DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The instant application No. 18425957 has claims 1-20 are pending.
2 The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: “A method for parallel handling of data comprising: configuring a port of a source information handling system to support a number n of communication lanes for that port:” There is grammar mistake after port instead of colon should be semi-colon. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Coteus et al. (Pub. No. US 2015/0289406 A1; hereinafter Coteus).
Regarding claim 1, Coteus discloses a network information handling system comprising:a plurality of externally accessible ports for connecting to one or more information handling systems, in which each externally accessible port of a-set of the externally accessible ports (20150289406-See ¶0037, using optical transceivers, the same 10 Gb/s signals may be sent over a pair of optical fibers, one sending data and one receiving data. Such a pair of signals is called a lane. A port can also include multiple lanes.) from the plurality of externally accessible port is configured to connect via a plurality of distinct connection lanes to a port of an information handling system; (See ¶0037, using optical transceivers, the same 10 Gb/s signals may be sent over a pair of optical fibers, one sending data and one receiving data. Such a pair of signals is called a lane. A port can also include multiple lanes.)
and a plurality of forwarding elements, in which each forwarding element is communicatively coupled to each externally accessible port of the set of externally accessible ports for at least one lane of the externally accessible port to enable parallel handling of the plurality of distinct connection lanes from the information handling system by the plurality of forwarding elements. (See ¶0025, each leaf chip has externally facing ports equal to p.sub.L/2 connected on a first edge of the leaf card to cables running to external computer elements (i.e., nodes), such as, for example, a processor; See ¶0037, A port can also include multiple lanes. If the signaling rate is 25 Gb/s per lane, these four lanes can deliver, in parallel, 100 Gb/s per port; Figure 1 each port has node on; interpreted each port is connected to a network processing unit)
Regarding claim 3, Coteus discloses a forwarding element is a network processing unit, a field-programmable gate array, an application specific integrated circuit, a chiplet, or a system-on-a-chip (SoC). (See ¶0025, each leaf chip has externally facing ports equal to p.sub.L/2 connected on a first edge of the leaf card to cables running to external computer elements (i.e., nodes), such as, for example, a processor; See ¶0037, A port can also include multiple lanes. If the signaling rate is 25 Gb/s per lane, these four lanes can deliver, in parallel, 100 Gb/s per port; Figure 1 each port has node on; interpreted each port is connected to a network processing unit)
Regarding claim 6, Coteus discloses an externally accessible port comprises a transceiver or pluggable module. (See ¶0037, a port may be implemented optically: using optical transceivers, the same 10 Gb/s signals may be sent over a pair of optical fibers, one sending data and one receiving data.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coteus in view of Lee et al. (Pub. No. US 2016/0142285 A1; hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claim 2, Coteus fails to disclose each forwarding element comprises a same forwarding table for communications between a source information handling system and a destination information handling system that utilize the plurality of distinct connection lanes of the network information handling system.
Lee discloses each forwarding element comprises a same forwarding table for communications between a source information handling system and a destination information handling system that utilize the plurality of distinct connection lanes of the network information handling system. (20160142285-See ¶0038, Then, the SDN controller 30 may update the flow table of the OpenFlow switches 110, 120 and 140 and vlan tables of the Ethernet switches 210-220 as Table 8-11 shown in below: table 11, VLAN Output port vlan table of Ethernet switch 210 100 P1, P2 vlan table of Ethernet switch 220 100 P1, P3, p4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify discloses a port has multi-lanes to transmit traffic to include vlan forwarding tables to transmit the traffic. The motivation to combine is SDN controller can control the data path of data packets in all connections of the OpenFlow network, the network capacity could be greatly improved (See ¶0004).
Regarding claim 4, Coteus fails to disclose each forwarding element is configured to support its maximum number of externally accessible ports.
Lee discloses each forwarding element is configured to support its maximum number of externally accessible ports. (20160142285-See ¶0022, OpenFlow switches 110-120 are configured at the edge of the network 20, whereas the Ethernet switches 210-240 are configured at the core of the network 20. Each of the OpenFlow switches 110-120 and the Ethernet switches 210-240 has a plurality of ports (e.g., the ports P1-P3 of the Ethernet switches 210-240), so that the OpenFlow switches 110-120 and the Ethernet switches 210-240 could be connecting to each other through ports of the OpenFlow switches 110-120 and the Ethernet switches 210-240)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify discloses a port has multi-lanes to transmit traffic to include a number of ports to connect other switches too. The motivation to combine is SDN controller can control the data path of data packets in all connections of the OpenFlow network, the network capacity could be greatly improved (See ¶0004).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coteus in view of Hari (Pub. No. US 2016/0065386 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Coteus fails to disclose each connection lane is individually addressed for data traffic handling.
Hari discloses each connection lane is individually addressed for data traffic handling. (20160065386 -See ¶0041, different VLANs, traffic between the two servers 110, 120 may traverse different routers 130; if traffic between the servers 110, 120 were routed over VLAN A 200a, the traffic would traverse routers 130a, 130d, 130b, 130c, 130g. The same traffic over VLAN B 200b, however, would only traverse routers 130a, 130b, 130g. On VLANs C 200c and D 200d, the traffic would similarly traverse different sets of routers)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the multi-lane port is utilize to transmit data to include the vlan have identifier can be used to transmit traffic. The motivation to combine is VLANs may thus be used to help optimize the bisectional bandwidth and other efficiencies used in the core network 130 (See ¶0041).
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coteus in view of Leigh et al. (Pub. No. US 2021/0021473 A1; hereinafter Leigh).
Regarding claim 7, a quotient of the number of distinct connection lanes of an externally accessible port of the network information handling system divided by the number of forward elements of the network information handling system is an integer.
Leigh discloses a quotient of the number of distinct connection lanes of an externally accessible port of the network information handling system divided by the number of forward elements of the network information handling system is an integer. (20210021473-See ¶0019, the lane from switch interface port 145 can support 100 G. The DRAG 120 can initially evenly divide the bandwidth allocated for each lane to the servers 125a-125h using server interface ports 140a-140h based on the bandwidth available at the switch 110. Referring back to the example where the lane to switch 110 supports 100 G, the DRAG 120 can allow each of the eight lanes from server interface ports 140-140h to utilize 12.5 G of bandwidth.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify multi-lane port used to transmit traffic to include each lane port has equal amount of bandwidth to transmit traffic. The motivation to combine is dynamically adjust an amount of bandwidth that is provided to servers, on a per-server basis (up to a bandwidth limit), in a manner that can improve utilization of the link and reduce stranded bandwidth (See ¶0012).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-20 are allowed.
Regarding claims 9 and 15, Coteus et al. (Pub. No. US 2015/0289406 A1) discloses a method for parallel handling of data comprising: configuring a port of a source information handling system to support a number n of communication lanes for that port; (20150289406-See ¶0037, using optical transceivers, the same 10 Gb/s signals may be sent over a pair of optical fibers, one sending data and one receiving data. Such a pair of signals is called a lane. A port can also include multiple lanes.)
However, Coteus fails to disclose connecting the port of the source information handling system to a port of network information handling system that comprises plurality of forwarding elements, in which at least two lanes of the communication lanes of the port are communicatively coupled to at least two forwarding elements within the network information handling system; and transmitting data via the communication lanes of the port to the corresponding forwarding elements of the network information handling system for parallel data handling.
Claim 8 is 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shen et al. (Pub. No. US 2006/0098020 A1)-See ¶0012, The switch has a first input port, a second input port and an output port. The switch selectively electrically connects one of the first input port and the second input port to the chipset through the output port according to a control signal. The first PCI Express X16 graphics interface has former eight lanes electrically connected to the chipset and latter eight lanes electrically connected to the first input port of the switch. The second PCI Express X16 graphics interface has former eight lanes electrically connected to the second input port of the switch.
Gallagher et al. (Pub. No. US 2007/0233930 A1)-See ¶0022, Attached to connector 134 is a device (e.g., an adapter) 122. This device 122 uses link 128 to transact data with any other device on the computer system. But note that while link 128 is 8-lane wide, the device 122 is an x16 device (i.e., the device can use 16 lanes to transact data). A link training and initialization feature available in PCI Express bus architecture allows for the device 122 to throttle down to 8 lanes when transacting data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TEJIS DAYA whose telephone number is (571)270-7817. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30-4:30.
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, Nicholas Jensen can be reached at 571-270-5443. 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.
/Tejis Daya/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472