International Journal of Computer Networks and Applications

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Performance Analysis of Various Mobility Management Protocols for IPv6 based Networks


Affiliations
1 Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Sikkim Manipal Institute of Technology, Majhitar, Sikkim, India
2 Jan Wyzykowski University, Polokwane, Poland
3 Dean (A) (Retd.), Sikkim Manipal Institute of Technology, Majhitar, Sikkim, India
4 Department of Information Technology, Sikkim Manipal Institute of Technology, Majhitar, Sikkim, India
 

–Amount of Internet traffic has increased significantly in recent times. Penetration of mobile and handheld devices in the society is also remarkable. In order to address the user demands and seamless mobility in IP networks like the Internet, there is a need to have efficient mobility management protocols and architectures. This is required to address various issues that arise due to users’ mobility. Such protocols and architectures should intend to provide better service quality to the end users. Protocols like Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6), Hierarchical MIPv6 (HMIPv6) and Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) have been established as widely accepted mobility solutions for IP based wireless networks which has also been standardized by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Three Layer MIPv6 (TLMIPv6) strives to provide seamless mobility management under mobile environment. In this paper, MIPv6, HMIPv6, PMIPv6 and TLMIPv6 are thoroughly surveyed. These protocols are also examined under different mobility models to evaluate respective performances. Three mobility models: (1) Random Walk Mobility Model, (2) Probabilistic Random Walk Mobility Model and (3) GaussMarkov Mobility Model are exploited to model the mobility of users, in order to analyze the performance of the protocols. Future scope of the work has also been outlined.

Keywords

Layered Architecture, Mobility Management, Performance Analysis, Mobility Models.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Nitul Dutta, Iti Saha Misra, Md Abu Safi, Kushal Pokhrel” Three layer MIPv6 (TLMIPv6): A new mobility management protocol for IPv6 based network” IEEE International Conference on Computational Intelligence & Computing Research (ICCIC), pp. 17-23, India, 2012

  • Cisco, Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic Forecast Update, 2014-2019, White Paper, Cisco, 2015.

  • Jon Postel, “Internet Protocol”,RFC 791, September 1981.

  • C. Perkins, “IP Mobility Support for IPv4 (revised)”, RFC 5944, November 2010.

  • D. Johnson and C. Perkins, “Mobility Support in IPv6”, RFC 3775, June 2004.

  • H. Soliman and C. Castelluccia, “Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Mobility Management (HMIPv6)”, RFC 4140, August 2005.

  • N. Dutta and I. S. Misra, “Mathematical Modeling of Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Based Network Architecture in Search of Optimal Performance”, Proc. IEEE CS 15th International Conference on ADCOM, pp. 599-601, 2007.

  • Nitul Dutta and Iti Saha Misra,” Mathematical Analysis of Signaling Overhead in MIPv6 based N-Layer Architecture”, International journal of Convergence Information Technology, ISSN: 1975-9320, Vol. 5, No.8, pp. 252-261, October 2010.

  • Nitul Dutta, I S Misra, “Multilayer Hierarchical Model for Mobility Management in IPv6: A Mathematical Exploration”, Wireless Personal Communications (Springer) vol. 78 (2), pp. 1413-1439

  • Javier Carmona Murillo et al., “Analytical and Experimental Evaluation of Handovers in IPv6 Mobility Management Protocols”, Network Protocols and Algorithms, vol. 8(1), 2016.

  • Azzedine Boukerche et al., Mobile IP Handover for Vehicular Networks: Methods, Models, and Classifications, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 49(4), 2017.

  • Chiwetalu Barth. N. & Nwachi-Ikpor, Juliana OGlobal Journal of Computer Science and Technology: E Network, Web & Security Vol.14(2), 2014.

  • Luca Cominardi, Fabio Giust, C. J Bernardos, A De La Oliva, “Distributed mobility management solutions for next mobile network architectures,”Computer Networks, vol. 121, pp. 124-136, 2017.

  • Hongwei Meng, Versatile routing and self-certifying features support for secure mobility in expressive internet architecture, China Communication, Vol. 14(4), pp. 73-88, 2017.

  • C. J. Bernardos,” Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility”, RFC 5218, 2016.

  • Myung-Kyu Yi, Jin-Woo Choi and Young-Kyu Yang, “A Comparative Analysis on the Signaling Load of Proxy Mobile IPv6 and Hierarchical Mobile IPv6”, Proc 4th International Symposium on Wireless Pervasive Computing, pp. 1-5, 2009.

  • Sangheon Pack, Minji Nam, and Yanghee Choiet, “A Study On Optimal Hierarchy in Multi-Level Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Networks”, Proc.IEEE Communications Society Globecom, pp. 1290-1294, 2004.

  • Iti S. Misra et.al. “An approach for Optimal Hierarchical Mobility Management Network Architecture”,IEEE 63rd Vehicular Technology Conference, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 481–485, 2006.

  • K. Kawano, K. Kinoshita, and Murakami, “Multilevel hierarchical mobility management scheme in complicated structured networks”,Proc.29th Annual IEEE International Conference on Local Computer Networks, pp. 34- 41, 2004.

  • S. Saha and A.K. Mukhopadhyay, “THMIP-A Novel Mobility Management Scheme using Fluid Flow Model”, Proc of 2nd National Conference on Emerging Trends and Applications in Computer Science (NCETACS), pp.1-5, March 2011.

  • Jong-Hyouk Lee, Youn-Hee Han, Sri Gundavelli and Tai-Myoung Chung, “A Comparative Performance Analysis on Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 and Proxy Mobile IPv6”, Telecommunication Systems, vol. 41, pp.279–292, May 2009.

  • S. Gundavelli, K. Leung, V. Devarapalli, K. Chowdhury, and B. Patil “Proxy Mobile IPv6”, RFC 5213, Aug 2008

  • Pearson, K. "The Problem of the Random Walk". Nature, vol. 72 (1865): pp. 294, 1905

  • McCrea, W. H. and Whipple, F. J. W. "Random Paths in Two and Three Dimensions." Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, vol. 60, pp. 281-298, 1940.

  • T. Camp, J. Boleng, and V. Davies, A Survey of Mobility Models for Ad Hoc Network Research, in Wireless Communication and Mobile Computing (WCMC): Special issue on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking: Research, Trends and Applications, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 483-502, 2002.

  • Chiang C., Wireless Network Multicasting, Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, 1998.

  • Liang B, Haas Z. Predictive distance-based mobility management for PCS networks, Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFO-COM), 1999.

  • “Network Simulator (ns), version 2”, online available from http:// www .isi.edu/nsnam/ns.

  • Zhang L, Tian YC,“An enhanced fast handover triggering mechanism for Fast Proxy Mobile IPv6”, Wireless Networks, 24(2), pp. 513–522, 2018.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-016-3627-8

  • Balfaqih, Z, “Design and development of network simulator module for distributed mobility management protocol”, J Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-020-01764-y.

  • S. Deering, R. Hinden, and others, Internet protocol, version 6 (IPv6) specification. RFC 2460, december, 1998.

  • J. Wozniak, “Mobility management solutions for current IP and future networks,” Telecommun. Syst., vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 257–275, 2016.

  • N. Dutta, I. S. Misra, K. Pokhrel, and M. A. Safi, “Survey on mobility management protocols for IPv6 based network,” Adv. Netw. Commun.ANC, vol. 1, no. 2, 2013.

  • S. Thomson, T. Narten, T. Jinmei, and others, “IPv6 stateless address autoconfiguration,” RFC 2462, December, 1998.

  • D. Haskin and E. Allen, “IP version 6 over PPP, Intemet-Draft, draft-ietf-ipngwg-pppext-ipv6cp-03. txt, May 1996,” Work Prog.

  • C. E. Perkins and J. Bound, “DHCP for IPv6,” in Proceedings Third IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications. ISCC’98. (Cat. No.98EX166), 1998, pp. 493–497.

  • A. Conta, S. Deering, and others, Generic packet tunneling in IPv6 specification. RFC 2473, December, 1998.

  • J. B. Postel, “DARPA Internet Program. Internet and Transmission Control Specifications,” University of Southern California Marina Del Rey Information Sciences Institute, 1981.

  • J. Postel, User Datagram Protocol Internet Request For Comments RFC 768. August, 1980.

  • S. Deering and R. Hinden, RFC1883: Internet Protocol, version 6 (IPv6) specification. RFC Editor, 1995.

  • G. Kirby, “Locating the user,” Commun. Int., 1995.

  • K. Pokhrel, N. Dutta, M. K. Ghose, H. Vithalani, H. K. D. Sarma, and Z. Polkowski, “Binding Lifetime Based Signaling Cost Analysis of Multilayer MIPv6.,” JCP, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 337–350, 2018.


Abstract Views: 353

PDF Views: 1




  • Performance Analysis of Various Mobility Management Protocols for IPv6 based Networks

Abstract Views: 353  |  PDF Views: 1

Authors

Kushal Pokhrel
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Sikkim Manipal Institute of Technology, Majhitar, Sikkim, India
Nitul Dutta
Jan Wyzykowski University, Polokwane, Poland
Mrinal K. Ghose
Dean (A) (Retd.), Sikkim Manipal Institute of Technology, Majhitar, Sikkim, India
Hiren Kumar Deva Sarma
Department of Information Technology, Sikkim Manipal Institute of Technology, Majhitar, Sikkim, India

Abstract


–Amount of Internet traffic has increased significantly in recent times. Penetration of mobile and handheld devices in the society is also remarkable. In order to address the user demands and seamless mobility in IP networks like the Internet, there is a need to have efficient mobility management protocols and architectures. This is required to address various issues that arise due to users’ mobility. Such protocols and architectures should intend to provide better service quality to the end users. Protocols like Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6), Hierarchical MIPv6 (HMIPv6) and Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) have been established as widely accepted mobility solutions for IP based wireless networks which has also been standardized by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Three Layer MIPv6 (TLMIPv6) strives to provide seamless mobility management under mobile environment. In this paper, MIPv6, HMIPv6, PMIPv6 and TLMIPv6 are thoroughly surveyed. These protocols are also examined under different mobility models to evaluate respective performances. Three mobility models: (1) Random Walk Mobility Model, (2) Probabilistic Random Walk Mobility Model and (3) GaussMarkov Mobility Model are exploited to model the mobility of users, in order to analyze the performance of the protocols. Future scope of the work has also been outlined.

Keywords


Layered Architecture, Mobility Management, Performance Analysis, Mobility Models.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.22247/ijcna%2F2020%2F196039