Obviousness

To conduct an obviousness analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for US patent 8,117,639, it is necessary to identify specific prior art references that would, individually or in combination, render the claimed invention obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (i.e., before the priority date of October 10, 2002). This analysis typically involves:

1. Identifying the scope and content of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art.
3. Determining the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering secondary indicia of obviousness (e.g., commercial success, long-felt need, failure of others).

However, the provided "Prior Art" section of this analysis explicitly lists "Prior art keywords" (user, network, packet, rules, control device) and a "Prior art date" (2002-10-10), but does not include any specific prior art references, such as patent numbers, publications, or other documents. Without specific prior art documents to examine, it is not possible to:

• Identify particular combinations of references.
• Detail the precise teachings of any specific prior art.
• Articulate why a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine them, as such motivations are typically drawn from the teachings of the references themselves, common general knowledge, or other factors known at the time.

Therefore, I cannot perform the requested obviousness analysis or identify combinations of prior art references that would render the claims obvious. A comprehensive obviousness analysis requires access to and detailed review of relevant prior art documents.