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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 6-12, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiussi et al. (US 2002/0036984, hereinafter Chiussi) in view of Dumitrescu et al. (US 2015/0016266, hereinafter Dumitrescu), and further in view of Le Pallec et al. (US 2013/0308658, hereinafter Le Pallec).
Regarding claim 1, Chiussi discloses a computer-implemented method for scheduling packets to be processed (a method for scheduling transmission of data packets – Chiussi ¶0031), the method comprising:
maintaining a plurality of ordered sub-queues used for storing packets (a server… uses a scheduling algorithm to control the order in which the individual queues are served – Chiussi ¶0003; for each incoming packet… the packet can be queued in a flow queue – Chiussi ¶0037; Examiner is interpreting the “queue” of Chiussi as mapping to the claimed “sub-queue” because the claims only refer to “sub-queues” without referring to any higher “queue”, so Examiner is interpreting the two terms as synonyms for the purpose of examination), wherein packets in the sub-queues are to be dequeued by a scheduler (the operation of MSS 20 [a monolithic shaper scheduler (MSS) 20 – Chiussi ¶0037] consists of… (3) flow dequeue – Chiussi ¶0045),
wherein a respective packet is enqueued into a sub-queue (for each incoming packet, receiver 6 also determines, at the time of receiving the packet, whether or not the packet can be queued in a flow queue 26-i associated with flow 22-i – Chiussi ¶0037), and wherein a virtual time associated with the respective packet is based on a current sub-queue virtual time corresponding to a previously enqueued packet in the sub-queue (a server uses this global function to compute a “finishing virtual time”, also referred to as a “timestamp”, for each packet in the associated system – Chiussi ¶0005; MSS 20 must use the previous timestamp… in the computation of the new timestamp – Chiussi ¶0067; also see Chiussi claim 11);
dequeuing, by the scheduler, a first packet from a currently selected sub-queue (the scheduler extracts the flow from the sorting structure – Chiussi ¶0051);
determining a packet virtual time associated with a next packet in the currently selected sub-queue (the eligibility of flow timestamp Flk at time tl,dk determines the value of an “eligibility flag” EFl associated with the flow – Chiussi ¶0052);
determining that the packet virtual time associated with the next packet is greater than a current global virtual time (1 if (Flk > tl,dk + ll,dk)/rl)*Timestamp is not eligible*/ – Chiussi ¶0053; 2 EFl <- FALSE – Chiussi ¶0054).
Chiussi does not disclose selecting a next sub-queue in the ordered plurality of sub-queues for dequeuing packets responsive to the packet virtual time comparison above, and updating the current global virtual time based on a packet virtual time associated with the dequeued first packet. Dumitrescu, however, in the same field of endeavor, teaches selecting a next queue in an ordered plurality of queues for dequeuing packets responsive to a packet virtual time comparison above (scheduler module 253 is configured to… select a next packet for transmission, and to dequeue the selected next packet(s) – Dumitrescu ¶0042; scheduler 253 is configured to monitor time advancement that may be utilized by credit logic… configured to update credits based, at least in part, on time, e.g., a duration of a time interval since a last update – Dumitrescu ¶0101; scheduler 253 may be configured to align its internal time reference… aligning the scheduler time reference with the network interface time – Dumitrescu ¶0102; scheduler 253 is configured to utilize a scheduling hierarchy… and credit logic in order to make a scheduling decision – Dumitrescu ¶0106; as the credit logic adds credits based on elapsed time and only executes when there is enough credit, the process is broadly responsive to the time comparison as claimed) and updating the current global virtual time (scheduler 253 is configured to read a current time in response to each dequeue invocation – Dumitrescu ¶0103; if NIC time is in the past… NIC time 262 should be adjusted by setting it to the current processor time 263 – Dumitrescu ¶0104). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the disclosure of Chiussi to comprise the selecting and updating limitations as claimed, in order to provide relatively high traffic metering accuracy for both relatively low and high bandwidth packet flows (Dumitrescu ¶0030).
Chiussi and Dumitrescu do not teach updating the current global virtual time based on a packet virtual time associated with the dequeued first packet. Le Pallec, however, in the same field of endeavor, teaches updating the current global time [as represented by the local copy of the global time] based on a time contained in a packet (synchronization control module 43 performs… capturing the message reception time… processing the time stamps contained in the message to update an offset estimation of the local clock with respect to the master clock… if the offset estimation satisfies an adjustment condition, adjusting the local clock as a function of the newly estimated offset – Le Pallec ¶0065). It would have been further obvious to modify the teachings of Chiussi and Dumitrescu to comprise the updating limitation as claimed, in order to meet stringent accuracy requirements in wireless networks (Le Pallec ¶0003).
Regarding claim 2, Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec teach comprising:
responsive to determining that the packet virtual time associated with the dequeued first packet is greater than the current global virtual time (if NIC time is in the past… NIC time 262 should be adjusted by setting it to the current processor time 263 – Dumitrescu ¶0104), updating the current global virtual time to the packet virtual time associated with the dequeued first packet (synchronization control module 43 performs… capturing the message reception time… processing the time stamps contained in the message to update an offset estimation of the local clock with respect to the master clock… adjusting the local clock as a function of the newly estimated offset – Le Pallec ¶0065) and
responsive to determining that the packet virtual time associated with the dequeued first packet is not greater than the current global virtual time, refraining from updating the current global virtual time (if NIC time is in the future… NIC time may not be adjusted – Dumitrescu ¶0104).
Regarding claim 6, Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec teach further comprising: determining the packet virtual time associated with the next packet by computing the virtual time of the next packet based on the packet virtual time associated with the dequeued first packet (scheduler 253 is configured to monitor time advancement that may be utilized by credit logic… when a packet is scheduled for transmission, the time is incremented with (n+h), where n is the packet length in bytes and h is the number of framing overhead bytes per packet – Dumitrescu ¶0101), a configured weight for the sub-queue (if the available traffic shaping token bucket credits… are greater than or equal to the packet credits, the current packet may be scheduled for transmission at operation 922… a weighted round robin (WRR) queue token accumulator may be updated at operation 924 – Dumitrescu ¶0082), and a size of the dequeued first packet (the queue token accumulator may be incremented by an amount… corresponding to the packet length. A next queue within the current pipe and current traffic class may be selected at operation 926 – Dumitrescu ¶0082).
Regarding claim 7, Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec teach further comprising: determining the packet virtual time associated with the next packet by reading a virtual time from metadata associated with the dequeued first packet (the eligibility of flow timestamp Flk at time tl,dk determines the value of an “eligibility flag” EFl associated with the flow – Chiussi ¶0052).
Regarding claim 8, Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec teach wherein selecting the next sub-queue in the ordered plurality of sub-queues is based on a sequence of non-empty sub-queues of the plurality of sub-queues (a shaped flow 22-1 through 22-R is classified as either “virtually compliant” or “virtually incompliant” when a new packet reaches the head of its queue… if the test for compliance is successful, the flow is classified as “virtually compliant” and the scheduler is enabled to select it for service at any time – Chiussi ¶0043; as selection is based on the received head packet for each and every queue, each of said queues is non-empty, so selection is based on “a sequence of non-empty sub-queues” as claimed).
Regarding claim 9, Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec teach further comprising determining the virtual time associated with the respective packet based on at least one of: a packet virtual time associated with a previous packet in the same sub-queue (a server uses this global function to compute a “finishing virtual time”, also referred to as a “timestamp”, for each packet in the associated system – Chiussi ¶0005; MSS 20 must use the previous timestamp… in the computation of the new timestamp – Chiussi ¶0067; as the claim limitations are recited as a list of alternatives, the prior art only needs to disclose one of the listed alternatives, where at least “a packet virtual time associated with a previous packet in the same sub-queue” is disclosed); a configured weight for the sub-queue; a size of the previous packet; a size of the respective packet; and the current global virtual time.
Regarding claim 10, Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec teach wherein the virtual time associated with the respective packet comprises one of: a start time, wherein the current sub-queue virtual time corresponds to a tail of the most recently enqueued packet in the sub-queue; and a finish time which indicates the current sub-queue virtual time corresponding to the tail of the most recently enqueued packet in the sub-queue plus a length of the respective packet (when a packet is scheduled for transmission, the time is incremented with (n+h), where n is the packet length in bytes and h is the number of framing overhead bytes per packet – Dumitrescu ¶0101; as the claim limitations are recited as a list of alternatives, the prior art only needs to disclose one of the listed alternatives, where at least “a finish time” as claimed is disclosed).
Regarding claim 11, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 1, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Regarding claim 12, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 2, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Regarding claim 16, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 6, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Regarding claim 17, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 7, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Regarding claim 18, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 9, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Regarding claim 19, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 10, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Regarding claim 20, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 1, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Claims 3-4, 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiussi in view of Dumitrescu and Le Pallec as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Acharya et al. (US 2014/0161135, hereinafter Acharya).
Regarding claim 3, Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec teach wherein the method further comprises:
responsive to determining that the packet virtual time associated with the dequeued first packet is greater than a certain time, updating said certain time to the packet virtual time associated with the dequeued first packet (if NIC time is in the past… NIC time 262 should be adjusted by setting it to the current processor time 263 – Dumitrescu ¶0104); and
responsive to determining that the packet virtual time associated with the dequeued first packet is not greater than said certain time, refraining from updating said certain time (if NIC time is in the future… NIC time may not be adjusted – Dumitrescu ¶0104).
Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec do not teach wherein a virtual dequeue time tracks a greatest virtual time indicated by packet virtual times of all packets dequeued in a single cycle of dequeuing packets from each of the ordered plurality of sub-queues, and where the virtual dequeue time is updated or not updated as claimed. Acharya, however, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein a virtual dequeue time tracks a greatest virtual time indicated by packet virtual times of all packets dequeued in a single cycle of dequeuing packets from each of the ordered plurality of sub-queues (each packet has an arrival timestamp, and a virtual output queue having the oldest timestamp is selected first to dequeue – Acharya Abstract; knowing which packet out of all the packets in all the queues is the oldest timestamp means that the “greatest virtual time” is tracked as claimed), and where the time is updated or not depending on whether or not the packet time is greater or not greater as claimed (the output port associated with these virtual output queues may generate a message that instructs the inputs to dequeue packets older than a certain timestamp value… the clocks of the various inputs are synchronized, and the oldest timestamp is selected – Acharya ¶0056). It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec to comprise the tracking and determining limitations as claimed, in order to solve the problem of buffer bloat, increased latency, and jitter (Acharya ¶0003).
Regarding claim 4, Chiussi, Dumitrescu, Le Pallec, and Acharya teach further comprising: responsive to completing the single cycle of dequeuing packets from each of the ordered plurality of sub-queues or responsive to a predetermined number of packets being dequeued from the ordered plurality of sub-queues, setting the current global virtual time to the virtual dequeue time (the output port associated with these virtual output queues may generate a message that instructs the inputs to dequeue packets older than a certain timestamp value… the clocks of the various inputs are synchronized, and the oldest timestamp is selected – Acharya ¶0056; as the claim limitations are recited as a list of alternatives, the prior art only needs to disclose one of the listed alternatives, where at least setting the time “responsive to completing the single cycle” is disclosed).
Regarding claim 13, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 3, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Regarding claim 14, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 4, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Claims 5, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiussi in view of Dumitrescu and Le Pallec as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Singh et al. (US 2019/0199646, hereinafter Singh).
Regarding claim 5, Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec teach further comprising: determining the packet virtual time associated with the next packet (the eligibility of flow timestamp Flk at time tl,dk determines the value of an “eligibility flag” EFl associated with the flow – Chiussi ¶0052).
Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec do not teach determining the packet virtual time associated with the next packet by extracting information from a service tag of the next packet to be dequeued in the currently selected sub-queue. Singh, however, in the same field of endeavor, teaches extracting information from a service tag of the next packet to be dequeued in the currently selected sub-queue (scheduling instance 308-0 can indicate in metadata that packet is transmission ready or a candidate for transmission in a next time slot or dropped – Singh ¶0033; at 424, bandwidth credits are allocated to user packets… packet metadata is updated with time stamp value and status indicator indicating packets being ready for next stage (e.g., transmission, wait for next time stamp/round, or drop) – Singh ¶0052; packet dequeue 510 scans the shared rings to select the packets which are marked for the transmission… 510 can apply a policy to allocate and potentially re-distribute traffic bandwidth… the policy for the bandwidth adjustment can use a filter-based approach – Singh ¶0067). It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the prior art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Chiussi, Dumitrescu, and Le Pallec to comprise the next packet tag limitation as claimed, in order to solve the problem of congestion management strategies uniformly dropping packets for all traffic classes regardless of the traffic sensitivity (Singh ¶0017).
Regarding claim 15, the instant claim is directed towards a substantially similar invention as recited in claim 5, and is thus rejected for substantially similar reasons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEON Y TSENG whose telephone number is (571)270-3682. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM MST, with every other Friday off.
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, WING CHAN can be reached at 571-272-7493. 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.
/LEON Y TSENG/Examiner, Art Unit 2441
/JOHN A FOLLANSBEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights