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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect the previously applied 35 USC 102 rejections to the independent claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Particularly, those claims are now rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Raghunath in view of Nadeau which was previously cited.
The applicant argues with respect to amended claims 1 and 10 that Nadeau fails to rectify the deficiencies of Raghunath as Nadeau does not disclose, teach or suggest, at least, "the first information indicates one or more network services available in a first network, and the first information is used by a first device, associated with the ALTO client, to obtain the one or more network services, wherein the one or more network services comprise at least one of: a service function chain service, a network slicing service, or a computing capability service."
The examiner disagrees. Raghunath discloses the parent claim but for not explicitly disclosing the one or more network services comprise at least one of: a service function chain service, a network slicing service or a computing capability service. Nadeau cures this deficiency by disclosing one or more network services available in a first network associated with the ALTO client, wherein the one or more network services comprise at least one of: a service function chain service, a network slicing service, or a computing capability service ([0105], particularly, “Controller 20 iterates through the set of service points 210A, 210B, and 210D for the service chain, starting at service point 210A and ending at service point 210D, and computes the shortest constraint-based sub-paths between each pair of the service points in the service chain. To compute the shortest constraint-based sub-paths between a pair of service points, controller 20 may apply an algorithm represented by steps of operation 118 of FIG. 6. That is, controller 20 may use an active topology to compute a constraint-conforming end-to-end path that traverses the sub-network of the active topology between the pair of service points. The active topology may be obtained from one or more active topology servers just prior to computation, e.g., ALTO, I2RS, BGP, and other such servers that provide topology as a service to controller 20.)”)
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.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raghunath et al (US Pub. No. 2014/0101254), hereafter, “Raghunath,” in view of Nadeau et al (US Pub. No. 2015/0200838), hereafter, “Nadeau.”
As to claim 1, Raghunath discloses an application layer traffic optimization (ALTO) protocol-based communication method (Abstract), comprising:
sending, by an ALTO server, first information to an ALTO client, wherein the first information is sent according to an ALTO protocol, the first information indicates one or more network services available in a first network, and the first information is used by a first device, associated with the ALTO client, to obtain the one or more network services ([0009]-[0010], particularly, “The CDN cache nodes provide status updates to the ALTO server, which incorporates the status update into calculation of ALTO network maps and cost maps. For example, a CDN cache node may send the ALTO server a status update stating that its content service is not operational. The ALTO server thus removes the node from the network map and updates the cost map accordingly. Because status updates regarding congestion or other network conditions may result in frequent modifications to the network map, the techniques cause the ALTO server to proactively update ALTO clients with incremental network map and cost map revisions. The incremental map revisions enable the ALTO clients to update a prior version of the network and cost maps, rather than receive the full network and cost maps in the update. In this manner, the techniques may allow ALTO clients to maintain current network and cost maps yet avoid traffic in the network that would otherwise result from frequent complete network or cost map transmissions.”).
However, Raghunath does not explicitly disclose the one or more network services comprise at least one of: a service function chain service, a network slicing service or a computing capability service.
But, Nadeau discloses one or more network services available in a first network associated with the ALTO client, wherein the one or more network services comprise at least one of: a service function chain service, a network slicing service, or a computing capability service ([0105], particularly, “Controller 20 iterates through the set of service points 210A, 210B, and 210D for the service chain, starting at service point 210A and ending at service point 210D, and computes the shortest constraint-based sub-paths between each pair of the service points in the service chain. To compute the shortest constraint-based sub-paths between a pair of service points, controller 20 may apply an algorithm represented by steps of operation 118 of FIG. 6. That is, controller 20 may use an active topology to compute a constraint-conforming end-to-end path that traverses the sub-network of the active topology between the pair of service points. The active topology may be obtained from one or more active topology servers just prior to computation, e.g., ALTO, I2RS, BGP, and other such servers that provide topology as a service to controller 20.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau in order to extend Raghunath’s system to be compatible with a broader variety of applications and services and thereby increase its usage.
As to claim 10, Raghunath discloses an application layer traffic optimization (ALTO) protocol-based communication method, comprising:
receiving, by an ALTO client, first information from an ALTO server, wherein the first information is received according to an ALTO protocol, the first information indicates one or more network services available in a first network, and the first information is used by a first device, associated with the ALTO client, to obtain the one or more network services ([0009]-[0010], particularly, “The CDN cache nodes provide status updates to the ALTO server, which incorporates the status update into calculation of ALTO network maps and cost maps. For example, a CDN cache node may send the ALTO server a status update stating that its content service is not operational. The ALTO server thus removes the node from the network map and updates the cost map accordingly. Because status updates regarding congestion or other network conditions may result in frequent modifications to the network map, the techniques cause the ALTO server to proactively update ALTO clients with incremental network map and cost map revisions. The incremental map revisions enable the ALTO clients to update a prior version of the network and cost maps, rather than receive the full network and cost maps in the update. In this manner, the techniques may allow ALTO clients to maintain current network and cost maps yet avoid traffic in the network that would otherwise result from frequent complete network or cost map transmissions.” See also Fig. 9, labels 134-142 and [0076], particularly, “Name server 132 comprises ALTO client 134 that requests and receives a network map and cost map from ALTO server 136 of CDN 130. DNS proxy 138 sends DNS request 152 responsive to DNS request 150 received from host 140, and name server 132 responds by selecting the most appropriate CDN node (in this instance, CDN node 142) based on the IP address of host 140 (forwarded by DNS proxy 138 in DNS request 152) and the network map and cost map received from ALTO server 136.” Illustrating how ALTO clients send the information they receive from the ALTO server to other devices, i.e. the claimed “first device”); and
sending, by the ALTO client, the first information to the first device (Fig. 9, labels 134-142 and [0076], particularly, “Name server 132 comprises ALTO client 134 that requests and receives a network map and cost map from ALTO server 136 of CDN 130. DNS proxy 138 sends DNS request 152 responsive to DNS request 150 received from host 140, and name server 132 responds by selecting the most appropriate CDN node (in this instance, CDN node 142) based on the IP address of host 140 (forwarded by DNS proxy 138 in DNS request 152) and the network map and cost map received from ALTO server 136.”).
However, Raghunath does not explicitly disclose the one or more network services comprise at least one of: a service function chain service, a network slicing service or a computing capability service.
But, Nadeau discloses one or more network services available in a first network associated with the ALTO client, wherein the one or more network services comprise at least one of: a service function chain service, a network slicing service, or a computing capability service ([0105], particularly, “Controller 20 iterates through the set of service points 210A, 210B, and 210D for the service chain, starting at service point 210A and ending at service point 210D, and computes the shortest constraint-based sub-paths between each pair of the service points in the service chain. To compute the shortest constraint-based sub-paths between a pair of service points, controller 20 may apply an algorithm represented by steps of operation 118 of FIG. 6. That is, controller 20 may use an active topology to compute a constraint-conforming end-to-end path that traverses the sub-network of the active topology between the pair of service points. The active topology may be obtained from one or more active topology servers just prior to computation, e.g., ALTO, I2RS, BGP, and other such servers that provide topology as a service to controller 20.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau in order to extend Raghunath’s system to be compatible with a broader variety of applications and services and thereby increase its usage.
As to claim 20, it is rejected by similar rationale to that set forth in claim 1’s rejection.
As to claims 2 and 11, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 1’s rejection further disclose the first information comprises identification information of at least one network service or service capability information of at least one network service (Raghunath, [0035], particularly, “CDN-ALTO server 22 stores ALTO maps, i.e., a network map and cost map, for CDN 6 and provides these maps to ALTO clients, such as CDN-ALTO client 28 of redirector 26. As described in detail below with respect to FIG. 7, a network map contains network location identifiers, or PIDs, that each represents one or more network devices in a network. In general, a PID may represent a single device or device component, a collection of devices such as a network subnet, an SP network, or some other grouping.”)
As to claims 3 and 12, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 1’s rejection further disclose the service capability information of the comprises one or more of following: type information of the network service, specification information of the network service, or quality of service (QoS) information of the network service (Raghunath, [0070] and [0090]).
As to claims 4 and 13, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 1’s rejection further disclose the first information comprises application-aware networking (APN) information related to the at least one network service (Nadeau, Abstract and [0029], particularly, “For example, network orchestration device 17 may facilitate application awareness for application- and/or user-demand responsive path computation and service chain establishment. Network orchestration device 17 may include an Application Programming Interface (API) for policy and network topology/location services, such as Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO), BGP, and Domain Network Service (DNS), for instance.”)
As to claims 5 and 14, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 1’s rejection further disclose the APN information comprises one or more following: APN identifier (ID) information, intent information, or APN parameter information, the APN ID information comprises user group identifier information and/or application group identifier information, and the APN parameter information comprises one or more of: network performance requirement information, security service requirement information, or network service requirement information (Nadeau, [0067]-[0068]).
As to claims 6 and 15, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 1’s rejection further disclose the first information comprises a correspondence between the one or more network services and application-aware networking (APN) information related to the at least one network service (Nadeau, Abstract and [0029], particularly, “For example, network orchestration device 17 may facilitate application awareness for application- and/or user-demand responsive path computation and service chain establishment. Network orchestration device 17 may include an Application Programming Interface (API) for policy and network topology/location services, such as Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO), BGP, and Domain Network Service (DNS), for instance.”)
As to claims 7 and 16, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 1’s rejection further disclose before the sending the first information to the ALTO, the method comprises: determining, by the ALTO server, the first information based at least in part on a target network service selected by the first device, the target network service comprising the one or more network services (Raghunath, [0009]-[0010] and Nadeau, [0105]).
As to claim 8, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 1’s rejection further disclose determining the first information comprises: obtaining, by the ALTO server, second information including, one or more of: topology information of the first network, device information of the first device in the first network, service function chain information of the first network, computing capability information of the first network, or application-aware networking (APN) information of the first network; and determining, by the ALTO server, the first information based on the second information (Raghunath, [0009]-[0010]).
As to claim 9, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 1’s rejection further disclose determining the first information based on the second information comprises: determining, by the ALTO server and based on the second information, the one or more network services available in the first network; and determining, by the ALTO server and based on the one or more network services available in the first network, the first information corresponding to the one or more network services available in the first network (Raghunath, [0009]-[0010]).
As to claim 17, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 10’s rejection further disclose the first information comprises application-aware networking (APN) information related to the at least one network service, and determining, by the ALTO client, the target network service based on the first information comprises: determining, by the ALTO client, the target network service based on the APN information related to the at least one network service (Raghunath, [0042] and Nadeau, Abstract and [0029], particularly, “For example, network orchestration device 17 may facilitate application awareness for application- and/or user-demand responsive path computation and service chain establishment. Network orchestration device 17 may include an Application Programming Interface (API) for policy and network topology/location services, such as Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO), BGP, and Domain Network Service (DNS), for instance.”)
As to claim 18, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 10’s rejection further disclose the first information comprises the correspondence between the one or more network services and application-aware networking (APN) information related to the at least one network service, and determining, by the ALTO client, the target network service based on the first information comprises: determining, by the ALTO client, the target network service based on the correspondence between the one or more network services and the APN information related to the at least one network service (Raghunath, [0042] and Nadeau, Abstract and [0029], particularly, “For example, network orchestration device 17 may facilitate application awareness for application- and/or user-demand responsive path computation and service chain establishment. Network orchestration device 17 may include an Application Programming Interface (API) for policy and network topology/location services, such as Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO), BGP, and Domain Network Service (DNS), for instance.”)
As to claim 19, the teachings of Raghunath and Nadeau as combined for the same reasons set forth in claim 10’s rejection further disclose wherein a type of any one of the one or more network services comprises a traffic engineering (TE) tunnel path service, a security service, a network slicing service, or a computing capability service (Raghunath, [0035] and [0092] and Nadeau, [0105])
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS J DAILEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1246. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:30am-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, Umar Cheema can be reached on 571-270-3037. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THOMAS J DAILEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Prosecution Insights