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 .
1. This communication is in response to amendments filed on 06/30/2026.
Claims 1, 8, 11, 18 and 20 have been amended. Claims 1-20 remain pending.
Claim Objections
2. Applicant’s amendments to claims 8 and 18 in response to the previous raised claim objection have been considered and obviate previous objection, as such the claim objection is hereby withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the previously applied combination of Cantwell and Arama references failing to teach, suggest or render obvious the limitations of amended independent claims 1, 11 and 20 have been considered, and are partially persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the previous references not disclosing the amended language specifying selecting one of a path tracing mode or a metric collection mode are moot because the new ground of rejection relies on the newly applied Vasseur reference for teaching this limitation. It is noted that claims, as currently amended, only require selection of one of a path tracing mode or a metric collection mode, and does not specify that the two modes are presented as alternatives to one another, as indicated in Applicant’s remarks. In other words, the claim language merely requires a selection of one of the modes, but not that both modes are provided as two probing mode options to select from.
Applicant additionally asserts that Cantwell also does not teach or suggest “instructing, by the device, the agent in the computer network to send one or more packets via the computer network according to the probing strategy” because Cantwell does not disclose a device forming a probing strategy for an agent and then instructing that agent in the computer network to send packets according to the probing strategy. Applicant acknowledges that Cantwell does teach a test engine configured to execute automated network tests, and expressly discloses that test scripts dynamically control the configuration and execution of the tests. It is submitted that this dynamic configuration of tests is unambiguously within the scope of a formed probing strategy. Similarly to the claimed invention, a request is made to an agent, or traffic generator module, to generate and send data based on the formed testing strategy. It is further noted that the newly applied Vasseur reference provides additional support for this limitation by expressly teachings that the monitoring nodes, corresponding with the claimed agents, are sent instructions to alter monitoring behavior, including an amount of probing.
The rejection is therefore maintained based on the newly cited rejection in view of the combination of Cantwell in view of Vasseur.
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.
4. Claims 1, 3-11, and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cantwell et al. (US 2018/0013657) in view of Vasseur et al. (US 2015/0333992).
Regarding claim 1, Cantwell teaches a method, comprising:
receiving, at a device (intelligent physical layer switch device 200 of FIG. 2) and via a user interface (device 242 of FIG. 2), an instruction to automate probing strategy formation for an agent in a computer network (Test automation refers to the use of specialized test hardware and software systems that are driven by a test script to dynamically control the configuration and execution of the test on the network being tested, [0017]; the embedded controller 210 running one or more test control applications receives a request from the client device 242 operatively coupled to the integrated network switch 200 (as shown in FIG. 2). In an embodiment, the request received from the client device 242 specifies a particular test script to be executed by the embedded controller 210 and/or specifies criteria (i.e. specific configuration) for testing the network traffic flow activity data, [0067]);
obtaining, by the device, network telemetry from the computer network (the test engine 218 is enabled to collect statistics (e.g., packet counts, byte counts, error counts, utilization, etc.) at least on a subset of the first plurality of ports 202 and/or a subset of the second plurality of ports 204. In one embodiment, the test engine 218 may include a statistics collector 222 adapted to receive a packet from the packet header parser 220 and determine, based on the packet, what type of event is occurring, [0049]);
selecting, by the device, a path tracing mode (test scenarios are run using exemplary software application simulators 128. Trace data including network response and load information is collected during the test scenarios, [0034]; test packets generated by the data traffic generator 304 described below with packet trace information contained in one or more log files to determine if the network 101 performed consistently with the applicable protocols and performance requirements, [0060]; One aspect of the various embodiments is to produce complete “end to end” packet trace information, [0065]; Packet trace information may be used to reconstruct transmitted voice/video streams in order to examine the behavior of the network 101, [0065]) or a metric collection mode (The impairment tool 124 is configured to generate and inject impairments into the network testing system 100. Throughout this description the term impairment will be used to indicate any type of abnormal operation which may be injected into the testing system to determine the network's response to the abnormal operation, [0032]; the application simulator 128 may be used to simulate the performance of an application by actually generating messages and packets based on a model of the traffic that an application is expected to generate in use, and collecting performance statistics based on these generated test messages and packets, [0033]) to form a probing strategy for the agent, based on the instruction (a plurality of desired test configurations may be defined externally from the test environment 200, stored within the test environment 200 and selectively loaded for carrying out one or more tests on the network, device or system under test, [0036]; a plurality of configuration images of integrated configurations can be stored in the FPGA image storage 232, [0057]; search the FPGA image storage 232 to find a configuration image associated with the requested test script and/or to find an image that satisfies the requested test criteria. When the embedded controller 210 identifies a desirable set (suite) of tests to be performed, the embedded controller 210 retrieves the corresponding configuration image from the FPGA image storage 232, and loads the retrieved configuration image on the test tool engine 218, [0067]); and
instructing, by the device, the agent in the computer network to send one or more packets via the computer network according to the probing strategy (the embedded controller 210 sends a request to the data traffic generator module 304 to either randomly generate or specifically generate flows of information (i.e., traffic) based on the test script being executed, [0068]; routing of the generated network data and/or impairments data using the one or more transmission ports specified in the test template by sending corresponding control data, [0070]).
However, Cantwell does not explicitly disclose using the network telemetry to select one of the path tracing mode or the metric collection mode.
Vasseur teaches selecting, by a device and using network telemetry (observation module 502 may periodically sample performance metrics 508 regarding the devices (e.g., routers) and network parameters that are affected by the export/collection process used to collect information regarding the state of the network, [0077]; data regarding the network-monitoring process is received. In various embodiments, the received data may include traffic information regarding the current traffic present in the network and traffic pattern data from a traffic pattern analyzer (e.g., TPA 248), [0100]; metric exporter and/or collector functionality can be dynamic and adjusted in the network based on the changing conditions of the network, [0105]), one of a path tracing mode or a metric collection mode to form a probing strategy for an agent (feature data 450 may be determined in part by sending probes between a given sender and a given responder, to capture metrics regarding the performance along the path, [0055]; adjustment of exporter/collector roles by a role assignment module (e.g., role assignment module 249), according to some embodiments., [0085]); and
instructing, by the device, the agent in a computer network to send one or more packets via the computer network according to the probing strategy (NAM 246 may configure one or more corresponding routers to generate more or less features based on the requirements of learning machine 404 (e.g., the amount of probing used may be adjusted as a function of the model's accuracy and confidence, based on network considerations such as current or future network usage, etc.), [0061]; the network-monitoring process may be adjusted by sending instructions to one or more nodes, to alter the behavior of the nodes. In some embodiments, a node may be instructed to start or stop acting as an exporter or collector in the network-monitoring process, [0095]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to dynamically configure a network monitoring process in the system/method of Cantwell as suggested by Vasseur in order to adjust the role of monitoring nodes based on a current state of a network. One would be motivated to combine these teachings to efficiently collect and analyze the most relevant data while also reducing traffic overhead in the network based on changes in traffic flow and network usage over time.
Regarding claim 3, Cantwell teaches the method as in claim 1, wherein the device selects the metric collection mode and the agent sends the one or more packets along a path in the computer network to collect at least one of: a round trip time metric, a delay metric, a loss metric, or a jitter metric (the test data generator 122 may generate traffic with accumulated jitter, [0031]; the test engine 218 may include a statistics collector 222 adapted to receive a packet from the packet header parser 220 and determine, based on the packet, what type of event is occurring. Exemplary event information may include whether the packet is enqueued, dequeued, dropped, includes an error, etc, [0049]; Network performance can be evaluated so that impairments such as packet loss or erasure and delay jitter can be corrected, [0065]).
Regarding claim 4, Cantwell teaches the method as in claim 1, wherein the network telemetry indicates at least one of: a probing error, a probe response rate, a round trip time, a packet loss, a path length, or a gap in a packet trace (the network analysis tools 126 may search for errors in data streams to help diagnose various network issues uncovered in the test environment 100, [0034]; the test engine 218 is enabled to collect statistics (e.g., packet counts, byte counts, error counts, utilization, etc.) at least on a subset of the first plurality of ports 202 and/or a subset of the second plurality of ports 204, [0049]; the statistics collector 222 may track, for example, how many bytes have been enqueued, dequeued, dropped, etc. from a particular source, [0049]; Network performance can be evaluated so that impairments such as packet loss or erasure and delay jitter can be corrected, [0065]).
Regarding claim 5, Cantwell teaches the method as in claim 1, further comprising:
forming, by the device, an updated probing strategy by updating the probing strategy to swap between the path tracing mode and the metric collection mode to select whichever mode was not selected when forming the probing strategy for the agent (In response to determining that the test script contains additional tests (decision block 410, “yes” branch), the embedded controller 210 may determine if a different configuration image, such as an image containing a different software module, needs to be retrieved from the FPGA image storage 232 and may repeat the above-described steps 402-408 for the next test to be executed, [0071]); and
instructing, by the device, the agent to send one or more packets via the computer network according to the updated probing strategy (the embedded controller 210 sends a request to the data traffic generator module 304 to either randomly generate or specifically generate flows of information (i.e., traffic) based on the test script being executed, [0068]; the embedded controller 210 may change to “smart” or “stats” mode of operations, if needed, search the FPGA image storage 232 to find a configuration image associated with the requested test script and/or to find an image that satisfies the requested test criteria, [0067]).
Regarding claim 6, Cantwell does not explicitly disclose the method as in claim 5, wherein the device forms the updated probing strategy based in part on an amount of time that has elapsed since it formed the probing strategy.
Vasseur teaches wherein a device forms an updated probing strategy based in part on an amount of time that has elapsed since it formed a probing strategy (the update rate of the features may be adjusted accordingly by TPA 248 (e.g., to reduce the update rate of irrelevant data, etc.). In one embodiment, adjusting the refresh rate of feature data 436 may be policy-based to reduce traffic overhead in the network, [0052]; observation module 502 may periodically sample performance metrics 508 regarding the devices (e.g., routers) and network parameters that are affected by the export/collection process used to collect information regarding the state of the network, [0077]; Metrics 508 regarding the export/collection process used in the network may be provided by observation module 502 to inference module 504 on a push basis (e.g., periodically, etc.), [0080]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to set a rate for the collection of metrics used to update a network monitoring configuration in the system/method of Cantwell as suggested by Vasseur in order to analyze and reconfigure the monitoring process on a periodic basis. One would be motivated to combine these teachings to efficiently determine whether a current monitoring configuration needs to be changed or updated based on real-time network conditions.
Regarding claim 7, Cantwell does not explicitly disclose the method as in claim 5, wherein the device forms the updated probing strategy in response to the network telemetry indicating a network configuration change for a host of the agent.
Vasseur teaches wherein the device forms an updated probing strategy in response to the network telemetry indicating a network configuration change for a host of an agent (observation module 502 may include data regarding the operational state of the network devices involved in the export/collection process. For example, performance metrics 508 may include data regarding the CPU loads of one or more network devices, [0078]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust network monitoring based on operational states of network devices in the system/method of Cantwell as suggested by Vasseur in order to improve dynamic network data collection and traffic analysis. One would be motivated to combine these teachings to ensure that the nodes performing the network monitoring have available resources and capacity to do so efficiently.
Regarding claim 8, Cantwell does not explicitly disclose the method as in claim 5, wherein the device forms the updated probing strategy based on a change in one or more path performance metrics collected by the agent using the one or more packets.
Vasseur teaches wherein the device forms an updated probing strategy based on a change in one or more path performance metrics collected by an agent using one or more packets (feature data 436 may include traffic flow information such as the duration of a flow, the rate of new flows, metrics capturing the rate of change of the previous metrics over time, or other such information, [0050]; A change to the network-monitoring process is determined based on the received data. The device also adjusts the network-monitoring process to implement the determined change, [0074]; a change to the network-monitoring process is determined based on the received data regarding the process, [0094]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust network monitoring based on monitored traffic flow information in the system/method of Cantwell as suggested by Vasseur in order to improve dynamic network data collection and traffic analysis. One would be motivated to combine these teachings to ensure that the metrics being collected and analyzed are the most relevant based on current network data and traffic trends.
Regarding claim 9, Cantwell does not explicitly disclose the method as in claim 5, wherein the device forms the updated probing strategy based on an indication that a path via which the agent sent the one or more packets has changed.
Vasseur teaches wherein a device forms an updated probing strategy based on an indication that a path via which the agent sent one or more packets has changed (a collector node may use the aggregated data to make predictions regarding a particular node and/or a particular network link or path (e.g., the aggregated data may be used by the collector node as part of a predictive networking strategy). For example, collector node 12 may use the received data 302 to make predictions regarding network segment 300 and use the predictions to adjust the operation of one or more devices in network segment 300, [0040]; feature data 450 may be determined in part by sending probes between a given sender and a given responder, to capture metrics regarding the performance along the path, [0055]; A change to the network-monitoring process is determined based on the received data. The device also adjusts the network-monitoring process to implement the determined change, [0074]; network anomaly tracker 702 may compare the current traffic trends with historical bounds to determine whether a network anomaly is present. The comparison may be based on criteria such as the average utilization of a path, [0087]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust network monitoring based on changes in performance metrics on a particular path or link in the system/method of Cantwell as suggested by Vasseur in order to improve dynamic network data collection and traffic analysis. One would be motivated to combine these teachings to ensure that the metrics being collected and analyzed are the most relevant based on current network traffic trends along a given path or link.
Regarding claim 10, Cantwell teaches the method as in claim 1, wherein the agent is hosted by an endpoint in the computer network (consolidate the above described automated test tools 122-128 into the physical layer switch device 120, [0035]).
The apparatus of claim 11 and the tangible, non-transitory, computer readable medium of claim 20 comprise limitations equivalent to those of method claim 1, and therefore are rejected in view of the same rationale.
The apparatus of claim 13 comprises limitations equivalent to those of method claim 3, and therefore is rejected in view of the same rationale.
The apparatus of claim 14 comprises limitations equivalent to those of method claim 4, and therefore is rejected in view of the same rationale.
The apparatus of claim 15 comprises limitations equivalent to those of method claim 5, and therefore is rejected in view of the same rationale.
The apparatus of claim 16 comprises limitations equivalent to those of method claim 6, and therefore is rejected in view of the same rationale.
The apparatus of claim 17 comprises limitations equivalent to those of method claim 7, and therefore is rejected in view of the same rationale.
The apparatus of claim 18 comprises limitations equivalent to those of method claim 8, and therefore is rejected in view of the same rationale.
The apparatus of claim 19 comprises limitations equivalent to those of method claim 9, and therefore is rejected in view of the same rationale.
5. Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cantwell-Vasseur in view of Cao et al. (US 2003/0161265).
Regarding claim 2, Cantwell teaches the method as in claim 1, wherein the device selects the path tracing mode and the one or more packets comprise path tracing packets to identify trace information along a path in the computer network (test packets generated by the data traffic generator 304 described below with packet trace information contained in one or more log files to determine if the network 101 performed consistently with the applicable protocols and performance requirements, [0060]; produce complete “end to end” packet trace information along with user-defined performance metrics. Packet trace information may be used to reconstruct transmitted voice/video streams in order to examine the behavior of the network 101, [0065]).
However, Cantwell-Vasseur do not explicitly disclose path tracing packets identifying hops along a path in the computer network.
Cao teaches wherein a device selects a path tracing mode and one or more packets comprise path tracing packets to identify hops along a path in a computer network (Processing by the intermediate node NMMs may involve writing the stored network performance conditions into the tracer packets, [0013]; When the tracer packets travel back to respective end devices, respective end device NMMs operating therein may decipher the information accumulated in the respective tracer packets, [0014]; Each of the segments may be used to store network service information, or network condition information, supplied by the intermediate node NMMs 32 and the gateway NMM 34, respectively, as the tracer packet travels through the first heterogeneous network 14, [0075]; upon initiation of network service probing, the outgoing datastream including the tracer packet travels over the first heterogeneous network 14 through at least one intermediate node 20. Typically, the datastream will make several hops between intermediate nodes 20 prior to reaching the gateway 22, [0099]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to accumulate information from intermediate nodes along a path in the system/method of Cantwell-Vasseur as suggested by Cao in order to determine network conditions experienced by each hop of a probe tracer packet. One would be motivated to combine these teachings to efficiently identify where on a network certain performance errors or conditions are occurring.
The apparatus of claim 12 comprises limitations equivalent to those of method claim 2, and therefore is rejected in view of the same rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Groath et al. US 6,571,285 – adaptively selecting network parameters to be monitored.
Inglis et al. US 7,577,738 – selecting a probe set for network performance testing based on network topology information.
Baltar et al. US 10,284,638 – updating monitoring information and requesting a new monitoring agent based on workload configuration changes.
Monk et al. US 2005/0114500 – configured measurements for heterogenous network agents for analysis.
Monk et al. US 2006/0245365 – configuring analyzers to measure different types of network measurements.
Akhter et al. US 2009/0097409 – dynamically change probing modes based on network conditions.
Wang et al. US 2010/0153537 – selecting most suitable monitors from a set of candidate monitors from sending traceroute packets and performing distance measurements.
Ketonen US 2014/0160971 – dynamically switching monitoring stations between monitoring modes to collect measurement data and perform measurements.
Chitalia et al. US 2019/0386891 – instructing agents issuing communication probes to use a newly selected protocol.
Nadeau et al. US 2021/0400104 – deploying and configuring test agents to collect network metrics.
Kamath et al. US 2022/0224623 – adaptive traceroute probing to determine measures of network performance.
Kolar et al. US 2022/0278922 – a device selecting from a set of probes having different characteristics to determine performance metrics for a network path.
Mukati et al. US 2024/0205108 – selecting one or more parameters associated with a network monitoring request including report type.
Bothe et al. US 2025/0007813 – network agents executing tests including both path tracing and network metric performance collection.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADHU WOOLCOCK whose telephone number is (571)270-3629. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday, Thursday 9-6 ET.
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, Chris Parry can be reached at 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 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.
MADHU WOOLCOCK
Examiner
Art Unit 2451
/MADHU WOOLCOCK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2451
Prosecution Insights