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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/27/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 9-12, 14-15 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hafeez et al. (US 2022/0166679 A1), in view of Whipple et al. (US 10,735,270 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Hafeez, discloses a fabric (computer network) designer system (Hafeez, figs. 2 - 4, [Abstract; 0023;0059] a system for designing a computer network) comprising:
processing circuitry (Hafeez, [0023] discloses a system comprising a processor configured to execute instructions stored on and/or provided by a memory coupled to the processor); and
a memory comprising instructions that when executed by the processing circuitry cause the processing circuitry to (Hafeez, [0023] discloses a system comprising a processor configured to execute instructions stored on and/or provided by a memory coupled to the processor):
generate (creating) data representative (model/template [figs. 1, 3 & 5, 0007;0064;0088]) of a user interface (UI) (fig. 5, 502) for display on a display device (Management server 102), (Hafeez, fig. 1, [0007; 0064; 0088] discloses a user interface 502 of a management server 102 used for creating a new connectivity template. User interface 502 shown in FIG. 5 is utilized in 304 of FIG. 3 to build the new connectivity template. User interface region 504 lists existing connectivity templates (including primitives) that are to be utilized in building the new connectivity template);
the data representative (Template/model) of the UI (502) comprising UI elements (computing infrastructure elements) representing one or more (server, switch, interface) fabric design (computer network) requirements (declarative requirements) (Hafeez, figs. 5-7, [0033; 0059] discloses in a user interface 502 displaying at least a portion of a computing infrastructure to implement declarative requirements represented as a template/graph model representative of computing infrastructure elements including computing infrastructure nodes and computing infrastructure edges. Data associated with each node of the graph representation include: an identifier, a node type (e.g., server, switch, interface, rule, policy, etc.));
receive (selecting), via the UI (502) on the display device (102), an indication (indication/selection of one or more devices) of a user input selecting one or more of the UI elements representing the one or more (user selection of one or more devices) fabric design requirements (declarative requirements of a computer network) (Hafeez, figs. 3-7, [0074; 0111] at step 306, an indication of an application of the connectivity template on the physical design of the computer network is received via the user interface 502, and the indicated application is implemented. A user indicates where the connectivity template is to be applied to on the physical design of the computer network. For example, via a graphical user interface, the user selects one or more devices and/or application points of the devices in the design where the connection is to be applied).
Hafeez did not explicitly disclose generate a model for a data center fabric, wherein the model comprises an architecture of the data center fabric comprising an arrangement of one or more network devices and one or more connections selected from a catalog of network devices and connections based on the one or more fabric design requirements; and generate UI elements representing the model for the data center fabric and fabric design specifications of the data center fabric for display on the display device.
Whipple discloses generate a model (Generate a model of an architecture or topology) for a data center fabric (Col. 9, lines 34 -41, Network 120/datacenter), wherein the model comprises an architecture of the data center fabric comprising an arrangement of one or more network devices (respective node and link connection) and one or more connections selected from a catalog (device library -124/224/policy defining device connection protocols for each link) of network devices and connections based on the one or more fabric design requirements (policy defining device connection protocols for each link) (Whipple, figs. 1 &2, col. 11, lines 40 – 54, and col. 20, line 49 – col. 21, line 1, a user, such as, e.g., a network administrator, architect, or other user designing a network, may select devices for a network from a device library (124/224) to design an architecture for a network including, e.g., device hardware, software, platform, version, vendor, and other characteristics, as well as links and device representations. Based on devices selected from the device library (124/224), a graph builder/constructor (104/204) generate a model of an architecture or topology of the network 120. Because the device representations include details as to a respective node, each link to another node and a policy defining device connection protocols for each link, the collection of normalized configurations can be assembled into a detailed map or model of each node and each link between nodes in the network 120/datacenter. The model of the network 120 reflects a static map of nodes, links and/or policies across the network 120 based on the devices from which configurations were collected), and
generate UI elements (fig. 6 - displaying screen – 606 & 607) representing the model for the data center fabric and fabric design specifications of the data center fabric for display on the display device (Whipple, figs. 5 & 6, col. 7, lines 42-49, discloses the ability to display the final output of a static network/datacenter model on a programmed graphical user interface such as a screen of a computer. In col. 34, line 24-45, a static network/datacenter model may be updated by an administrator through a display screen such that, configured aggregate routes may be modelled against advertised aggregate routes to determine where a configured aggregate route is missing from the routing advertisements. Using the display screen, the administrator may then manually remove sleeping aggregates from the associated configurations. Col. 40, lines 27-33 - display a topological state visualization).
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Hafeez and Whipple because these teachings are from the same field of endeavor with respect to the design of models that represent connectivity of network elements of a desired data center topology.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Hafeez with the teachings of Whipple to enable a live map of a network to be generated based on the status of each device. Configuration errors and network errors are determined based at least in part on the static network map and the live map, and routing errors are determined based at least in part on a comparison between protocol prefixes and predetermined network invariants, Whipple, [Abstract].
Regarding claim 2, Hafeez modified by Whipple disclose the fabric designer system of claim 1, wherein the fabric design specifications (requirements/constraints) of the data center fabric (requirements/constraints for designing a data center fabric) comprise a bill of materials (list of components required to design a data center fabric – [0059] - network pod, rack, spine node, leaf node (e.g., router, switch, server, firewall, load balancer, etc.) (Hafeez, figs. 5 & 11, [0059; 0088; 0111], the user interface region 504 lists existing connectivity templates (including primitives) that are to be utilized in building the new connectivity template. User interface region 506 shows a graphical flow visualization of the component connectivity templates used to build the new template as well as their ordering of application and relationship between each other. User interface region 508 shows input fields where the user is able to input configuration parameters for the component connectivity templates. At 1104, implicit and explicit constraints associated with the existing computer network are received. Implicit constraints are based on and inherent to a reference network type, while explicit constraints are user specified constraints. At 302, Hafeez discloses a bill of materials which include physical network devices (e.g., network pod, rack, spine node, leaf node (e.g., router, switch, server, firewall, load balancer, etc.) and interfaces and subinterfaces of devices, etc.).
The motivation to combine is similar to that of claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Hafeez modified by Whipple disclose the fabric designer system of claim 1, wherein the fabric design specifications of the data center fabric comprise a diagram of the architecture of the data center fabric (Col. 9, lines 34 -41, Network 120/datacenter) (Whipple, col. 11, lines 41-65, discloses a data collector 102, collecting information on each network/datacenter device reflecting a static map of nodes, links, connectivity between the nodes and/or policies across the network architecture into a model that conforms a schema or diagram describing the devices and their relationships).
The motivation to combine is similar to that of claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, Hafeez modified by Whipple disclose the fabric designer system of claim 1, wherein to receive the indication of the user input selecting one or more of the UI elements representing the one or more fabric design requirements, the instructions cause the processing circuitry (Hafeez, figs. 5-7, [0023;0030;0088] discloses a processor configured to execute instructions stored on and/or provided by a memory coupled to the processor. Based on declarative and imperative requirements, the processor selects network elements using a user interface 502 displaying in region 504 a list of items in a catalog from which networking elements may be selected and used to generate a new connectivity template 506 for a desired network) to:
receive the indication of the user input via an application programming interface (API) (Hafeez, [0032; 0037; 0048] management server 102 facilitates interactions with users to receive and provide desired requirements, specifications, and status updates. For example, a user utilizes a user interface (e.g., web interface, application interface, command line interface, graphical interface, application programming interface (API), configuration file interface, etc. Management server 102 selects processing agents among a plurality of processing agents (e.g., triggered by patterns matching at least a portion of a graph representation) to achieve/complete a desired network requirement. Agents are accessed by a user via an API (e.g., RESTful API). For example, HTTP methods (e.g., GET, PUT, POST, DELETE, etc.) may be utilized to access and manage information via the API. URIs may be utilized to reference state and resources).
The motivation to combine is similar to that of claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, Hafeez modified by Whipple disclose the fabric designer system of claim 1, wherein to generate the model for the data center fabric, the one or more instructions (policy defining device connection protocols for each link) cause the processing circuitry to: (Whipple, figs. 1 &2, col. 11, lines 40 – 54, and col. 20, lines 49 – 55, Based on devices selected from a device library (124/224) by a user, such as, e.g., a network administrator, architect, or other user designing a network, a graph builder/constructor (104/204) generate a model of an architecture or topology of the network 120. Because the device representations include details as to a respective node, each link to another node and a policy defining device connection protocols for each link, the collection of normalized configurations can be assembled into a detailed map or model of each node and each link between nodes in the network 120/datacenter. The model of the network 120 reflects a static map of nodes, links and/or policies across the network 120 based on the devices from which configurations were collected):
apply one or more rules to select the one or more network devices and the one or more connections from the catalog of network devices and connections (Whipple, figs. 1 &2, col. 11, lines 40 – 54, col. 14, lines 25-52, and col. 20, lines 49 – 64, a user, such as, e.g., a network administrator, architect, or other user designing a network, may select devices for a network from a device library (124/224) to design an architecture for a network including, e.g., device hardware, software, platform, version, vendor, and other characteristics, as well as links and device representations. Based on devices selected from the device library (124/224), a graph builder/constructor (104/204) generate a model of an architecture or topology of the network 120. Because the device representations include details as to a respective node, each link to another node and a policy defining device connection protocols for each link, the collection of normalized configurations can be assembled into a detailed map or model of each node and each link between nodes in the network 120/datacenter. The model of the network 120 reflects a static map of nodes, links and/or policies across the network 120 based on the devices from which configurations were collected).
The motivation to combine is similar to that of claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, Hafeez modified by Whipple disclose the fabric designer system of claim 6, wherein the one or more rules comprise a rule to override the (modify requirements/primitives/existing templates) one or more network devices (requirements/primitives) or one or the more connections selected for the data center fabric (Hafeez [0079] when an existing connectivity template is modified, instances where the connectivity template was applied are updated/overwritten to implement the new modification. This allows primitives that have applied in multiples to be centrally managed/overwritten at the template level. A user is able to make a change to an existing connectivity template and the change is automatically implemented at the application points where the template was previously applied. This allows the user change to be automatically propagated without requiring the user to reapply the change template to all of the appropriate application points).
The motivation to combine is similar to that of claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, Hafeez modified by Whipple disclose the fabric designer system of claim 1, wherein the architecture of the datacenter fabric comprises (Hafeez [0108] discloses a graph model schema for a typical leaf-spine datacenter network architecture):
a multi-stage (Spine and leaf nodes) fabric architecture of the data center fabric (Hafeez [0033;0059] at step 302, a specification of a physical design of a computer network is received. The physical design of the computer network specifies physical connections between one or more physical network devices (e.g., network pod, rack, spine node, leaf node (e.g., router, switch, server, firewall, load balancer, etc.) and interfaces and subinterfaces of devices, etc.). [0039] different stages/levels of the data center topology model may define different levels of processing. One processing stage/level may determine a logical connectivity in its output declarative requirements, another processing stage/level may determine physical connectivity in its output declarative requirements, and another processing stage/level may determine a cabling diagram in its output declarative requirements).
The motivation to combine is similar to that of claim 1.
Regarding claim(s) 11-12,14-15 and 18-19, the claim(s) are rejected with rational similar to claim(s) 1,2,5-6 and 9-10, respectively.
Regarding claim 20, Hafeez discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage media (fig. 1, 102 &104) comprising instructions that, when executed by processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to (Hafeez, fig. 1, [0023], discloses a system comprising a processor configured to execute instructions stored on and/or provided by a non-transitory computer memory coupled to the processor):
The rest of the limitations of claim 20 are rejected with rational similar to that of claim 1.
Claim(s) 4 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over unpatentable over Hafeez et al. (US 2022/0166679 A1), in view of Whipple et al. (US 10,735,270 B1), further in view of Tsui et al. (US 2005/0283348 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Hafeez modified by Whipple disclose the fabric designer system of claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the processing circuitry to (Hafeez, [0023] discloses a system comprising a processor configured to execute instructions stored on and/or provided by a memory coupled to the processor):
Hafeez modified by Whipple did not explicitly disclose export the fabric design specifications.
Tsui discloses export the fabric design specifications (Tsui, [0039 & 0041-0042] discloses a data center model 210 that is exported to create Data center model clone 220 by importing into Data center simulator 230 simulation environment)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Hafeez, Whipple and Tsui because these teachings are from the same field of endeavor with respect to the construction of a data network that satisfies a predetermined criteria.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Hafeez modified by Whipple with the teachings of Tsui to enable the system to perform off-line trouble-shooting of system problems in the environment provided by the framework. Thus, the shutdown may be totally avoided or minimized by exporting Data center model 210 to create Data center model clone 220 by importing into Data center simulator 230 simulation environment. The problem may then be reproduced in Data center simulator 230 and trouble-shooting can be carried out in the simulation environment instead of in the live system, Tsui, [0042].
Regarding claim 13, the claim is rejected with rational similar to that of claim 4.
Claim(s) 7 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hafeez et al. (US 2022/0166679 A1), in view of Whipple et al. (US 10,735,270 B1), further in view of Sobhani et al. (US 11,765,041 B1).
Regarding claim 7, Hafeez modified by Whipple disclose the fabric designer system of claim 6, but did not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more rules comprise a rule to select the one or more network devices based on a radix of the one or more network devices.
Sobhani discloses wherein the one or more rules (criteria for selecting a source and destination group of nodes/devices/switches) comprise a rule to select (criteria for selecting a source and destination group of nodes/devices/switches for creating a Radix topology) the one or more network devices based on a radix (radix topology) of the one or more network devices (Sobhani, Col. 1, line 50 – col. 2, line 27, discloses criteria for selecting a source and a destination group of nodes to be used in the construction and implementation of a network topology for a high radix network, nodes of the network topology corresponding to high radix switches of the high radix network. Col. 10, lines 31-39, the selection of the number of groups (group of nodes/switches) may be determined based on a predefined/rule/constraint and configuration parameters of the network, such as the number of servers (or end points) to be connected by switches, the radix (i.e., number of available ports) of the switches, and the server port ratio (i.e., the ratio representing what proportion of switch ports should be connected to servers as opposed to other network connections). Each of these parameters may be predefined by a user and/or predefined based on real-world requirements).
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Hafeez, Whipple and Sobhani because these teachings are from the same field of endeavor with respect to the construction of a data network that satisfies a predetermined criteria.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Hafeez and Whipple with the teachings of Sobhani in order to elevate the complexity of connection between switches of a high radix network topology in the real-world, Sobhani, col. 1, lines 42-47.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is rejected with rational similar to that of claim 7.
Claim(s) 8 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hafeez et al. (US 2022/0166679 A1), in view of Whipple et al. (US 10,735,270 B1), further in view of Clemons et al (US 2023/0111375 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Hafeez modified by Whipple disclose the fabric designer system of claim 6, but did not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more rules comprise a rule to select the one or more network devices based on cost requirements.
Clemons discloses wherein the one or more rules (rule to reduce the overall cost of a neural network) comprise a rule to select (selecting configuration, removing input channels/nodes) the one or more network devices based on cost requirements (overall cost reduction requirement) (Clemons [0038; 0048; 0062] discloses a technique for selecting network devices and settings to achieve a reduction of an overall cost in the implementation of neural network model 110. To a achieve a reduction of the overall cost implementation of the neural network model 110, an execution graph of the augmented neural network model 110 is modified compared with the execution graph of the original neural network model to reduce the overall cost of executing the augmented neural network model 110. The modification of the augmented neural network model 110 may be to reconfigure the network by the selected configuration settings to bypass or avoid a layer computation (replace the layer with an identity layer), remove input channels to a layer, where each I/O channel is comprised of one or more intermediate devices).
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Hafeez, Whipple and Clemons because these teachings are from the same field of endeavor with respect to the construction of a data network that satisfies a predetermined criteria.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Hafeez and Whipple with the teachings of Clemons in order to enable dynamic configuration of the augmented neural network model to adapt to real-time changes in the performance constraints, Clemons, [Abstract].
Regarding claim 17, the claim is rejected with rational similar to that of claim 8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following publications show the state of the art related to the generation of data network models for implementing predefined requirements of a network.
Gous et al. (US 2006/0174154 A1)
A et al. (US 10,516,761 B1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIXON F DABIPI whose telephone number is (571)270-3673. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher L Parry, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-8328. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/D.F.D/ Examiner, Art Unit 2451
/Chris Parry/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2451