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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending per amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-8, 10-14 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Applicant disclosed RFC 8986: Segment Routing over IPv6 (Srv6) Network Programming (hereinafter RFC 8986).
For claim 1, RFC 8986 discloses:
A network device applied to a first node, comprising:
one or more memories configured to store instructions; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to execute the instructions (page 7, “3.2. SID Allocation within an SR Domain”: a plurality of router devices enabled for SRv6 disclosed), wherein execution of the instructions causes the network device to:
receive a first packet, comprising a first destination address field, wherein the first destination address field comprises a first segment identifier (page 6, second paragraph” “When an Srv6 SID is in the Destination Address field of an IPv6 header of a packet, it is routed through transit nodes…”; page 4, “2. Terminology”: SID defined as Segment ID);
determine, from the first destination address field, a first arguments field corresponding to the first segment identifier (page 6, “3.1 SID Format”: SRv6 SID format is LOC (locator):FUNCT (function):ARG (argument)); and
execute at least one first processing behavior indicated by the first arguments field (pages 9-10, “4. SR Endpoint Behaviors” and “Table 1: Endpoint Behaviors”: “…any behavior can be attached to a local SID; for example, a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”).
For claim 2, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 1, wherein executing the instructions further causes the network device to: identify at least one behavior instruction carried in the first arguments field; and execute the at least one first processing behavior indicated by the at least one behavior instruction (page 6, SID Format packet includes ARG (argument function; pages 9-10, “a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”)
For claim 3, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 2, wherein executing the instructions further causes the network device to:
identify, based on an arguments field template, the at least one behavior instruction carried in the first arguments field, wherein the arguments field template defines at least one of a type, a location, or a length of the at least one behavior instruction carried in the first arguments field (page 6, “3.1 SID Format”: SRv6 SID format is LOC (locator):FUNCT (function):ARG (argument); pages 9-10, “4. SR Endpoint Behaviors, Table 1”: Table of endpoint behaviors that may be associated with endpoint disclosed; “…any behavior can be attached to a local SID; for example, a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”).
For claim 6, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 2, wherein executing the instructions further causes the network device to: identify at least one flag bit carried in the first arguments field, wherein each flag bit corresponds to the at least one behavior instruction; and identify, based on the at least one flag bit, the at least one behavior instruction carried in the first arguments field (page 6-7, “3.1. SID Format”: Arguments (ARG) bit encoding disclosed; ARG bits of SRv6 SID governs endpoint behavior processing/treatment of packets).
For claim 7, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 6, wherein each flag bit indicates whether the first arguments field carries the corresponding at least one behavior instruction; or indicates whether the corresponding at least one behavior instruction in the first arguments field can be identified (page 6-7, “3.1. SID Format”: Arguments (ARG) bit encoding disclosed; ARG bits of SRv6 SID governs endpoint behavior processing/treatment of packets).
For claim 8, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 1, wherein executing the instructions further causes the network device to: determine that a structured parameter function of the first node is in an enabled state (pages 6-7, “3.1. SID Format”: SRv6 endpoint behavior information is included in ARG bits of the SID); and execute the at least one first processing behavior indicated by the first arguments field; or determine that the first arguments field is a structured arguments field based on at least one of a SRv6 (Segment Routing over IPv6) behavior or a SRv6 flavor indicated by a function field in the first segment identifier; and execute the at least one first processing behavior indicated by the first arguments field (pages 9-10, “4. SR Endpoint Behaviors” and “Table 1: Endpoint Behaviors”: “…any behavior can be attached to a local SID; for example, a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”).
For claim 10, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 1, wherein a length of the first segment identifier is 128 bits (page 6: “…an SRv6 SID as consisting of LOC:FUNCT:ARG, where a locator (LOC) is encoded in the L most significant bits of the SID, followed by F bits of function (FUNCT) and A bits of arguments (ARG). L, the locator length, is flexible, and an operator is free to use the locator length of their choice. F and A may be any value as long as L+F+A <= 128 (bits).”).
For claim 11, RFC 8986 discloses:
A network device, comprising:
one or more memories configured to store instructions; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to execute the instructions (page 7, “3.2. SID Allocation within an SR Domain”: a plurality of router devices enabled for SRv6 disclosed), wherein execution of the instructions causes the network device to:
encapsulate a first segment identifier into a first packet (page 6, second paragraph” “When an Srv6 SID is in the Destination Address field of an IPv6 header of a packet, it is routed through transit nodes…”; page 4, “2. Terminology”: SID defined as Segment ID; page 1, “Abstract”: “SRv6 network programming framework enables an application to specify a packet processing program by encoding a sequence of instructions in the IPv6 packet header.); and
send the first packet, wherein a node receiving the first packet is configured to determines a first arguments field from a first destination address field of the first packet (page 6, “3.1 SID Format”: SRv6 SID format is LOC (locator):FUNCT (function):ARG (argument)) and executes at least one first processing behavior indicated by the first arguments field, wherein the first arguments field corresponds to the first segment identifier (pages 9-10, “4. SR Endpoint Behaviors” and “Table 1: Endpoint Behaviors”: “…any behavior can be attached to a local SID; for example, a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”).
For claim 12, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 11, wherein executing the instructions further causes the network device to:
encapsulate the first segment identifier into the first destination address field; or encapsulate a segment routing header (SRH} into the first packet, wherein the SRH comprises the first segment identifier (page 6, SID Format packet includes ARG (argument function; pages 9-10, “a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”).
For claim 13, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 11, wherein the first packet corresponds to a target service flow, and wherein executing the instructions further causes the network device to:
encapsulate a second segment identifier into a second packet of the target service flow (page 6, second paragraph” “When an Srv6 SID is in the Destination Address field of an IPv6 header of a packet, it is routed through transit nodes…”; page 4, “2. Terminology”: SID defined as Segment ID); and
send the second packet, wherein a node receiving the second packet is configured to determines a second arguments field from a second destination address field of the second packet, and executes at least one second processing behavior indicated by the second arguments field (page 6, “3.1 SID Format”: SRv6 SID format is LOC (locator):FUNCT (function):ARG (argument)), wherein
the second arguments field corresponds to the second segment identifier, and the at least one second processing behavior is different from the at least one first processing behavior (pages 9-10, “4. SR Endpoint Behaviors” and “Table 1: Endpoint Behaviors”: “…any behavior can be attached to a local SID; for example, a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”).
For claim 14, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 13, wherein the node indicated by the first segment identifier is the same as the node indicated by the second segment identifier (page 6, second paragraph” “When an Srv6 SID is in the Destination Address field of an IPv6 header of a packet, it is routed through transit nodes…”; page 4, “2. Terminology”: SID defined as Segment ID).
For claim 16, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 11, wherein the first segment identifier comprises the first arguments field is comprised in the first segment identifier, ;or the first arguments field is located behind after the first segment identifier (page 6, “3.1 SID Format”: SRv6 SID format is LOC (locator):FUNCT (function):ARG (argument)).
For claim 17, RFC 8986 discloses:
A packet forwarding method applied to a packet forwarding system, wherein the method comprises:
receiving, by a first node, a first packet comprising a first destination address, wherein a first destination address field of the first packet comprises a first segment identifier (page 6, second paragraph” “When an Srv6 SID is in the Destination Address field of an IPv6 header of a packet, it is routed through transit nodes…”; page 4, “2. Terminology”: SID defined as Segment ID);
determining, by the first node from the first destination address field, a first arguments field corresponding to the first segment identifier (page 6, “3.1 SID Format”: SRv6 SID format is LOC (locator):FUNCT (function):ARG (argument)); and
executing, by the first node, at least one first processing behavior indicated by the first arguments field (pages 9-10, “4. SR Endpoint Behaviors” and “Table 1: Endpoint Behaviors”: “…any behavior can be attached to a local SID; for example, a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”);
receiving, by a second node, a second packet sent by the first node, wherein the second packet is obtained based on the first packet, and a second destination address field of the second packet comprises a second segment identifier (page 6, second paragraph” “When an Srv6 SID is in the Destination Address field of an IPv6 header of a packet, it is routed through transit nodes…”; page 4, “2. Terminology”: SID defined as Segment ID; That is, the packet flowing through network are routed in accordance with DA (destination address) in header of packet);
determining, by the second node, a second arguments field from the second destination address field, wherein the second arguments field corresponds to the second segment identifier (page 6, “3.1 SID Format”: SRv6 SID format is LOC (locator):FUNCT (function):ARG (argument)); and
executing, by the second node, at least one second processing behavior indicated by the second arguments field (pages 9-10, “4. SR Endpoint Behaviors” and “Table 1: Endpoint Behaviors”: “…any behavior can be attached to a local SID; for example, a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”).
For claim 18, RFC 8986 discloses:
The method according to claim 17, wherein the first arguments field and the second arguments field are a same field (page 6, SID Format packet includes ARG (argument function; pages 9-10, “a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”).
For claim 19, RFC 8986 discloses:
The method according to claim 17, wherein the at least one first processing behavior is the same as the at least one second processing behavior (page 6, SID Format packet includes ARG (argument function; pages 9-10, “a node N can bind a SID to a local Virtual Machine (VM) or container that can apply any complex processing on the packet, provided there is an SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint allocated for the processing.”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 9, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant disclosed RFC 8986: Segment Routing over IPv6 (Srv6) Network Programming (hereinafter RFC 8986), in view of NPL Compressed SRv6 Segment List Encoding in SRH” (hereinafter RFC 9800).
For claim 9, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose “wherein the first segment identifier is a compressed segment identifier, and a length of the compressed segment identifier is less than 128 bits.”
However, in a related field, RFC 9800 discloses a compressed segment list encoding for SRv6 SIDs, wherein the segment-list field is 128 bits (page 4, “3. Basic Concepts”, paragraphs 1-5 and page 4, “3. Basic Concepts”: “…when the combined length of SRv6 SID, function and argument is smaller than 128 bits, the trailing bits are set to zero”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before effective filing date of instant application to have introduced RFC 9800’s disclosure alongside RFC 8966. The motivation to combine would have been to achieve data storage efficiency by compressing portions of SID packet (RFC 9800, page 4, last paragraph – page 5, 1st full paragraph).
For claim 15, RFC 8986 discloses:
The network device according to claim 11, but fails to disclose “wherein the first segment identifier is a compressed segment identifier, and a length of the compressed segment identifier is less than 128 bits; or a length of the first segment identifier is 128 bits.”
However, in a related field, RFC 9800 discloses a compressed segment list encoding for SRv6 SIDs, wherein the segment-list field is 128 bits (page 4, “3. Basic Concepts”, paragraphs 1-5 and page 4, “3. Basic Concepts”: “…when the combined length of SRv6 SID, function and argument is smaller than 128 bits, the trailing bits are set to zero”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before effective filing date of instant application to have introduced RFC 9800’s disclosure alongside RFC 8966. The motivation to combine would have been to achieve data storage efficiency by compressing portions of SID packet (RFC 9800, page 4, last paragraph – page 5, 1st full paragraph).
For claim 20, RFC 8986 discloses:
The method according to claim 17, but fails to disclose “wherein both the first segment identifier and the second segment identifier are compressed segment identifiers and a length of the compressed segment identifier is less than 128 bits; or both a length of the first segment identifier and a length of the second segment identifier are 128 bits.”
However, in a related field, RFC 9800 discloses a compressed segment list encoding for SRv6 SIDs, wherein the segment-list field is 128 bits (page 4, “3. Basic Concepts”, paragraphs 1-5 and page 4, “3. Basic Concepts”: “…when the combined length of SRv6 SID, function and argument is smaller than 128 bits, the trailing bits are set to zero”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before effective filing date of instant application to have introduced RFC 9800’s disclosure alongside RFC 8966. The motivation to combine would have been to achieve data storage efficiency by compressing portions of SID packet (RFC 9800, page 4, last paragraph – page 5, 1st full paragraph).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a. Wen USP 12316724;
b. Shaw USP 11477119.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAYTON R WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-3801. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:00pm.
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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/CLAYTON R WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights