows the IHS 200 to communicate via an external network (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 215, 215; Col. 11, lines 19-22); network adapter 255c may support connections with remote access controller 255 using wired and/or wireless network connections via a variety of network technologies (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 255, 255c; Col. 15, lines 1-3).
Khatri in view of BeSerra does not explicitly teach the management controller is incapable of communicating with other systems external to the data processing system without using the single network module.
Aldebert further teaches wherein the single network module is physically installed within the data processing system separate from the management controller, and the management controller is incapable of communicating with other systems external to the data processing system without using the single network module, e.g., the MAC 4 can receive data from the network 2 via its communication line and can transmit the data to a line buffer 5, wherein this buffer forms part of a receive backbone (RBB) 6, wherein the RBB manages the movement of data from the MAC by converting, aligning, and storing the data into the line buffer 5, wherein once the RBB 6 stores the data, the RBB 6 transmits the data to a second buffer 7, wherein the second buffer 7 forms part of a (BaRT-based finite state machine (BFSM))-based parser filter and checksum (BPFC) 8 (Para. 14);
the role of BPFC 8 is to analyze the packets in the second buffer 7 and make various decisions before they are forwarded to the main part of the device, i.e. the host (Para. 15);
packets received by the MAC 4 destined for the BMC can be handled by the NPC unit before being passed to the BMC, wherein the NC can include the HEA 3, MAC 4, switch 12, and NC-SI port controller (NPC) 23, but may not include the BMC 17 (Figs. 1, 2, el. 3, 4, 12, 23; Para. 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Khatri in view of BeSerra to include the single network module being the only network module installed in the data processing system and is adapted to receive all remote communications directed to the data processing system, using the known method of having a single network interface controller that receives data from an external network and routes the data to either the main part of the host system or the BMC, as taught by Aldebert, in combination with the reprovisioning system of Khatri in view of BeSerra, using the same motivation as in claim 1.
Regarding claim 23, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 1,
Khatri further teaches wherein the single network module is the only network…provided for the data processing system that is capable of providing network access to both the hardware resources and the management controller of the data processing system, e.g., processor(s) 205 may also be coupled to a network controller 225 via in-band bus 215, such as provided by a Network Interface Controller (NIC) that allows the IHS 200 to communicate via an external network (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 215, 215; Col. 11, lines 19-22); network adapter 255c may support connections with remote access controller 255 using wired and/or wireless network connections via a variety of network technologies (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 255, 255c; Col. 15, lines 1-3).
Khatri in view of BeSerra does not explicitly teach wherein the single network module is the only network component provided for the data processing system that is capable of providing network access to both the hardware resources and the management controller of the data processing system.
Aldebert further teaches wherein the single network module is the only network component provided for the data processing system that is capable of providing network access to both the hardware resources and the management controller of the data processing system, e.g., the MAC 4 can receive data from the network 2 via its communication line and can transmit the data to a line buffer 5, wherein this buffer forms part of a receive backbone (RBB) 6, wherein the RBB manages the movement of data from the MAC by converting, aligning, and storing the data into the line buffer 5, wherein once the RBB 6 stores the data, the RBB 6 transmits the data to a second buffer 7, wherein the second buffer 7 forms part of a (BaRT-based finite state machine (BFSM))-based parser filter and checksum (BPFC) 8 (Para. 14);
the role of BPFC 8 is to analyze the packets in the second buffer 7 and make various decisions before they are forwarded to the main part of the device, i.e. the host (Para. 15);
packets received by the MAC 4 destined for the BMC can be handled by the NPC unit before being passed to the BMC, wherein the NC can include the HEA 3, MAC 4, switch 12, and NC-SI port controller (NPC) 23, but may not include the BMC 17 (Figs. 1, 2, el. 3, 4, 12, 23; Para. 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Khatri in view of BeSerra to include wherein the single network module is the only network component provided for the data processing system that is capable of providing network access to both the hardware resources and the management controller of the data processing system, using the known method of having a single network interface controller that receives data from an external network and routes the data to either the main part of the host system or the BMC, as taught by Aldebert, in combination with the reprovisioning system of Khatri in view of BeSerra, using the same motivation as in claim 1.
Regarding claim 24, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 1, wherein making the identification of the occurrence of the hardware event that impairs the operation of the hardware resources of the data processing system comprises, at least: identifying, by the management controller using an ownership voucher of the data processing system that is locally accessible to the management controller during a startup of the data processing system and without human intervention, that a first hardware loadout of the hardware resources currently installed in the data processing system is different from a second hardware loadout specified in the ownership voucher, e.g., the validation process may be initialized upon the customer installing new and/or replacement hardware components in the IHS, where the validation process 510 may run within a pre-boot validation environment 505, such as a PXE (Preboot eXecution Environment) validation environment, where a pre-boot validation environment 505 in which the validation process 510 runs may include an environment that is executed by the remote access controller of the IHS based on validated firmware instructions (Khatri-Fig. 5, el. 505; Col. 19, lines 44-61);
upon collection of the detected hardware components of the initialized IHS, at block 570, the inventory certificate validation process compares the collected inventory information against the inventory information that is parsed from the signed inventory certificate (Khatri-Fig. 5, el. 570; Col. 21, lines 53-57);
at block 665, the inventory certificate validation process continues the comparison of the detected hardware components of the initialized IHS against the identities of the hardware components that are included in the signed inventory certificate, and in particular against the signed inventory of the factory installed hardware components that is included in the signed inventory certificate (Khatri-Fig. 6, el. 665; Col. 22, lines 20-26); and
identifying, based on identifying that the first hardware loadout is different from the second hardware loadout, that the hardware event has occurred, e.g., if any devices of any type, or other hardware, are detected that are not identified the inventory of factory-installed hardware, at block 680, the inventory certificate validation process may signal an inventory validation failure, and an inventory validation failure will also be signaled if the validation process 510 is unable to detect factory-installed hardware components that are specified in the inventory certificate, such that successful validation requires confirming that an IHS is operating using all of the factory-installed hardware, but no additional hardware (Khatri-Fig. 6, el. 680; Col. 22, lines 44-53).
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert and further in view of Young et al. (US 2019/0065786 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 5.
Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert does not clearly teach wherein the system data comprises the encryption key.
Young teaches wherein the system data comprises the encryption key, e.g., in addition to providing configuration information to be applied to configuration settings 226, SCP file 234 can include a second digital signature that includes a new public key for authenticating future SCP files, in order to provide for key rotation. For example, a particular SCP file may be intended for one-time use, and so, by rotating the public key in BMC 220, any future attempts to execute the particular SCP file will fail because the original digital signature will not authenticate under the new public key in the BMC (Fig. 2, el. 220, 226, 234; Para. 28); then management system 230 sets up a secure channel over the management network with BMC 220 to transfer SCP file 234 to the BMC (Fig. 2, el. 230; Para. 25); an example of management block 190 may include a commercially available BMC product that operates in accordance with an Intelligent Platform Management Initiative (IPMI) specification, such as an Integrated Dell Remote Access Controller (iDRAC) (Fig. 1, el. 190; Para. 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert to include wherein the system data comprises the encryption key, using the known method of sending a new public key from a management system to the BMC, as taught by Young, in combination with the reprovisioning system of Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert, for the purpose of increasing the security of the system by rotating the public keys.
Regarding claim 7, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert in view of Young teaches the method of claim 6, wherein performing the update process comprises: providing, by the management controller and via a sideband channel, the encryption key for storage in a trusted platform module of the data processing system, e.g., the remote access controller 255 may rely on certain cryptographic capabilities of a TPM, such as in generating keypairs, calculating cryptographic signatures (e.g., hashes) and/or providing a persistent and secure memory for storage of the keypair used by the hardware validation procedures (Khatri-Col. 13, lines 58-64); the service processor 255a of remote access controller 255 may rely on an I2C co-processor 255b to implement sideband I2C communications between the remote access controller 255 and managed components 220, 225, 230, 280 of the IHS (Khatri-Col. 15, lines 30-34).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert and further in view of Butcher et al. (US 2020/0220812 A1).
Regarding claim 22, Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert teaches the method of claim 1.
Khatri further teaches wherein the single network module is also separate from the hardware resources of the data processing system, and…the management controller are still operable while the hardware resources of the data processing system are powered off, e.g., remote access controller 255 may operate from a different power plane from the processors 205 and other components of IHS 200, thus allowing the remote access controller 255 to operate, and management tasks to proceed, while the processing cores of IHS 200 are powered off (Khatri-Col. 12, lines 35-40); the remote access controller may transmit the CSR to a remote validation service 820 without the operating system of the IHS being booted and may utilize out-of-band data collection and networking, and may execute validated instructions to generate and transmit the CSR to the remote validation service 820, wherein the validation process 815 may be configured to halt further booting of an IHS until a new inventory certificate is provided in response to the generated CSR (Khatri-Col. 24, lines 35-43);
processor(s) 205 may also be coupled to a network controller 225 via in-band bus 215, such as provided by a Network Interface Controller (NIC) that allows the IHS 200 to communicate via an external network (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 215, 215; Col. 11, lines 19-22);
network adapter 255c may support connections with remote access controller 255 using wired and/or wireless network connections via a variety of network technologies (Khatri-Fig. 2, el. 255, 255c; Col. 15, lines 1-3).
Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert does not clearly teach the single network module and the management controller are still operable while the hardware resources of the data processing system are powered off.
Butcher teaches wherein the single network module, e.g., network interface 180 (Figs. 2, 3, el. 180), is also separate from the hardware resources of the data processing system, and the single network module and the management controller, e.g., baseboard management controller (BMC) 200 (Figs. 2, 3, el. 200), are still operable while the hardware resources of the data processing system are powered off, e.g., electrical signals and/or electrical power may then be communicated or conveyed via the bus 224 between the network interface 180 and the baseboard management controller 200 (Fig. 3, el. 224; Para. 19);
if the host information handling system 100 is electrically powered off, the baseboard management controller 200 will need to respond to ARP (address revolution protocol) requests, and the flow table 246 may thus be reprogrammed in the S5 state to pass ARP requests to the sideband, and when the host information handling system 100 shuts down in the S5 state, the baseboard management controller 200 may instruct the smart network interface 180 to program the flow table 246 with the port number 242 reserved for remote management functions, thus allowing the baseboard management controller 200 to respond to ARP requests, wherein the smart network interface 180 and the flow table 246 may thus be always electrically powered, active, and available even in the S5 state (Para. 26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert to include the single network module and the management controller are still operable while the hardware resources of the data processing system are powered off, using the known method of providing power to the network interface and the BMC even when the rest of the host machine is not powered, as taught by Butcher, in combination with the reprovisioning system of Khatri in view of BeSerra in view of Aldebert, for the purpose of enabling the BMC to communicate with the external network via the external network interface while the host system is powered off, thereby enabling the remote monitoring to continue uninterrupted while also using an external network interface that may be physically upgraded separately from the BMC.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kaminski (US 10,924,350 B1)—Kaminski discloses the BMC 209 also participates in a determination that host machine 201 may need re-provisioning or re-configuring, after completion of an update process (Col. 11, lines 22-25).
Greenstein (US 2009/0210601 A1)—Greenstein discloses utilizing a Local Area Network on Motherboard (LOM) separate from the BMC to communicate data to and from the Internet and a BMC and the rest of the host machine (Fig. 2).
Smith (US 2009/0328195 A1)—Smith discloses upon an authentication error or exception, processor 102 may invoke ME 110. ME 110 may be configured to re-provision a logic module and/or corresponding authentication reference value(s), and to force processor 102 to reattempt authentication, with or without a system reset. ME 110 may be configured to evaluate an exception to determine whether the logic module and/or the reference values are correct. ME 110 may be configured to notify IT system 124 of an exception over OOB link 122, and may be configured to receive a replacement logic module and/or authentication reference value(s) over link 122 (Para. 42).
Savage et al. (US 2023/0130256 A1)—Savage discloses importing cryptographic credentials of a customer to an IHS (Information Handling System) (Abstract).
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 JEREMY DUFFIELD whose telephone number is (571)270-1643. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 AM - 3:00 PM (ET).
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, Yin-Chen Shaw can be reached at (571) 272-8878. 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.
10 August 2026
/Jeremy S Duffield/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2498
Prosecution Insights