Pre-Grant Publication Number: 20070192495
Collaborate on the process of community review for this application. Posting will not be forwarded to the USPTO. Flagging a post as an ACTION ITEM signals further research. Flagging SPAM and ABUSE helps to manage discussion. Placing double brackets around a reference to a claim or prior art will create a hyperlink to the original ex. [[claim 1]] and [[prior art 2]].

Please review the Community Code of Conduct prior to posting

Discussion (15)
  Facilitator's Comment     Action Item
  Show without Noise
8
baker james (10 months ago)
this is a test. sorry for inconvenient.
7
G. R. Konrad Roeder (11 months ago)
Regarding Claim 00004, this claim describes that the connection of one mobile per identifier is unique. Any attempt to execute the context by a second process is rejected. This claim re-asserts that the identifier is unique. It's essentially another way of implementing Claim 00003. Anyone skilled in the art can recognize this. Combining this claim with Claim 00001 is obvious.
G. R. Konrad Roeder (10 months ago)
Regarding Claim 00004, When implementing a push to talk IMS/SIP application like Ready Link, maintaining the secuirty tenant of one mobile per identifier is also obvious. In a SIP/IMS implementation, the SIP function would need to drop one of the two duplicate call legs.
6
G. R. Konrad Roeder (11 months ago)
Regarding Claim 00003, this claim describes that the connection of one mobile per identifier is unique. Any attempt to make a second connection to an identifier already being used is rejected. This claim re-asserts that the identifier is unique. Combining this claim with Claim 00001 is obvious. It presents one of the several ways of dealing with a duplicate connection attempt - to keep the old connection.
G. R. Konrad Roeder (10 months ago)
Regarding Claim 0003, Ready Link probably would reject the first session if a second connection was requested due to a disconnect in the protocol states at each end. No matter if the first or the second attempt is dropped, the SIP function would provide this since SIP call legs. SIP does not need duplicate call legs out to the UE for a push to talk application, and it would be obvious to reject one or the other call leg.
5
G. R. Konrad Roeder (11 months ago)
Regarding Claim 00002 This claim describes session persistence. This is done through preserving states at the radio side and the data side. Combining this claim and Claim 00001 is obvious due to the fact that radio connections often do not remain connected. Many gateways have session persistence.
G. R. Konrad Roeder (10 months ago)
Regarding Claim 00002, Ready Link probably does not need session persistence because the session is probably dropped if the caller loses RF connectivity. The next call in the conversation sets up a new session.
4
G. R. Konrad Roeder (11 months ago)
Regarding Claim 00001 Claims a gateway between wireless and wired protocols, stores a session context, maintains a client connection state, and a session identifier which is unique to the session.

PCUs and RNCs are gateways between GSM's wireless data protocols GPRS and UMTS respectively and the Gb interface, which is a wired data interface (IP or frame relay). An associated device, the SGSN maintains a session context called the PDP context, maintains the client connection, and maintains a session identifier which is unique to the session (NSAPI) it connects to the GGSN over a Gn interface. There is nothing novel about combining the PCU and SGSN or the RNC and the SGSN into a single box. This is not done in practice because the SGSN is radio protocol independent and the PCU and RNC are radio protocol dependent.
G. R. Konrad Roeder (10 months ago)
Regarding Claim 00001. Not Novel. 802.11 Access points (like a Linksys WRT-54G) running captive portal gateway software like nocat auth (nocat.net) have been around since 2001. It's basically as a gateway used with Wi-Fi (802.11) access points to restrict access to members of the community. The access point is a bridge between the wireless and wired protocols. The session context consists of the client's mac address, IP address, perhaps what protocols the client is allowed to use, the quality of service, and what destinations are allowed... The connection state is kept by the portal for each user to manage who is authenticated and authorized. A session identifier is used to track the session. Here is the e-mail archive for that project http://lists.nocat.net/pipermail/nocat/
3
G. R. Konrad Roeder (about 1 year ago)
Regarding Claim 00009, This is basically Claim 00001 substituting "A method for operating a gateway for wireless mobile clients in a messaging system,
the messaging system being configured to comprise a plurality of mobile wireless clients,
a core messaging system and at least one gateway process or gateway," with "A gateway computer for wireless mobile clients in a messaging system,
the messaging system being configured to comprise a plurality of mobile wireless clients
and a core messaging system,
with the gateway computer comprising at least one gateway process or gateway". This merely indicates that the gateway's agent function could be done by a computer. There is nothing novel about this configuration either.
2
G. R. Konrad Roeder (about 1 year ago)
Regarding Claim 00001 This is basically claiming a client-server architecture with a relay agent in the middle the gateway is perhaps converting wireless protocols to wired protocols. There is nothing novel here.
Kevin McLaughlin (10 months ago)
An example of a system that meets this description is the "Ready Link" Push-to-Talk system that is used by Sprint. It uses SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) and uses wired and wireless network components (ie, Mobile IP for the IP assignment, TCP for control connection, UDP for voice data, all wireless; and multiple servers on the network side which communicate using TCP). I will try to find some public prior art. Basic link: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pwwi/is_200311/ai_mark612617188
G. R. Konrad Roeder (10 months ago)
ok ...Sprint's Ready Link was made available in 2003. http://telephonyonline.com/backoffice/print/telecom_sprint_ready_link/ I don't understand the Ready Link application in detail, but I do understand SIP and IMS. But, I have limited knowledge about the CDMA transport layers being a GSM guy. But that's not important here

You will need to help me out here. The basic idea is that we need to match the prior art with the claims. We need to address the basic claims in [Claim 0001] which claims a gateway between wireless and wired protocols, stores a session context, maintains a client connection state, and a session identifier which is unique to the session.

The P-CSCF (call session control function) interfaces wireless protocols with the wired protocol, thus it does the gateway function at the IMS layer. The rest of the CSCF stores a session context, maintains a client connection state, a session identifier unique to the session.

Here is a nice description and diagram: http://www.dataconnection.com/sbc/imsarch.htm

The SIP layer does the call control - adding/dropping call legs. As such, it must establish all the call legs when the caller pushes the talk button and drop all the call legs when the caller releases the talk button.


1
G. R. Konrad Roeder (about 1 year ago)
Many companies make gateways to support convergent devices. What is being claimed here is a method of achieving session persistence for messaging systems. A proxy or an agent is not the only way of achieving this. The IBM Lotus Mobile Connect may implement its gateway in a different manner.
baker james (10 months ago)
wow