Appeal No. 2002-1527 Page 11
Application No. 08/885,817
public keys are stored in and obtained from a domain name server, viz., a CA. The
relevance of the appellants' argument whence "a private key . . . is obtained," (Supp.
Appeal Br. at 6 (emphasis added), escapes us. Therefore, we affirm the rejection of
claims 2, 11, 15, 25, and 34.
Regarding claim 35, the appellants rely on their argument for claim 34. Having
found the argument unpersuasive, we affirm the rejection of claim 35.
C. CLAIM 4
Observing that "Aziz discloses . . . transmitting and receiving multicasts . . . and
further discloses that only group members would be authorized to send and receive
multicasts (col 14, lines 11-17)," (Supp. Examiner's Answer at 6), the examiner "infers
that messages to and from non-members (users which are not on the group
membership list) would be blocked." (Id.) The appellants argue, "[i]n Aziz, no routing
element is disclosed that does any decoding of a join request." (Supp. Appeal Br. at 6.)
Turning to Aziz, the reference discloses that "[w]hen secure multicasting to a
multicast address M is required, a group membership creation primitive will establish
the group key Kg and the membership list of addresses that are allowed to transmit and
receive encrypted multicast datagrams to and from group address M." Col. 14, ll. 11-
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007