Excerpt
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
i
Acknowledgement
____________________________________________________
With exception, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the Almighty Allah who is
full of mercy and compassion for giving me strength and good health during the whole period of
my study.
I am highly indebted to my mother for her love, blessings, support and encouragement
during the days of research.
Finally I thank my friends and not forgetting my course mates for their frankness and
availability to discuss diverse social and academic issues, some of whom contributed to this
study by providing constructive criticism and moral support.
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
ii
Abstract
______________________________________________
Mobile Internet Protocol (MIP), the current International Engineering Task Force (IETF)
proposal for IP mobility support, represents a key element for future all-Internet Protocol (IP)
wireless networks to provide service continuity while on the move within a multi-access
environment. A performance evaluation of Mobile internet protocol version 6 (IPv6) and its
proposed enhancements, i.e., Fast Handovers for Mobile IPv6, Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 was
conducted. And a combination of fast handover (FMIPv6) and hierarchical mobile IPv6
(HMIPv6) was proposed and simulated by using the network simulator NS-2. The simulation
scenario comprised two access routers and one mobile node that communicated in accordance
with the IEEE 802.11 wireless LAN standards. The study provides quantitative results of the
performance improvements obtained by the proposed enhancements as observed by a single
mobile user with respect to handoff latency, throughput, packet delivery ratio, average jitter etc.
In addition to this, the signaling load costs associated with the performance improvements
provided by the enhancements has been analyzed. The handover delay reduction approaches,
specifically the Fast Handover Mobile Ipv6 FHMIPv6 have been shown. The thesis concludes
with the analysis of simulation results, evaluating the MIPv6, HMIPv6 and FHMIPv6
performance and finally gives some suggestions for the future work.
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
v
Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES
vi
ACRONYMS
vii
______________________________________________________________________________
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1
1.1 Research Motivation
1
1.2 Local and Global Mobility
2
1.3 Host Based Mobility
3
1.4 Mobile IPv6
4
1.5 Hierarchical Structures and Protocols
5
1.6 Hierarchical Mobile IPv6
5
1.7 FHMIPv6
6
1.8 Research Objectives
8
1.9 Thesis Outlines
8
CHAPTER 2: MOBILE IP PROTOCOL (MIP)
9
2.1 Internet Protocol (IP) Overview
9
2.2 IPv4 Addressing and Sub-Netting
10
2.2.1 Hardware Addressing
10
2.2.2 Logical Addressing
10
2.3 Internet Protocol (IP)
10
2.3.1 IPv4 Addressing
11
2.3.2 IPv6 Addressing
12
2.4 Mobile IP Version 4 (MIPv4)
13
2.5 Mobile IP Version 6 (MIPv6)
15
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
iv
2.6 Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN)
18
CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE SURVEY
19
3.1 Problem Statement
25
CHAPTER 4: HANDOVER DELAY
26
4.1 Handover Delay Reasons
26
4.1.1 Standard MIPv6 Handover Delay
27
4.1.2 HMIPv6 Handover Delay
28
4.1.3 FMIPv6 Handover Delay
28
4.1.4 FHMIPv6 Handover Delay
28
CHAPTER 5: THE SIMULATION
29
5.1 Simulation Goals
29
5.2 Simulation Model
29
5.3 Mobile IP Extension
29
5.3.1 Delay Reduction Extension to NS2
30
5.4 Simulation Scenario
31
CHAPTER 6: THE RESULTS
33
6.1 Results at Varying Speed of MN
33
6.2 Results Obtained By Increasing the Simulation Time
38
6.3 Result Analysis
43
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
44
7.1 Conclusion
44
7.2 Future Work
44
REFERENCES
45-48
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
v
Figure 1.1
Local and Global Mobility
2
List of Figures
Figure 2.1
IPv4 Header Format
11
Figure 2.2
IPv6 Header Format
12
Figure 2.3
Mobile IP Version 4 (MIPv4)
15
Figure 2.4
Mobile IP Version 6 (MIPv6)
17
Figure 5.1
MIPv6 Studied Simulation Scenario
30
Figure 5.2
HMIPv6, FHMIPv6 Studied Simulation Scenario
32
Figure 6.1
Packet Delivery Ratio by varying the speed of MN
36
Figure 6.2
Average Throughput by varying the speed of MN
36
Figure 6.3
Average Handover Delay by varying the speed of MN
37
Figure 6.4
Average Jitter by varying the speed of MN
38
Figure 6.5
Packet Delivery Ratio by increasing the simulation time
41
Figure 6.6
Average Handover Delay by increasing the simulation time
41
Figure 6.7
Average Throughput by increasing the simulation time
42
Figure 6.8
Average Jitter by increasing the simulation time
42
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
vi
Table 6.1
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 1m/s
33
List of Tables
Table 6.2
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 2m/s
33
Table 6.3
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 3m/s
34
Table 6.4
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 4m/s
34
Table 6.5
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 5m/s
34
Table 6.6
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 6m/s
34
Table 6.7
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 7m/s
35
Table 6.8
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 8m/s
35
Table 6.9
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 9m/s
35
Table 6.10
Performance metrics while MN is moving at speed 10m/s
35
Table 6.11
Performance metrics at simulation time 90 seconds
39
Table 6.12
Performance metrics at simulation time 100 seconds
39
Table 6.13
Performance metrics at simulation time 110 seconds
39
Table 6.14
Performance metrics at simulation time 120 seconds
39
Table 6.15
Performance metrics at simulation time 130 seconds
40
Table 6.16
Performance metrics at simulation time 140 seconds
40
Table 6.17
Performance metrics at simulation time 150 seconds
40
Table 6.18
Performance metrics at simulation time 160 seconds
40
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
vii
ARP
Acronyms
Address Resolution Protocol
BS
Base Station
CoA
Care-of-Address
CN
Correspondent Node
DHCP
Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
DSR
Dynamic Source Routing
DSDV
Destination Sequence Distance Vector
FA
Foreign Agent
FBACK
Fast Binding Acknowledge
FBU
Fast Binding Update
FMIP
Fast Mobile IP
FNA
Fast Neighbor Advertisement
FNAACK
Fast Neighbor Advertisement
Acknowledgment
HA
Home Agent
HACK
Handover Acknowledge
HI
Handover Initiate
HMIP
Hierarchical Mobile IP
IETF
Internet Engineering Task Force
LCOA
On-Link Care-of-Address
L2
Layer 2
L3
Layer 3
MAP
Mobility Anchor Point
MN
Mobile Node
NAR
New Access Router
NOAH
NO Ad-Hoc Routing Agent
nFA
New Foreign Agent
oFA
Old Foreign Agent
PAR
Previous Access Router
PrRtAdv
Proxy Router Advertisement
RtSolPr
Router Solicitation for Proxy Advertisement
SCTP
Stream Control Transmission Protocol
SIP
Session Initiation Protocol
WLAN
Wireless Local-area Access Network
WPAN
Wireless Personal-area Access Network
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Research Motivation
The mobile communication is growing very fast in order to meet today world's needs and
desires. People are moving from one place to another rapidly, changing their attachment points to
the communication networks (Mobile Cellular Networks, Wireless Local Area networks WLAN
and Wireless Personal Access Networks WPAN). The main challenge produced by this scenario
is how to keep those people connected to their destinations, with the minimum delay, while they
are moving among these different wireless and mobile networks.
The fourth generation (4G) of mobile communication networks will be more flexible for users to
communicate anywhere anytime. Using the FHMIP and S_MIP connection ability, can facilitate
the access to a large number of networks. 4G represents wireless networks integrated with all
existing mobile technologies through a common IP core. It consists of an IP based heterogeneous
networks, connected together through an IP core using the Internet. Users will be free to move
among these networks, and remain connected to their home networks. IP based networks and
mobility management are the main features of the 4G communications. Supporting mobility in IP
networks will give the possibility to manage the movement between the various wireless
networks connected through the Internet.
The high demand for the real time applications through the Internet is one of the challenges in
4G. Real time applications are increasing over the Internet; more and more users are attracted by
these kinds of applications, which can be in the form of audio applications, video applications,
conference applications and the interactive games. Voice over IP (VoIP) and voice chatting
services are the major real time applications used in the Internet. Video streaming, radio and TV
over the Internet also are spreading very fast. All these real time applications require a high
speed connection with a minimum amount of delay.
Reducing the connection delay and increasing the throughput to satisfy the real time
application's requirements must be considered carefully. The goals of supporting mobility
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
2
around different wireless and mobile networks (the 4G networks), in addition to reduce the
connection delay as less as possible in order to satisfy the real time application's requirements,
are the main focus in this research. We will concentrate mainly in how to reduce the handover
delay to increase the throughput, specifically the mobile IP (MIP) handover delay using a
FHMIP approach. Also our focus in this research is on other performance parameters like packet
delivery ratio (PDF), packet loss, jitter and end-to-end delay.
1.2 Local and Global Mobility
When IP Mobility is defined within an access network, it becomes a Local Mobility
Management Problem. An access network is a collection of fixed and mobile network
components belonging to one operational domain and providing access to the internet. The area
within which the MN may roam may be restricted, but the overall geographic area might be quite
large [1]. The access network gateways act as the aggregation routers. There is administrative
management of all the components of the domain defined as local and an association between the
components as opposed to none in case of a global mobility management scenario. In case of
global mobility management, there is no administrative management between the components
and as such there is no restriction of mobility to be within an access network. A comparison of
local and global mobility scenario is shown in figure-1.1.
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
3
If we have two such networks, Network-I (N-I) and Network-II (N-II), a MN moving between
these two access networks will fall into the global mobility scenario and such mobility will be
managed by a global mobility protocol like MIPv6, HIP, MOBIKE etc (scenario V in Fig.1.1) .
However if a MN moves between two routers of the same access network it will fall in the
domain of local mobility and will be managed by a local mobility protocol like PMIPv6
(scenario IV, VI of Fig.1.1). A router having more than one access point implies that any MN
movement between the two access points consists of intra-link mobility (scenario I, II, III of
Fig.1.1). It involves only Layer 2 mechanisms and as such it is also known as Layer 2 mobility.
There is no IP subnet configuration necessary once the MN moves between access points of the
same router as the link does not change. However some IP signaling may be required [1]. In case
of global mobility protocols, the MN is reachable even when its globally routable IP address
changes. Since the basic mobility scenario is the same if the MN moves between routers of the
same access network or between routers of different access networks, global mobility protocols
can substitute for local mobility protocols. However it is not efficient to use global mobility
management protocols for local mobility management. Firstly because updating the CoA at the
HA, CN or the global mobility anchor point can be time consuming and results in packet loss
when packets continue to be sent to the original or the home address of the MN. Secondly update
messages involve signaling between the MN and the HA, or MN and the CN, keeping the MN
occupied for some time. This creates performance overhead for the MN as well as the wireless
network. Location privacy is another issue with global mobility protocol [1][2][3]. If the CoA of
the MN keeps changing, signals need to be exchanged to update the CN, HA or the global
mobility anchor point. Traffic analysis can indicate that a particular node in the network is
roaming and can also reveal the location of MN. Thus using global mobility management
protocols for localized mobility or intra-link mobility has some drawbacks. Therefore need of a
localized mobility management protocol arose and gave way to Network - based Localized
Mobility Management (NETLMM) [2].
1.3 Host Based Mobility
When the MN is constantly engaged in the process of signaling and such a mobility management
approach is known as Host-based mobility management. As there is a Binding Update delay
Mobility supporting schemes over IPv6 networks
4
during mobility. If Route Optimization is used, then there might be a further delay before
communication might actually start between the MN and the CN. All the messages exchanged by
the MN with other agents in the network and with the CN consume bandwidth and cause link
layer and IP layer delays. Reducing such delays in the process of handover is essential to the
performance improvement of MIPv6. This led to the creation of extended versions of MIPv6,
namely HMIPv6 by H.Soliman and FMIPv6 by R.Koodli. A combination of these two led to the
creation of FHMIPv6 by HeeYoung Jung et.al.
1.4 Mobile IPv6
Mobile IP supports mobility of IP hosts by allowing them to make use of (at least) two IP
addresses: a home address that represents the fixed address of the node and a care-of address
(CoA) that changes with the IP subnet the mobile node is currently attached to. Clearly, an entity
is needed that maps a home address to the corresponding currently valid CoA. In Mobile IPv4
[4] these mappings are exclusively handled by `home agents' (HA). A correspondent node (CN)
that wants to send packets to a mobile node (MN) will send the packets to the MN's home
address. In the MN's home network these packets will be `intercepted' by the home agent and
tunneled, e.g. by IP-in-IP encapsulation [4], either directly to the MN or to a foreign agent to
which the MN has a direct link.
In MIPv6, home agents no longer exclusively deal with the address mapping, but each CN can
have its own `binding cache' where home address plus care-of address pairs are stored. This
enables `route optimization' compared to the triangle routing via the HA in MIPv4: a CN is able
to send packets directly to a MN when the CN has a recent entry for the MN in its corresponding
binding cache. When a CN sends a packet directly to a MN, it does not encapsulate the packet as
the HA does when receiving a packet from the CN to be forwarded, but makes use of the IPv6
Routing Header Option. When the CN does not have a binding cache entry for the MN, it sends
the packet to the MN's home address. The MN's home agent will then forward the packet. The
MN, when receiving an encapsulated packet, will inform the corresponding CN about the current
CoA. In order to keep the home address to CoA mappings up-to-date, a mobile node has to
signal corresponding changes to its home agent and/or correspondent nodes when performing a
Excerpt out of 56 pages
- Quote paper
- Riaz Khan (Author), 2012, Mobility Supporting Schemes over IPv6 Networks, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/376247
Similar texts
Publish now - it's free
✕
Excerpt from
56
pages
Comments