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 .
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 § 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, 6, 8-10, 12, 15, 17, and 20, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsubota (US 2006/0126587 A1)
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Tsubota discloses:
a method in a wireless access point (WAP) (fig.1 depicts access points element 2-1 and 2-3 (i.e. wireless LAN base stations) which receive and transmit wireless signal to and from devices, (i.e. wireless LAN device) which are clients of the WAP) for processing network traffic data units (NTDUs) (par.[0058] describes the WAP reception of wireless signals from the wireless devices associated with the WAP, fig.5 which describes the layer-2 packets which are received at the wireless transceiver of the WAP element 123, par.[0056]), comprising the WAP (fig.1 which describes the WAPs);
receiving an NTDU from a client device (par.[0057] which recites, in part, “The wireless signals, transmitted from the wireless LAN device 3-1, are captured by the device side transceiver 23-1 of the access point 2-1.”, and fig.6 step 1, which describes an AP receiving a signal, (i.e. a data frame) from the wireless LAN device associated with the AP), the NTDU having a header (fig.5 which depicts a data frame before encapsulation as shown in element 119, the data frame comprises a header and a payload, (i.e. the data) in element 121) including a source internet protocol (IP) address (fig.5 element 131 which describes the source IP address in the header portion of the signaling/data frame received from the station, to the WAP), a destination IP address (fig.5 the destination IP address element 129), and a tag that is separate from the source and destination IP address (fig.5 the destination MAC address element 125);
identifying a virtual tunnel upon which to transmit the NTDU based on a portion of the header (fig.6 element s2 and par.[0058] which recites, in part, “The inter-AP virtual LAN switch 22-1 refers to the address management table 22B to take out the identification information of the access point relating to the destination MAC address 125. In short, the access point 2-3 is decided to which the wireless LAN device 3-3 is to be connected, step S2.”. That is, the destination MAC address is used to determine which path, route, or how the data frame is switched to arrive at its destination. The paths/routes being interpreted as virtual tunnels/logical paths to arrive at the destination) of the NTDU according to a policy (par.[0058] the address management table which is referred to when the AP receives the data frame to match the destination MAC address to a route/virtual tunnel in order to reach the intended recipient), wherein the policy maps the portion of the header to one of a plurality of available virtual tunnels (fig.4 element 22b which depicts the table wherein the Destination MAC Addresses are associated with a different AP, which would require a different path/tunnel/route to reach each destination); and
transmitting, via the identified virtual tunnel (par.[0060] which describes the determination of the route to the appropriate destination, each destination comprising a different route, naturally), the NTDU to a network device (fig.1 the WAP may transmit to another network device, or WAP which is the determined destination of the data frame received from the wireless LAN device associated with the WAP), wherein the portion of the header comprises the tag and the policy maps a first tag (fig.5 and par.[0058] wherein the destination MAC addresses can/are associated with different destinations which correspond to a path/route as discussed in par.[0060]), and a second tag to a second virtual tunnel of the available virtual tunnels (fig.5 and par.[0058] wherein the destination MAC addresses can/are associated with different destinations which correspond to a path/route as discussed in par.[0060]).
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Hooda discloses:
wherein the policy is a look-up table (fig.4 a lookup table at the access point).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Hooda discloses:
establishing a second virtual tunnel between the WAP and a second network device, wherein the network device is associated with a layer-2 domain, wherein the second network device is associated with a second layer-2 domain (par.[0060] describes the inter-AP virtual LAN switch establishing a route/path/tunnel between the AP, and the destination network device which provides access to the destination, see e.g., “When the inter-AP virtual LAN switch 22-1 has decided on the access point 2-3 as the destination of transmission, the inter-AP virtual LAN switch 22-1 acquires, based on the routing table 22A-1, the routing information for transmission to the access point 2-3”. Thus, the when the inter-AP virtual LAN switch determines each destination the route/tunnel is established between the AP and the destination in order for the AP to deliver data frames to the destination device).
Regarding claims 6, 12, and 20, Hooda discloses:
wherein the plurality of available virtual tunnels connect the WAP to a plurality of network devices (par.[0006] describes the transmission paths/routes between network devices, such as APs).
Regarding claims 8, Hooda discloses:
a non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor (par.[0097] which discloses that the methods may be implemented using software which would be stored on a memory), performing:
a method in a wireless access point (WAP) (fig.1 depicts access points element 2-1 and 2-3 (i.e. wireless LAN base stations) which receive and transmit wireless signal to and from devices, (i.e. wireless LAN device) which are clients of the WAP) for processing network traffic data units (NTDUs) (par.[0058] describes the WAP reception of wireless signals from the wireless devices associated with the WAP, fig.5 which describes the layer-2 packets which are received at the wireless transceiver of the WAP element 123, par.[0056]), comprising the WAP (fig.1 which describes the WAPs);
receiving an NTDU from a client device (par.[0057] which recites, in part, “The wireless signals, transmitted from the wireless LAN device 3-1, are captured by the device side transceiver 23-1 of the access point 2-1.”, and fig.6 step 1, which describes an AP receiving a signal, (i.e. a data frame) from the wireless LAN device associated with the AP), the NTDU having a header (fig.5 which depicts a data frame before encapsulation as shown in element 119, the data frame comprises a header and a payload, (i.e. the data) in element 121) including a source internet protocol (IP) address (fig.5 element 131 which describes the source IP address in the header portion of the signaling/data frame received from the station, to the WAP), a destination IP address (fig.5 the destination IP address element 129), and a tag that is separate from the source and destination IP address (fig.5 the destination MAC address element 125);
identifying a virtual tunnel upon which to transmit the NTDU based on a portion of the header (fig.6 element s2 and par.[0058] which recites, in part, “The inter-AP virtual LAN switch 22-1 refers to the address management table 22B to take out the identification information of the access point relating to the destination MAC address 125. In short, the access point 2-3 is decided to which the wireless LAN device 3-3 is to be connected, step S2.”. That is, the destination MAC address is used to determine which path, route, or how the data frame is switched to arrive at its destination. The paths/routes being interpreted as virtual tunnels/logical paths to arrive at the destination) of the NTDU according to a policy (par.[0058] the address management table which is referred to when the AP receives the data frame to match the destination MAC address to a route/virtual tunnel in order to reach the intended recipient), wherein the policy maps the portion of the header to one of a plurality of available virtual tunnels (fig.4 element 22b which depicts the table wherein the Destination MAC Addresses are associated with a different AP, which would require a different path/tunnel/route to reach each destination); and
transmitting, via the identified virtual tunnel (par.[0060] which describes the determination of the route to the appropriate destination, each destination comprising a different route, naturally), the NTDU to a network device (fig.1 the WAP may transmit to another network device, or WAP which is the determined destination of the data frame received from the wireless LAN device associated with the WAP), wherein the portion of the header comprises the tag and the policy maps a first tag (fig.5 and par.[0058] wherein the destination MAC addresses can/are associated with different destinations which correspond to a path/route as discussed in par.[0060]), and a second tag to a second virtual tunnel of the available virtual tunnels (fig.5 and par.[0058] wherein the destination MAC addresses can/are associated with different destinations which correspond to a path/route as discussed in par.[0060]).
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) 4 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsubota as applied to claim 1, in view of Arista “VXLAN Pseudowire”, dated July 2016, submitted in the IDS dated 09/15/2021 of application 17/131,544.
Regarding claims 4 and 18, the disclosure Tsubota discloses a wireless access point configured to encapsulate a service frame for layer-3 transmission of layer-2 frames and particular the disclosure teaches encapsulating service frames in VXLAN frames. However, the disclosure of Tsubota does not teach:
VXLAN Pseudowire.
However, the VXLAN Pseudowire was known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application. For example, in an analogous art, the disclosure of Zanier Arista discloses:
VXLAN Pseudowire (pg.2 which describes the VXLAN Pseudowire).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Tsubota for encapsulation of service frames from one point to another utilizing tunnels with the disclosure of Arista Pseudowire. The motivation/suggestion would have been to reduce the complexity for providing connectivity for PTP over a layer 3 connection.
Claim(s) 5, 11, and 19, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsubota (US 2006/0126587 A1) as applied to independent claim 1, in view of Gu (US 2015/0082418 A1).
Regarding claims 5, 11, and 19, Tsubota teaches the forwarding of packets over a path based on a header of a data frame that is transmitted from a client station, and encapsulation of the packet for transmission over the network based on the identified destination, but may not disclose:
wherein the identified virtual tunnel is a virtual extensible local area network (VXLAN) tunnel.
In an analogous art the disclosure of Gu teaches:
wherein the identified virtual tunnel is a virtual extensible local area network (VXLAN) tunnel (par.[0004] describes VXLAN, Virtual Tunnel Endpoints, and the tunnels which connect Layer-2 Domains over layer-3 networks).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Tsubota with the disclosure Gu. The motivation/suggestion would have been to allow for the connection of layer-2 domains over a layer-3 network.
Claim(s) 7 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsubota as applied to claim 1, in view of Zhang (US 2014/0146817 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 13, the disclosure of Tsubota teaches the transmission of a packet by a wireless access point via a tunnel endpoint to a destination, but does not disclose:
wherein the network device encapsulates the NTDU for transmission within a layer-2 domain of the network device.
However, the above technique was known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention. For example, in an analogous art, the disclosure of Zhang teaches:
wherein the network device encapsulates the NTDU for transmission within a layer-2 domain of the network device (par.[0023] describes the end point receiving the packet over the layer 3 network, and further encapsulating the packet for transmission to a VM in the same VXLAN domain, same layer-2 domain).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int eh art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Hooda, with the disclosure of Zhang. The motivation/suggestion would have been to efficiently and correctly forward a packet to its destination.
Regarding claim 14, Zhang discloses:
wherein the network device further transmits at least one NTDU without encapsulation (par.[0024] describes the gateway not encapsulating the packet for forwarding to the next hop).
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 103
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8, and 15, along with each of the dependent claims 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Yerrapureddy et al. (US 2019/0014040 A1) “Edge Network Node and Method for Configuring a Service Therein”
Moreno et al. (US 2017/0295093 A1) “Asymmetric Multi-Destination Traffic Replication in Overlay Networks”
Abraham et al. (US 2020/0059459 A1) “Secure Forwarding of Tenant Workloads in Virtual Networks”
Meier et al. (US 2004/0054799 A1) “Enhanced Mobility and Address Resolution in a Wireless Premises Based Network”
Nagarajan et al. (US 2008/0013474 A1) “Wireless Switch Network Architecture Implementing Layer Mobility Domains”
Nambiar (US 2008/0155252 A1) “VLAN Tunneling”
Rune et al. (US 2008/0186897 A1) “Methods and Nodes in A Communication System Controlling the use of Access Resources”
Casado et al. (US 2013/0058354 A1) “Managed Switching Elements Used as Extenders”
Koponen et al. (US 2013/0103818 A1) “Physical Controller”
Bhattacharya et al. (US 2015/0195178 A1) “Method for Resource Optimized Network Virtualization Overlay Transport in Virtualized Data Center Environments”
Nakabayashi et al. (US 2003/0112810 A1) “Method for Forwarding Packets by Connecting Network Segments Through a Wireless Channel and Wireless Bridging Apparatus Using the Same”
Eng et al. (US 5,958,018 B1) “Wireless Services Data Network Translating MAC Address to Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) Address”
Giaffreda et al. (US 2005/0154774 A1) “Method of Data Transfer in Mobile and Fixed Telecommunications Systems”
Leung (US 6,982,967 B1) “Methods and Apparatus for Implementing a Proxy Mobile Node in a Wireless Local Area Network”
Hooda et al. (US 2018/0159957 A1) “Context Export from an Access Point to a Fabric Infrastructure”
Iino et al. (US 2008/0304456 A1) “Communication System, Radio LAN Base Station Control Device, and Radio LAN Base Station Device”, fig(s).2, 4(a)-(c), and 5.
Olin et al. (US 2004/0005878 A1) “Access Point for Mobile Devices in a Packet Based Network and a Method and System for Billing in Such a Network”
Peles (US 2004/0236855 A1) “Multi-Link Tunneling”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. 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.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411