241 likes | 458 Views
IEEE International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications, 2008. (WIMOB '08 ). Seamless Handover Scheme for Proxy Mobile IPv6. Ju-Eun Kang , LGDACOM CORPORATION/Research Institute of Technology, Korea
E N D
IEEE International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications, 2008. (WIMOB '08) Seamless Handover Scheme for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Ju-EunKang, LGDACOM CORPORATION/Research Institute of Technology, Korea Dong-Won Kum, Yang Li, and You-Ze ChoSchool of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Kyungpook National University, Korea
Outline • Introduction • Proxy Mobile IPv6 and Fast handover Schemes for PMIPv6 • The Proposed Seamless Handover Scheme • Performance Evaluation
Introduction • Mobile IPv6 • well-known mature standard for IPv6 host-based mobility • handover latency, packet loss and signaling overhead • the MIPv6 requires protocol stack modification • Proxy Mobile IPv6 • network-based mobility management support to an MN in a topologically localized domain • allows the serving network to control the mobility management on behalf of an MN • eliminating the MN from any mobility-related signaling • still suffer from handover latency and packet loss during a handover
Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) from: Proxy Mobile IPv6, RFC 5213
Fast Handover Schemes for PMIPv6 • [7] F. Xia, and B. Sarikaya, “Mobile Node Agnostic Fast Handovers for Proxy Mobile IPv6,” Internet-Draft, draft-xia-netlmm-fmip-mnagno-01.txt, July 2007.
limitations • Each MAG needs to have a tuple that contains the BS-IDs and IP addresses for all the MAGs • packet ordering problem after a handover • occurs between the packets buffered at the pMAGand the packets from the LMA after registration. • The MN should provide information about the target network to pMAG through L2 signaling
The advantages of the proposed handover scheme • reduces the handover latency • circumventing authentication and reducing the default router reconfiguration delay • avoid the on-the-fly packet loss during a handover • packet buffering • ensures the packet sequence during a handover • an additional packet buffering at the LMA • the MN is not required to provide any information about the target network to the pMAG • Overheads • Each MAG needs to maintain a database including its attached MN information, such as MN_HNP, MN_IP and LMAA. • sending ND messages to the neighbor MAGs causes additional traffic. • The packet buffering at the MAG and the LMA incurs an overhead. • Nonetheless, the proposed scheme can reduce the handover latency, and avoid the on-the-fly packet loss while ensuring the packet sequence
Performance Evaluation • IEEE 802.11b • 2 Mbps link bandwidth. • A CBR with 0.01 second intervals and FTP application using TCP Reno is considered. 400m 100m 150m
International Conference On Mobile Technology, Applications, And Systems, 2008MobiWorld workshop Infrastructure-based Route Optimization for NEMO based on Combined Local and Global Mobility Christian Bauer, SerkanAyaz,German Aerospace Center Max Ehammer, Thomas GräuplandUniversity of Salzburg FabriceArnalThales Alenia Space France
Outline • Introduction • Scenario of proxy-LMA protocol • MR in foreign non-PMIP domain • MR in foreign PMIP domain
Introduction • There is currently great interest in NEMO, especially from the side of the aeronautical and Car2Car communications community • that have a great need for network mobility solutions. • the lack of Route Optimization in the NEMO Basic support protocol has proved to be a major obstacle for its deployment. • The NEMO Basic Support protocol [12] extends MIPv6 from a Mobile Host (MH) to support Mobile Routers (MR) • Mobility management has been partitioned into four independent parts of two dimensions • local vs. global mobility and • host vs. router mobility. • MIP and NEMO are addressing global mobility for both hosts and routers • whereas PMIPv6 provides local mobility for hosts only (as of now)
Global HA to HA protocol • 3GPP TR 24.801 v0.9.0, “3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Core Network and Terminals; 3GPP System Architecture Evolution; CT WG1 Aspects (Release 8)”, May 2008. • Provide some extent of route optimization support for NEMO-bs • relies on a distributed HA architecture • that allows the MR to bind with its topologically closest HA • supported by the Dynamic Home Agent Address Discovery (DHAAD) procedure • defined in MIPv6 using IPv6 anycast addressing
Scenario of proxy-LMA protocol roaming agreement
consist of more than one LMA and associated MAGs • allows MRs to bind to the closest LMA instead to the original one at the home link • serve as a proxy HA and • accepts traffic originating from and destined to the MR • nearly optimal routing is achieved • In a non-PMIP access network, the MR will have to make use of its NEMO functionality to achieve network mobility.
MR in foreign non-PMIP domain NEMO-bs BU/BA
MR in foreign PMIP domain HA/LMA of the MR(Home LMA)
Our primary use case for this RO procedure is Air Traffic Services and Airline Operational Serviceswhere only a very limited number of CNs exist. 22