DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
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 1-3, 5-10, 12-15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gandhi et al. (US 20220286395 A1), hereinafter “Gandhi”, in view of Xie et al. (“BGP-LS with Multi-topology for Segment Routing based Virtual Transport Networks draft xie-idr-bgpls-sr-vtn-mt-02”), hereinafter “Xie”.
Per claim 1, 8, 13 and 17:
Regarding claim 13, Gandhi teaches ‘A network device’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [FIG.1A]: “PACKET SWITCHING DEVICE”); ‘comprising: a memory configured to store instructions’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [FIG.1B]: “Memory (INSTRUCTIONS”); ‘at least one processor’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [FIG.1B]: “PROCESSING ELELMENTS”; [Page 33]: “apparatus 120 includes one or more processor(s)”); ‘coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to cause the network device to’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 33]: “The operation of apparatus 120 is typically controlled by processor(s) 121 using memory 122 and storage device(s) 123 to perform one or more tasks or processes”);
‘generate an advertisement message comprising a first identifier of a network slice and path information of one or more paths in the network slice’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 13]: “1. Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions (e.g., uSID(s)) for data plane are allocated on each hop along the packet path to realize end-to-end network slices and their associated slice Identifiers. 2. Slice profile is used by the node to provide resource allocation, scheduling/queuing, security, privacy, isolation, and other packet forwarding treatment in data plane specific to each network slice.… 4. Node advertises the Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions and their network slice identifiers”, network device would generate advertisement message about network slice identifier and path information);
‘send, to a controller, the advertisement message’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 13]: “Node advertises the Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions and their network slice identifiers”; [Page 17]: “SDN Controller”). However, Gandhi fails to expressly teach send the advertisement message to the controller.
However, Xie in the same field of endeavor teaches network devices advertise resource-aware SID identifying the network resources available on data plane to controller to enhance VPN for 5G network slicing (Xie: [Page 3]: “introduces resource awareness to Segment Routing (SR) [RFC8402], by associating existing type of SIDs with network resource attributes … When a centralized network controller is used for VTN-specific path computation, especially when a VTN spans multiple IGP areas or multiple Autonomous Systems (ASes), BGP-LS is needed to advertise the VTN information in each IGP area or AS to the network controller”; [Page 2]: “require integration between the overlay connectivity and the characteristics provided by the underlay networks … An enhanced VPN can be used for 5G network slicing”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Xie’s teaching with that of Gandhi for network device to send advertisement message to controller in order to enhance VPN for 5G network slicing (see reference quotes in element above).
Regarding claim 17, Gandhi teaches ‘A controller’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 17]: “Controller”); ‘comprising: a memory configured to store instructions’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [FIG.1B]: “Memory (INSTRUCTIONS”); ‘at least one processor’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [FIG.1B]: “PROCESSING ELELMENTS”; [Page 33]: “apparatus 120 includes one or more processor(s)”); ‘coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to cause the controller to’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 33]: “The operation of apparatus 120 is typically controlled by processor(s) 121 using memory 122 and storage device(s) 123 to perform one or more tasks or processes”);
‘receive, from a network device, an advertisement message comprising a first identifier of a network slice and path information of one or more paths in the network slice’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 13]: “1. Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions (e.g., uSID(s)) for data plane are allocated on each hop along the packet path to realize end-to-end network slices and their associated slice Identifiers. 2. Slice profile is used by the node to provide resource allocation, scheduling/queuing, security, privacy, isolation, and other packet forwarding treatment in data plane specific to each network slice.… 4. Node advertises the Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions and their network slice identifiers”, network device would send advertisement message about network slice identifier and path information). However, Gandhi fails to expressly teach network device sends the advertisement message to the controller;
‘control, based on the first identifier and the path information, a message forwarding path’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 17]: SDN Controller configures network devices; [Page 13]: “SDN controller provisions the node with Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions and their network slice identifiers”; [Page 26]: “Slice-aware Path Computation”, controller computes and configures a message forwarding path based on slice ID and path information).
However, Xie in the same field of endeavor teaches network devices advertise resource-aware SID identifying the network resources available on data plane to controller to enhance VPN for 5G network slicing (Xie: [Page 3]: “introduces resource awareness to Segment Routing (SR) [RFC8402], by associating existing type of SIDs with network resource attributes … When a centralized network controller is used for VTN-specific path computation, especially when a VTN spans multiple IGP areas or multiple Autonomous Systems (ASes), BGP-LS is needed to advertise the VTN information in each IGP area or AS to the network controller”; [Page 2]: “require integration between the overlay connectivity and the characteristics provided by the underlay networks … An enhanced VPN can be used for 5G network slicing”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Xie’s teaching with that of Gandhi for network device to send advertisement message to controller in order to enhance VPN for 5G network slicing (see reference quotes in element above).
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites the method implemented by the network device of claim 13 (see rejection of claim 13 above).
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 recites the method implemented by the controller of claim 17 (see rejection of claim 17 above).
Per claim 2, 9, 14 and 18:
Regarding claim 14, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the network device of claim 13 (discussed above).
Gandhi teaches ‘wherein the advertisement message is a Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)-Link State (LS) message’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 13]: “Node advertises the Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions and their network slice identifiers”; [Page 26]: “Proposed scheme allows to identify the network slice ID for each link (via IGP/BGP-LS flooding”).
Regarding claim 18, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the controller of claim 17 (discussed above).
Gandhi teaches ‘wherein the advertisement message is a Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)-Link State (LS) message’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 13]: “Node advertises the Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions and their network slice identifiers”; [Page 26]: “Proposed scheme allows to identify the network slice ID for each link (via IGP/BGP-LS flooding”).
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 recites the method implemented by the network device of claim 14 (see rejection of claim 14 above).
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 recites the method implemented by the controller of claim 18 (see rejection of claim 18 above).
Per claim 3, 10 and 15:
Regarding claim 15, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the network device of claim 14 (discussed above).
Gandhi teaches ‘wherein the first identifier is carried in a segment routing (SR) policy candidate path descriptor type-length-value (TLV) of the BGP-LS message’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 15]: “Per-Hop Behavior SRv6 uSID Instructions for methods: 1a) IGP Flood Record TLV”; “Slice ID”; [Page 26]: “identify the network slice ID for each link (via IGP/BGP-LS flooding”).
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 recites the method implemented by the network device of claim 15 (see rejection of claim 15 above).
Regarding claim 10, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the method of claim 9 (discussed above).
Gandhi teaches ‘wherein the first identifier is carried in a segment routing (SR) policy candidate path descriptor type-length-value (TLV) of the BGP-LS message’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 15]: “Per-Hop Behavior SRv6 uSID Instructions for methods: 1a) IGP Flood Record TLV”; “Slice ID”; [Page 26]: “identify the network slice ID for each link (via IGP/BGP-LS flooding”).
Per claim 5 and 12:
Regarding claim 5, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the method of claim 1 (discussed above).
Gandhi teaches ‘wherein the path information comprises a segment identifier (SID) list corresponding to the one or more paths’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 10]: “SRv6: Segment Routing using 1Pv6 data plane … An SRv6 segment: • is represented as a 128-bit SID address … Segment-list”; [Page 28]: “Network slices may use certain Flex-Alga paths for the data packets”; [Page 12]: “SRv6 SID of format … A uSID container can be encoded in the Destination Address of an IPv6 header or at any position in the Segment List”; [Page 1]: “Packets are typically forwarded in a network based on one or more values representing network nodes or paths”).
Regarding claim 12, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the method of claim 8 (discussed above).
Gandhi teaches ‘wherein the path information comprises a segment identifier (SID) list corresponding to the one or more paths’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 10]: “SRv6: Segment Routing using 1Pv6 data plane … An SRv6 segment: • is represented as a 128-bit SID address … Segment-list”; [Page 28]: “Network slices may use certain Flex-Alga paths for the data packets”; [Page 12]: “SRv6 SID of format … A uSID container can be encoded in the Destination Address of an IPv6 header or at any position in the Segment List”; [Page 1]: “Packets are typically forwarded in a network based on one or more values representing network nodes or paths”).
Regarding claim 6, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the method of claim 5 (discussed above).
Gandhi teaches ‘wherein the path information further comprises status information of the one or more paths’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 13]: “Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions (e.g., uSID(s)) for data plane are allocated on each hop along the packet path to realize end-to-end network slices and their associated slice Identifiers. 2. Slice profile is used by the node to provide resource allocation, scheduling/queuing, security, privacy, isolation, and other packet forwarding treatment in data plane specific to each network slice”; [Page 8]: “A network slice typically defines connectivity resource requirements and associated network behaviors such as bandwidth, latency, jitter, packet loss, availability, security, and network functions with other resource behaviors such as compute and storage availability”; [Page 26]: “resources allocated include link bandwidth capacity, hardware queues/TCAMs/Memory (e.g., low latency)”; [Page 28]: “Flex-Alga is used to route the data packets on a minimum IGP cost or lowest latency paths in a network … Network slices may use certain Flex-Algo paths for the data packets”; [Page 29]: “Using Per-Hop SRv6 uSID instructions in the data packet for forwarding treatment … Proposed scheme enables per-slice CSPF (Constrained Shortest Path First) Path Computation, Performance Monitoring, etc. using Per-Hop instruction mapped slice identifier”; [Page 30]: “The mechanism uses Per-Hop Behavior SRv6 uSID Instructions and slice identifiers along with associated slice profiles for each link along the path for ensuring the network wide consistent treatment for each end-to-end network slice … The packet treatment may include using low latency queuing, rate limiting, security-level, privacy, storage-function, service function chaining”; path information include status information of the paths).
Regarding claim 7, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the method of claim 6 (discussed above).
Gandhi teaches ‘one or more of: traffic statistics information’ (this is optional), ‘network performance information’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 27]: “Slice-aware Performance Measurement … end-to-end performance can be measured for each network slice”), ‘or connectivity information’ (this is optional).
Claims 4, 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combination of Gandhi and Xie, in view of Sun et al. (US 20220045944 A1), hereinafter “Sun”.
Per claim 4, 11 and 16:
Regarding claim 16, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the network device of claim 15 (discussed above).
Combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches ‘wherein the first identifier is further carried in a sub-TLV of the SR policy candidate path descriptor TLV, wherein the sub-TLV comprises a slice identifier (ID) field, and wherein the slice ID field stores the first identifier’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 15]: “Per-Hop Behavior SRv6 uSID Instructions for methods: 1a) IGP Flood Record TLV”, “Slice ID”. Xie: [Page 5]: “sub-TLV is carried in the BGP-LS attribute associated with the Link NLRI of a VTN”). However, combination of Gandhi and Xie fails to expressly teach sub-TLV includes a slice ID.
However, Sun in the same field of endeavor teaches Slice Prefix-SID sub-TLV includes a Slice-ID field to carry Slice ID (Sun: [FIG.6]: “Prefix-SID sub-TLV”, “Slice-ID”; [0005]: “A network device determines a forwarding path for the service data according to network resource configuration information of the designated network and a network slice of the service data … a network slice associated with a network resource of the determined forwarding path matches the network slice of the service data; and the network device forwards the service data according to the forwarding path”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sun’s teaching with that of combination of Gandhi and Xie for network device to include a sub-TLV of the SR policy candidate path descriptor TLV to carry the Slice ID in order to forward service data by matching the network slice of the service data (see reference quotes in element above).
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 recites the method implemented by the network device of claim 15 (see rejection of claim 16 above).
Regarding claim 11, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the method of claim 10 (discussed above).
Combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches ‘wherein the first identifier is further carried in a sub-TLV of the SR policy candidate path descriptor TLV, wherein the sub-TLV comprises a slice identifier (ID) field, and wherein the slice ID field stores the first identifier’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 15]: “Per-Hop Behavior SRv6 uSID Instructions for methods: 1a) IGP Flood Record TLV”, “Slice ID”. Xie: [Page 5]: “sub-TLV is carried in the BGP-LS attribute associated with the Link NLRI of a VTN”). However, combination of Gandhi and Xie fails to expressly teach sub-TLV includes a slice ID.
However, Sun teaches Slice Prefix-SID sub-TLV includes a Slice-ID field to carry Slice ID (Sun: [FIG.6]: “Prefix-SID sub-TLV”, “Slice-ID”; [0005]: “A network device determines a forwarding path for the service data according to network resource configuration information of the designated network and a network slice of the service data … a network slice associated with a network resource of the determined forwarding path matches the network slice of the service data; and the network device forwards the service data according to the forwarding path”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sun’s teaching with that of combination of Gandhi and Xie for network device to include a sub-TLV of the SR policy candidate path descriptor TLV to carry the Slice ID in order to forward service data by matching the network slice of the service data (see reference quotes in element above).
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combination of Gandhi and Xie, in view of Kim et al. (US 20180205635 A1), hereinafter “Kim”.
Regarding claim 19, combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches the controller of claim 17 (discussed above).
Gandhi teaches ‘obtain a second path in the one or more paths when a first bandwidth utilization rate of a first path in the one or more paths reaches a threshold, wherein the second path is configured to bear traffic forwarded on the first path, and wherein the first path is the message forwarding path’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 26]: “Network Slice Per-Hop Behavior Slice Profile … resources allocated include link bandwidth capacity… Slice-aware Path Computation … Path computation uses the local Per-Hop slice profile for the slice ID to allocate the link capacity per slice • E.g., 20% of link capacity for low-latency slice, 60% of link capacity for high bandwidth slice, 20% for best effort slice”; [Page 28]: “Flex-Alga is used to route the data packets on a minimum IGP cost or lowest latency paths in a network … Ingress Node maps the Network Slice with the Per-Hop-Behavior”; [Page 29]: “Proposed scheme enables per-slice CSPF (Constrained Shortest Path First) Path Computation, Performance Monitoring, etc. using Per-Hop instruction mapped slice identifier”, compute and configure a message forwarding path based on resources such as bandwidth capacity). However, combination of Gandhi and Xie fails to expressly based on bandwidth utilization rate reaches a threshold.
However, Kim in the same field of endeavor teaches select a secondary path if bandwidth utilization rate on current path reaches a threshold (Kim: [0012]: “Setting any one of the shortest path and the secondary path as the access path … checking respective bandwidth utilization rates for multiple candidate network addresses of the object data server, usable as the secondary path, when the bandwidth utilization rate for the first network address is equal to or greater than a threshold; and selecting the access path depending on which one of the first network address and the multiple candidate network addresses has a lowest bandwidth utilization rate”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim’s teaching with that of combination of Gandhi and Xie in order to improve performance by using additional paths as well as the shortest path (Kim: [0007]: “improving maximum file input/output performance for a single data server using additional paths as well as the shortest path”).
Regarding claim 20, combination of Gandhi, Xie and Kim teaches the controller of claim 19 (discussed above).
Combination of Gandhi and Xie teaches ‘wherein the first bandwidth utilization rate is a second bandwidth utilization rate of one or more links on the message forwarding path’ (Gandhi: [PRO 63157810]: [Page 26]: “resources allocated include link bandwidth capacity”; [Page 15]: “Per-Hop Behavior SRv6 uSID Instructions”; [Page 4]: “uSID is one embodiment of a Compressed SID (also referred to as a compact SID)”. Xie: [Page 4]: “The SRv6 End.X SIDs are carried in the BGP-LS Attribute associated with the link NLRI, the MT-ID TLV can be carried in the link descriptor to identify the corresponding topology of the End.X SIDs. The SRv6 SID NLRI is defined to advertise other types of SRv6 SIDs”; [Page 5]: “Maximum Link Bandwidth sub-TLV is carried in the BGP-LS attribute associated with the Link NLRI of a VTN, it indicates the amount of link bandwidth resource”; [Page 5]: “BGP Peer-Adj-SIDs or SRv6 End.X SID”; resources such as bandwidth associated with SRv6 END.X SID about topology with addition to other SRv6 SID). However, combination of Gandhi and Xie fails to expressly teach bandwidth utilization rate is a second bandwidth utilization rate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Xie’s teaching of SRv6 End.X SIDs with that of Gandhi in order to associate bandwidth with End.X SIDs about topology with addition to other SRv6 SIDs (see reference quotes in element above).
Kim teaches bandwidth utilization rate associated with path (Kim: [0012]: “Setting any one of the shortest path and the secondary path as the access path … checking respective bandwidth utilization rates for multiple candidate network addresses of the object data server, usable as the secondary path, when the bandwidth utilization rate for the first network address is equal to or greater than a threshold; and selecting the access path depending on which one of the first network address and the multiple candidate network addresses has a lowest bandwidth utilization rate”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim’s teaching with that of combination of Gandhi and Xie for bandwidth utilization rate to be associated with SRv6 End.X SID (a second bandwidth utilization rate) in addition to other SRv6 SIDs (a first bandwidth utilization rate) in order to associate resources such as bandwidth with topology (Xie: [Page 4]: “The SRv6 End.X SIDs are carried in the BGP-LS Attribute associated with the link NLRI, the MT-ID TLV can be carried in the link descriptor to identify the corresponding topology of the End.X SIDs. The SRv6 SID NLRI is defined to advertise other types of SRv6 SIDs”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20220141095 A1 see [FIG.1]-[FIG.8C], [0006]-[0012]; [0034]-[0053];
US 20220014394 A1 see [FIG.1]-[FIG.6], [0035]-[0072], [0106]-[0164];
US 20170289020 A1 see [FIG.1], [FIG.5]-[FIG.10], [0006]-[0022], [0041]-[0061];
US 20200008067 A1 see [FIG.4], [0010]-[0045];
US 20150304206 A1 see [FIG.9], [0017]-[0067], [0140];
US 20220052945 A1 see [FIG.3a]-[FIG.3b], [0042]-[0046], [0151];
US 20120008503 A1 see [FIG.1], [0009]-[0012], [0056].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUOXING FAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:30pm.
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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571)272-3927. 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.
/G.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2462
/YEMANE MESFIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2462