DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is in response to the communication filed on 06/17/2026. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 10, 13, 15, 17-18, 20, 23-24, 26-27, 32, 37, 39-40, 42 and 47 are pending in this application.
Examiner Note
The applicant has claimed “and/or” several times throughout the claims.
The examiner is taking the position that in the case of “element A and/or element B” that the “and/or” covers embodiments having element A alone, element B alone, or elements A and B taken together. The phrase “and/or” is not inherently indefinite and therefore is not objected to or rejected as indefinite.
When construing the claims in the context of a possible anticipation or obviousness rejection, the examiner’s disclosure of any one item from the claimed list will provide sufficient teaching of the entire limitation. In Medline, for example, the PTAB stated that “and/or” is a “disjunctive alternative,” and the prior art showing one of the elements so joined renders the claim unpatentable (See, Medline Indus. Inc. v. Paul Hartmann AG, Case No. IPR2013-00173, Paper 17 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 20, 2013)).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 03/24/2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) to claim 2 is now withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
The claim objection to claim 20 is now withdrawn in view of the claim amendments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 4-5, 10, 13, 15, 17-18, 20, 23-24, 26-27, 32, 37, 39-40, 42 and 47 have been considered but are moot based on the new grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant’s amendments. Specifically, the arguments present that Wu and Chen fail to provide for the amended language, where the rejection below now relies on Harwood to teach this subject matter.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-2, 4, 10, 13, 15, 17-18, 20, 23-24, 26, 32, 37, 39-40, 42 and 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180278541 A1 (hereinafter Wu), in view of US 20200142753 A1 (hereinafter Harwood), and in further view of US 20230275830 A1 (hereinafter Chen).
For Claim 1, Wu teaches a routing method, applied to performed by a routing system comprising a first node and a second node (Wu discloses a SDN controller as a first node and an edge switch as a second node; FIG. 1; para. [0038] “… The virtual switches form an SDDCN. The SDDCN is an SDN network, and includes an SDN controller 30. The edge switches 51-55 exchange a packet according to an instruction of the SDN controller 30 …”), the method comprising:
performing a computing management control function by the first node (Wu, FIG. 1; para. [0040] “… an SDN controller, such as the SDN controller 30 in FIG. 1, is used to implement a scheduling and decision function of an LBer (i.e. load balancer), and the SDN controller performs automated management on a service cluster according to a same IP address or a shared IP address of a serving node in a same service cluster …”); and
performing a computing routing function by the second node (Wu, FIG. 1; para. [0040] “… the SDN controller follows a serving node load balancing principle, and customizes a packet forwarding flow table to instruct a switch to direct user traffic to a specified serving node. The switch receives the forwarding flow table delivered by the SDN controller, and distributes traffic according to an instruction of the forwarding flow table …”);
Wu does not explicitly teach, but Harwood teaches wherein the routing system supports a perception mode centralized and distributed in coordination (Harwood teaches a accelerator service platform comprising a server controller 140 and a plurality of distributed server nodes comprising accelerator devices/resource, the server controller comprises centralized management functions including global service scheduling, resource allocation/provisioning, work load monitoring, topology determination and topology graph generation/analysis, at the same time the server controller periodically queries the information from server nodes and networks, therefore Harwood teaches an centralized and distributed coordinated architecture to make resource decisions; FIG. 1; para. [0013] “… FIG. 1 illustrates a cloud computing environment in which techniques according to embodiments of the invention are implemented for dynamically reallocating resources during run-time execution of workloads in a distributed XaaS computing system to increase workload execution performance and resource utilization …”; para. [0014] “… The service controller 140 comprises a global service request scheduler and request queue module 141, a resource allocation and provisioning module 142, a workload monitor module 143, a live migration module 144, a topology determination module 145, and a topology graph generator and analysis module 146 … The server nodes 160-1, 160-2, ... , 160-n each comprise accelerator application programming interfaces (APIs) 162, an accelerator virtualization layer 164, and hardware accelerator devices 166 …”; para. [0021] “… The topology determination module 145 implements methods that are configured to periodically query the server nodes 160, the networks 150 and 170, and the data storage system 180, etc., within the accelerator service platform 130 to automatically discover/identify constituent objects (logical objects and physical objects) of the accelerator service platform 130 (e.g., servers, routers, firewalls, applications, databases, network resources, storage resources, etc.) …”; para. [0022] “… The topology information collected by the topology determination module 145 for a given server node will indicate the types and number of hardware processor resources (e.g., CPUs, GPUs, other accelerator devices) of the given server node. In addition, the topology information will indicate the types of intra-node connection topologies (communication links) used to connect the hardware processor resources of a given server node …”);
wherein the perception mode centralized and distributed in coordination is that a first part of computing resource and network information is collected by the first node (Harwood teaches the server controller/topology determination module periodically queries service nodes, networks and data storage systems, the topology information collected comprising information about hardware processor resources and the intra-node connection topologies; FIG. 1; para. [0021] “… The topology determination module 145 implements methods that are configured to periodically query the server nodes 160, the networks 150 and 170, and the data storage system 180, etc., within the accelerator service platform 130 to automatically discover/identify constituent objects (logical objects and physical objects) of the accelerator service platform 130 (e.g., servers, routers, firewalls, applications, databases, network resources, storage resources, etc.) …”; para. [0022] “… The topology information collected by the topology determination module 145 for a given server node will indicate the types and number of hardware processor resources (e.g., CPUs, GPUs, other accelerator devices) of the given server node. In addition, the topology information will indicate the types of intra-node connection topologies (communication links) used to connect the hardware processor resources of a given server node …”; para. [0023] “… In addition, the topology information collected by the topology determination module 145 includes information regarding the types of network interface devices and topologies that are implemented by the server nodes for inter-node communication within the cluster 160 …”), and
a second part of the computing resource and network information is collected by the second node (Harwood teaches distributed servers nodes comprising reporting agents to collect the topology information of hardware resources; FIG. 1; para. [0024] “… the server nodes 160, the networks 150 and 170, and the data storage system 180 comprise reporting agents that are configured to determine the hardware configuration and hardware interconnect topology for the nodes and networks by analyzing a layer of low-level system drivers, and report the topology information to the topology determination module 145 …”; also see para. [0028]),
wherein the first part is static topology information of computing resource and network (Harwood teaches the server controller/topology determination module periodically queries service nodes, networks and data storage systems, the topology information collected comprising information about hardware processor resources and the intra-node connection topologies, the topology graph generator generates a semantic model/topology node graph (which is considered to represent static topology information) based on the collected information; FIG. 1; para. [0026] “… The topology graph generator and analysis module 146 implements methods to generate a semantic model of the managed environment of the accelerator service platform 130 based on the topology information which is collected/generated by the topology determination module 145 …”), and
the second part is dynamic real-time information of computing resource and network (Harwood teaches the reporting agents on server nodes reporting real-time resource usage information; FIG. 1; para. [0028] “… The workload monitor module 143 implements methods to monitor the performance of running workloads and to detect bottlenecks by collecting and utilizing telemetry information which provides real-time resource usage information (e.g., on a per application/workload basis) of the running workloads … The telemetry information collected for a given running workload comprises, for example, bus or networking bandwidth usage information (i.e., percent of usage), current bandwidth usage of the communication links between provisioned processor devices (e.g., CPUs, accelerator devices, etc.), CPU and accelerator device utilization, data storage throughput, and other types of resource usage information which can be utilized to monitor for communication overload or bottlenecks that could result in degraded performance of a running workload …”; para. [0029] “… the telemetry information is continually measured/tracked and periodically reported by the reporting agents (e.g., every 5 seconds). The telemetry information is stored in a resource usage database that is maintained by the workload monitor module 143 …”).
Harwood and Wu are analogous art because they are both related to computing network systems.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the collection topology information of hardware resources and network configuration information techniques of Harwood with the system of Wu to facilitate implementing an efficient distributed computing environment for these types of high-performance computing applications and optimizing resource utilization to ensure the enhance performance (Harwood, para. [0004])
Wu-Harwood does not explicitly teach, but Chen teaches computing power as network computing resource (Chen, para. [0136] “… The CFN (i.e. computing first network or computing force network) is used as an example. In the CFN, a network is for being aware of computing power information of a serving node in real time, and the serving node is flexibly selected based on the computing power information, to implement optimal utilization of a resource in the entire network …”).
Chen and Wu-Harwood are analogous art because they are both related to computing network systems.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the collecting computing power information techniques of Chen with the system of Wu-Harwood to facilitate a load balancing function for performing session persistence in a network system (Chen, para. [0003]).
For Claim 2, Wu-Harwood-Chen teaches the method according to claim 1,
wherein the computing management control function comprises at least one of: a computing perception function or a service scheduling function (Wu, FIG. 1; para. [0040] “… an SDN controller, such as the SDN controller 30 in FIG. 1, is used to implement a scheduling and decision function of an LBer (i.e. load balancer), and the SDN controller performs automated management on a service cluster according to a same IP address or a shared IP address of a serving node in a same service cluster …”);
wherein performing the computing management control function by the first node comprises:
collecting, through the computing perception function, computing resource and network information by the first node (Wu teaches the SDN controller detecting a health status of a service cluster/nodes (i.e. computing resources) and collecting network traffic statistics information; FIG. 1; para. [0038] “… As shown in FIG. 1, the tenant network 31 defines a service cluster 7 …”; para. [0045] “… An SDN controller 30 manages the service cluster of the tenant according to the shared IP address, identifies a serving node of the shared IP address in a tenant network, establishes the service cluster and expands a capacity of the service cluster based on the serving node of the shared IP address, regularly detects a health status of each node in the service cluster, and reduces a capacity of the service cluster or deletes the service cluster according to a health check result …”; para. [0092] “… The SDN controller 30 periodically collects, from the edge switch of the serving node, a traffic statistics result of each forwarding flow table statistically collected by the edge switch, filters service response traffic data from a traffic statistics result of each forwarding flow table in order to implement monitoring of traffic load of the serving node …”); and
performing, through the service scheduling function, service scheduling by the first node based on the computing resource and network information (Wu, FIG. 1; para. [0090] “… The SDN controller 30 performs load balancing scheduling based on a load balancing principle of serving node traffic, and customizes a corresponding forwarding flow table to instruct an edge switch to distribute traffic. …”).
Wu-Harwood does not explicitly teach, but Chen teaches computing power as network computing resource (Chen, para. [0136] “… The CFN (i.e. computing first network or computing force network) is used as an example. In the CFN, a network is for being aware of computing power information of a serving node in real time, and the serving node is flexibly selected based on the computing power information, to implement optimal utilization of a resource in the entire network …”).
Chen and Wu-Harwood are analogous art because they are both related to computing network systems.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the collecting computing power information techniques of Chen with the system of Wu-Harwood to facilitate a load balancing function for performing session persistence in a network system (Chen, para. [0003]).
For Claim 4, Wu-Harwood-Chen teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the computing routing function comprises at least one of:
a computing perception function, a service scheduling function, or a data forwarding function (Wu teaches the computing routing function comprising a data forwarding function; Examiner notes that this is a list of alternatives and only requires one of the options to teach the claim as a whole; FIG. 1; para. [0040] “… the SDN controller follows a serving node load balancing principle, and customizes a packet forwarding flow table to instruct a switch to direct user traffic to a specified serving node. The switch receives the forwarding flow table delivered by the SDN controller, and distributes traffic according to an instruction of the forwarding flow table …”);
wherein performing the computing routing function by the second node comprises:
collecting, through the computing perception function (Examiner notes that this element for which Wu-Harwood-Chen is not relied upon (i.e. “a data forwarding function” is selected for examining the claim as a whole) is not required to be examined), computing power and network information by the second node;
performing, through the service scheduling function (Examiner notes that this element for which Wu-Harwood-Chen is not relied upon (i.e. “a data forwarding function” is selected for examining the claim as a whole) is not required to be examined), service scheduling by the second node based on the computing power and network information; and
forwarding, through the data forwarding function, a data packet by the second node based on the service scheduling (Examiner notes that the element “the service scheduling” for which Wu-Harwood-Chen is not relied upon due to the same reason as for “the service function,” therefore the examination of this limitation only requires to examine “forwarding, through the data forwarding function, a data packet by the second node”; FIG. 1; para. [0040] “… the SDN controller follows a serving node load balancing principle, and customizes a packet forwarding flow table to instruct a switch to direct user traffic to a specified serving node. The switch receives the forwarding flow table delivered by the SDN controller, and distributes traffic according to an instruction of the forwarding flow table …”);
wherein the computing perception function (Examiner notes that this element and its related limitations that Wu-Harwood-Chen is not relied upon (i.e. “a data forwarding function” is selected for examining the claim as a whole) are not required to be examined) includes at least one of: a computing power discovery function, or a computing power notification function;
wherein collecting, through the computing perception function, computing power and network information by the second node comprises: discovering, through the computing power discovery function, computing power and network information for a third node by the second node; and notifying, through the computing power notification function, another network node of the computing power and network information discovered by the second node, and/or collecting computing power and network information notified by another network node.
For Claim 10, Wu-Harwood-Chen teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the routing system supports at least one of: a centralized scheduling mode (Wu teaches that the SDN controller performs a service scheduling and management function, FIG. 1, para. [0040]; Examiner notes that the branch of “a centralized scheduling mode” is selected for examination based on the claim structure), a distributed scheduling mode, or a scheduling mode centralized and distributed in coordination;
wherein the centralized scheduling mode is that service scheduling is all performed by the first node (Wu, FIG. 1; para. [0090] “… The SDN controller 30 performs load balancing scheduling based on a load balancing principle of serving node traffic, and customizes a corresponding forwarding flow table to instruct an edge switch to distribute traffic. …”);
wherein the distributed scheduling mode is that service scheduling is all performed by the second node;
wherein the scheduling mode centralized and distributed in coordination is that service scheduling is performed by the first node and the second node in coordination.
For Claim 13, Wu-Harwood-Chen teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein, the distributed scheduling mode is performed by one second node; or the distributed scheduling mode is performed by a plurality of second nodes in coordination (The instant claim modifies elements of claim 10 for which Wu-Harwood-Chen is not relied upon, without requiring such elements to be applied. Accordingly, the instant claim is rejected for similar reasons as claim 10).
For Claim 15, Wu-Harwood-Chen teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein for the centralized scheduling mode, the method further comprises:
when a service request is received (Wu exemplifies User 63 may send service request to the SDN controller 30 in FIG. 1), determining one or more destination addresses (Wu teaches an IP address of a serving node in a determined service cluster to fulfill the service request) by the first node based on computing resource and network information, and sending the one or more destination addresses to the second node (Wu teaches determining a serving node in a service cluster which has a same IP address or a shared IP address based on the destination address of the service request packet and a load balancing principle, and delivering the generated forwarding flow table to the edge switches; FIG. 1, FIG. 5; para. [0040] “… an SDN controller, such as the SDN controller 30 in FIG. 1, is used to implement a scheduling and decision function of an LBer, and the SDN controller performs automated management on a service cluster according to a same IP address or a shared IP address of a serving node in a same service cluster … the SDN controller follows a serving node load balancing principle, and customizes a packet forwarding flow table to instruct a switch to direct user traffic to a specified serving node …”; para. [0090] “… S53. The SDN controller 30 parses a packet source and destination information of the service request packet, determines a service cluster corresponding to the service request packet according to destination IP address information of the service request packet, selects the serving node A1 in the service cluster A as a target serving node according to a preset load balancing policy, calculates forwarding information between the user 1 and the edge switch 201 of the serving node A1, generates respective forwarding flow tables of the edge switch 201 and the edge switch 200 according to the determined forwarding information, and respectively delivers the respective forwarding flow tables to the edge switch 201 of the serving node Al and the edge switch 200 of the user 1 …”); and
forwarding a data packet by the second node based on the one or more destinations (Wu, FIG. 1; para. [0040] “… The switch receives the forwarding flow table delivered by the SDN controller, and distributes traffic according to an instruction of the forwarding flow table …”);
for the distributed scheduling mode (Examiner notes that the limitations corresponding to “the distributed scheduling mode” modify elements of claim 10 for which Wu-Harwood-Chen is not relied upon, without requiring such elements to be applied. Accordingly, the limitations corresponding to “the distributed scheduling mode” is rejected for similar reasons as claim 10), the method further comprises: when a service request is received, determining one or more destination addresses by the second node based on computing power and network information, and forwarding a data packet based on the one or more destinations.
Wu-Harwood does not explicitly teach, but Chen teaches computing power as network computing resource (Chen, para. [0136] “… The CFN (i.e. computing first network or computing force network) is used as an example. In the CFN, a network is for being aware of computing power information of a serving node in real time, and the serving node is flexibly selected based on the computing power information, to implement optimal utilization of a resource in the entire network …”).
Chen and Wu-Harwood are analogous art because they are both related to computing network systems.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the collecting computing power information techniques of Chen with the system of Wu-Harwood to facilitate a load balancing function for performing session persistence in a network system (Chen, para. [0003]).
For Claim 17, Wu-Harwood-Chen teaches the method according to claim 15, wherein forwarding a data packet based on the one or more destinations specifically comprises:
when one destination address is determined, forwarding the data packet to a node corresponding to the one destination address (Examiner notes that the branch of “one destination address” is selected for examination based on the claim structure; Wu, FIG. 1; para. [0040] “… The SDN controller captures an IP address conflict in a tenant network, identifies the shared IP address and manages the service cluster based on the shared IP address, and distinguishes different serving nodes in the service cluster using a MAC address. In addition, the SDN controller follows a serving node load balancing principle, and customizes a packet forwarding flow table to instruct a switch to direct user traffic to a specified serving node. The switch receives the forwarding flow table delivered by the SDN controller, and distributes traffic according to an instruction of the forwarding flow table …”); or
when a plurality of destination addresses are determined, forwarding the data packet to a plurality of nodes corresponding to the plurality of destination addresses, and carrying a measurement message in the data packet; receiving measurement response messages returned by the plurality of nodes, selecting a destination address from the plurality of destination addresses based on measurement results carried in the measurement response messages, and forwarding the data packet to a node corresponding to the destination address selected.
For Claim 18, Wu-Harwood-Chen teaches the method according to claim 17, further comprising: generating a routing forwarding table by the second node based on the one destination address or the destination address selected (Chen teaches the CFN router generating a session table for routing the packet flow to a service instance, the session identifier including the destination address; FIG. 2, FIG. 9; para. [0127] “… 2. The ingress CFN router selects an S1 instance of Node 2 for service by using the load balancing algorithm for the first data packet of a flow for a user to access S1. As shown in FIG. 2, load of the S1 instance of Node 2 in three serving nodes is the smallest, and a corresponding metric is the smallest …”; para. [0128] “… 3. The ingress CFN router sends the first data packet to the egress CFN router connected to Node 2 and generates a session table for the flow …”; para. [0170] “… As shown in FIG. 9, the first session identifier carried in the packet B includes the source address (SIP1) and the destination address (DIP1) …”); and
forwarding subsequent data packets based on the routing forwarding table (Chen, FIG. 2; para. [0129] “… 4. Subsequent data packets of the flow are sent to a same instance, namely, an instance of an APP 1 of Node 2, to maintain a session connection …”);
wherein the second node supports at least one of: an addressing mode based on a service ID, an addressing mode based on an Internet Protocol (IP) address (Chen, FIG. 9; para. [0159] “… Refer to FIG. 9, a first node (a conversion node) receives a packet A sent by a client C1. The packet A includes a source address (SIP1), a destination address (DIP1), a protocol type (TCP), a source port (TSP1), and a destination port (TDP1), where the source address (SIP1) and the destination address (DIP1) are in a network-side IP header of the packet …”), or an addressing mode based on a service ID and an IP address.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the collecting computing power information techniques of Chen with the system of Wu-Harwood to facilitate a load balancing function for performing session persistence in a network system (Chen, para. [0003]).
For Claim 20, Wu-Harwood-Chen teaches the method according to claim 18,
wherein when the second node supports the addressing mode based on the service ID, determining a forwarding path by the second node based on a service ID carried in the service request, and forwarding the data packet based on the forwarding path;
when the second node supports the addressing mode based on the IP address, determining a forwarding path by the second node based on an IP address carried in the service request, and forwarding the data packet based on the forwarding path (Chen teaches the CFN router generating a session table for routing the packet flow to a service instance, the session identifier including the destination address which is an IP address; Examiner notes that the branch of “based on an IP address” is selected for examination based on the claim structure since the branch of “based on an IP address” is selected for examination in claim 18 upon which claim 20 depends; FIG. 2, FIG. 9; para. [0127] “… 2. The ingress CFN router selects an S1 instance of Node 2 for service by using the load balancing algorithm for the first data packet of a flow for a user to access S1. As shown in FIG. 2, load of the S1 instance of Node 2 in three serving nodes is the smallest, and a corresponding metric is the smallest …”; para. [0128] “… 3. The ingress CFN router sends the first data packet to the egress CFN router connected to Node 2 and generates a session table for the flow …”; para. [0159] “… Refer to FIG. 9, a first node (a conversion node) receives a packet A sent by a client C1. The packet A includes a source address (SIP1), a destination address (DIP1), a protocol type (TCP), a source port (TSP1), and a destination port (TDP1), where the source address (SIP1) and the destination address (DIP1) are in a network-side IP header of the packet …”; para. [0170] “… As shown in FIG. 9, the first session identifier carried in the packet B includes the source address (SIP1) and the destination address (DIP1) …”);
when the second node supports the addressing mode based on the service ID and the IP address, determining a forwarding path by the second node based on a service ID and an IP address carried in the service request, and forwarding the data packet based on the forwarding path.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the collecting computing power information techniques of Chen with the system of Wu-Harwood to facilitate a load balancing function for performing session persistence in a network system (Chen, para. [0003]).
For Claim 23, the claim is substantially similar to claim 1 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim 24, the claim is substantially similar to claim 2 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim 26, the claim is substantially similar to claim 4 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim 32, the claim is substantially similar to claim 10 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim 37, the claim is substantially similar to claim 15 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim 39, the claim is substantially similar to claim 17 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim 40, the claim is substantially similar to claim 18 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim 42, the claim is substantially similar to claim 20 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim 47, the claim is substantially similar to claim 1 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above. Additionally, Wu teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing a computer program which causes a computer to execute a routing method (Wu, para. [0097] “… Persons of ordinary skill in the art may understand that all or some of the steps of the embodiments may be implemented by hardware or a program instructing related hardware. The program may be stored in a computer-readable storage medium …”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 5 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180278541 A1 (hereinafter Wu), in view of US 20200142753 A1 (hereinafter Harwood), in view of US 20230275830 A1 (hereinafter Chen), and in further view of US 20190199634 A1 (hereinafter Veres).
For Claim 5, Wu-Harwood-Chen teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the routing system further supports at least one of: a centralized perception mode (Wu teaches that the SDN controller performs a service scheduling and management function, FIG. 1, para. [0040]; Examiner notes that the branch of “a centralized perception mode” is selected for examination based on the claim structure with a list of alternatives), or a distributed perception mode;
wherein the centralized perception mode is that computing resource and network information is all collected by the first node (Wu teaches the SDN controller detecting a health status of a service cluster/nodes (i.e. computing resources) and collecting network traffic statistics information; FIG. 1; para. [0038] “… As shown in FIG. 1, the tenant network 31 defines a service cluster 7 …”; para. [0045] “… An SDN controller 30 manages the service cluster of the tenant according to the shared IP address, identifies a serving node of the shared IP address in a tenant network, establishes the service cluster and expands a capacity of the service cluster based on the serving node of the shared IP address, regularly detects a health status of each node in the service cluster, and reduces a capacity of the service cluster or deletes the service cluster according to a health check result …”; para. [0092] “… The SDN controller 30 periodically collects, from the edge switch of the serving node, a traffic statistics result of each forwarding flow table statistically collected by the edge switch, filters service response traffic data from a traffic statistics result of each forwarding flow table in order to implement monitoring of traffic load of the serving node …”);
wherein the distributed perception mode is that computing power and network are all collected by the second node.
Wu-Harwood does not explicitly teach, but Chen teaches computing power as network computing resource (Chen, para. [0136] “… The CFN (i.e. computing first network or computing force network) is used as an example. In the CFN, a network is for being aware of computing power information of a serving node in real time, and the serving node is flexibly selected based on the computing power information, to implement optimal utilization of a resource in the entire network …”).
Chen and Wu-Harwood are analogous art because they are both related to computing network systems.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the collecting computing power information techniques of Chen with the system of Wu-Harwood to facilitate a load balancing function for performing session persistence in a network system (Chen, para. [0003]).
Wu-Harwood-Chen does not explicitly teach, but Veres teaches the network nodes being switched ON or OFF of collecting network information in order to support the routing system between the centralized perception mode and the perception mode centralized and distributed in coordination (Veres teaches the central management system controlling the network traffic data collection by turning on the NetFlow emission (analogous to the perception mode centralized and distributed in coordination) and turning off the NetFlow emission (analogous to the centralized perception mode) based on the network system condition; FIG. 1, FIG. 2; para. [0037] “… The central management system 130 controls the amount of network traffic data collection based on a specific situation. The central management system 130 may collect network traffic data from a number of different network devices …”; para. [0055] “… In this example, the traffic monitor on the Netflow producer module 290 monitors traffic of a specific application. Based on this traffic, the system will compute a score (i.e. Application Performance Score APS) for the application … The NetFlow emitter on the Netflow producer module 290 monitors traffic flowing through it and produces a NetFlow v9 record for each flow on the network …”; para. [0057] “… The central management system 130 will monitor the application performance scores (APS) produced by the appliance such as the network traffic appliance 126. When the APS drops below a threshold value, the central management system 130 will communicate with the Netflow producer module 290 to instruct it to start emitting the NetFlow v9 records … These records are sent to the central management system 130 for collection and later reporting. The central management system 130 continues to monitor the APS; when it returns to a value above the customer specified value, the central management system 130 instructs the Netflow producer module 290 to stop emitting NetFlow records …”).
Veres and Wu-Harwood-Chen are analogous art because they are both related to computing network systems.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the selected augmentation of data collection techniques of Veres with the system of Wu-Harwood-Chen to facilitate a network system to operate more efficiently and “scale to higher levels of traffic monitoring without having to increase its overall capacity (Veres, para. [0060]).
For Claim 27, the claim is substantially similar to claim 5 and therefore is rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed below, thank you:
i. US 20200244722 A1 (hereinafter Jeuk) teaches to provide a method for managing network operations. The method generally includes selecting an edge cloud of a plurality of edge clouds to be used for performing one or more network operations for at least one endpoint device. In certain aspects, the selection may be based on an indication of at least one of an amount of available resources or capabilities associated with each of the plurality of edge clouds. In certain aspects, the method also includes configuring the edge cloud to perform the one or more network operations based on the selection (Abstract).
ii. US 20170295082 A1 (hereinafter Wu) teaches an auto-scaling software-defined monitoring ("SDM") platform for software-defined networking ("SDN") service assurance. According to one aspect of the concepts and technologies disclosed herein, an SDM controller can monitor event data associated with a network even that occurred within a virtualized IP SDN network that is monitored by a virtualized SDM resources platform. The SDM controller can measure, based upon the event data, a quality of service ("QoS") performance metric associated with the virtualized SDM resource platform. The SDN controller can determine, based upon the QoS performance metric, whether an autoscaling operation is to be performed. The auto-scaling operation can include reconfiguring the virtualized SDM resources platform by adding virtual machine capacity for supporting event management tasks either by instantiating a new virtual machine or by migrating an existing virtual machine to a new hardware host (Abstract).
Conclusion
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 ZONGHUA DU whose telephone number is (408)918-7596. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5 PM PST.
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 on (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.
/Z.D./Examiner, Art Unit 2444
/SCOTT B CHRISTENSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights