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
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.
2. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oprea et al. (US 20160344618 A1) in view of Nellen (US 20190141015 A1).
Claim 1 Oprea teaches a system for restricting traffic in a computer network, the system comprising:
a system to extract a routing path of a packet. (FIG. 12, ¶0056, extracting the header from a packet to analyze the routing paths, i.e. extracting the routing paths)
However, Oprea does not explicitly teach a memory; and
a processor to:
determine whether to allow or block the packet based on the routing path.
From a related technology, Nellen teaches a memory; (¶0043, memory) and
a processor (¶0043, processor) to:
determine whether to allow or block the packet based on the routing path. (FIG. 5A, ¶0181, after selection of the routing path the firewall blocking or permitting the routing path)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Oprea to evaluate the packets firewall permissions as taught by Nellen in order to more effectively utilize network resources.
Claim 2 Oprea in view of Nellen teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the routing path defines the physical path of the packet. (Oprea, ¶0228, wherein the network paths are physical)
Claim 3 Oprea in view of Nellen teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the routing path comprises an ordered list of port numbers of network components in the routing path. (Oprea, FIG. 12, ¶0056, extracting the routing path wherein a routing path is an order path of network components and their port numbers)
Claim 4 Oprea in view of Nellen teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the packet is an incoming packet, (Oprea, FIG. 12, ¶0056, wherein a packet is received, i.e. incoming to the receiver) and wherein the routing path is a return path defining a path for a response packet. (Oprea, FIG. 12, ¶0056, wherein the routing path comprises the return path of the response packets)
Claim 5 Oprea in view of Nellen teaches Claim 4, and further teaches wherein the return path is updated by network components along an ongoing path of the packet. (Oprea, ¶0066, wherein the topology computing the paths is updated by network components)
Claim 6 Oprea in view of Nellen teaches Claim 1, and further teaches, wherein the packet is an incoming packet, (Oprea, FIG. 12, ¶0056, wherein a packet is received, i.e. incoming to the receiver) wherein an ongoing path of the packet is determined by a source node sending the packet, wherein a return path of the packet is updated by network components along the ongoing path, (Oprea, ¶0066, wherein the topology computing the paths is updated by network components) and wherein the processor is configured to extract the routing path of the packet from the packet data by extracting the return path of the packet. (Oprea, FIG. 12, ¶0056, extracting the header from a packet to analyze the routing paths, i.e. extracting the routing paths)
Claim 7 Oprea in view of Nellen teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the packet is an outgoing packet, (Oprea, FIG. 12, ¶0056, wherein a packet is received, i.e. outgoing from the transmitter) wherein an ongoing path of the packet is determined by a source node sending the packet, (Oprea, ¶0012, wherein the source routing is determined by the source node) and wherein the processor is configured to extract the routing path of the packet from the packet data by extracting the ongoing path of the packet. (Oprea, FIG. 12, ¶0056, extracting the header from a packet to analyze the routing paths, i.e. extracting the routing paths)
Claim 8 Oprea in view of Nellen teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the processor is configured to determine whether to allow or block the packet based on the routing path by allowing packets with certain routing paths and blocking packets with other routing paths. (Nellen, FIG. 5A, ¶0181, determining whether to allow or block packets, i.e. allowed packets, or disallowed paths, i.e. blocked packets)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Oprea to evaluate the packets firewall permissions as taught by Nellen in order to more effectively utilize network resources.
Claim 9 Oprea and Nellen teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the processor is configured to determine whether to allow or block the packet based on the routing path by:
applying at least one rule on the routing path; allowing the packets that conform to the at least one rule; and blocking the packets that do not conform to the at least one rule. (Nellen, FIG. 5A, ¶0181, determining whether to allow or block packets, i.e. allowed packets, or disallowed paths, i.e. blocked packets)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Oprea to evaluate the packets firewall permissions as taught by Nellen in order to more effectively utilize network resources.
Claim 10 Oprea in view of Nellen teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the computer network is an InfiniBand computer network. (Oprea, ¶0055, wherein the packets are Infiniband packets, i.e. the network is an Infiniband computer network)
Claim 11 Oprea and Nellen teaches a method for restricting traffic in a computer network, the method comprising:
extracting a routing path of a packet. (FIG. 12, ¶0056, extracting the header from a packet to analyze the routing paths, i.e. extracting the routing paths)
However, Oprea does not explicitly teach determining whether to allow or block the packet based on the routing path.
From a related technology, Nellen teaches determining whether to allow or block the packet based on the routing path. (FIG. 1, Col. 6, Lines 19-35, determining whether to allow or block packets based on routing policy)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Oprea to evaluate the packets firewall permissions as taught by Nellen in order to more effectively utilize network resources.
Claims 12-19 are taught by Oprea and Nellen as described for Claims 2-9.
Claim 20 Quevedo teaches a method for implementing an authorization mechanism in a computer network, the method comprising:
determining a routing path of a packet. (FIG. 12, ¶0056, extracting the header from a packet to analyze the routing paths, i.e. extracting the routing paths)
However, Oprea does not explicitly teach allowing the packet based on the routing path.
From a related technology, Nellen teaches allowing the packet based on the routing path. (FIG. 5A, ¶0181, after selectin of the routing path the firewall blocking or permitting the routing path)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Oprea to evaluate the packets firewall permissions as taught by Nellen in order to more effectively utilize network resources.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER PALACA CADORNA whose telephone number is (571)270-0584. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-7:00.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571) 272-3964. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P CADORNA/Examiner, Art Unit 2444
/JOHN A FOLLANSBEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights