1 / 23

Mobility Management for All-IP Mobile Networks: Mobile IPv6 vs. Proxy Mobile IPv6

IEEE Wireless Communications, 2008. Mobility Management for All-IP Mobile Networks: Mobile IPv6 vs. Proxy Mobile IPv6.

beaumont-dilan
Télécharger la présentation

Mobility Management for All-IP Mobile Networks: Mobile IPv6 vs. Proxy Mobile IPv6

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IEEE Wireless Communications, 2008 Mobility Management for All-IP Mobile Networks: Mobile IPv6 vs. Proxy Mobile IPv6 Ki-Sik Kong; Wonjun Lee; Korea UniversityYoun-Hee Han;Korea university of Technology and EducationMyung-Ki Shin;Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI)HeungRyeol YouKorea Telecommunication (KT)

  2. Outline • Introduction • Why Network-Based Mobility Management • Network-Based Mobility Management: PMIPv6 • Qualitative Analysis • Quantitative Analysis • Concluding Remarks

  3. Introduction • “anywhere, anytime, and any way” high-speed Internet access • IEEE 802.16d/e, WCDMA • IETF, 3GPP, ITU-T • All-IP mobile networks • Expected to combine the Internet and telecommunication networks • Mobility management • Location Management • Handover Management

  4. Introduction (cont.) • Mobile IPv4, Mobile IPv6 • Handover latency, packet loss, and signaling overhead • slowly deployed in real implementations • “the handover latencies associated with MIPv4/v6 do not provide the quality of service (QoS) guarantees required for real-time applications” • Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) • the IETF NETLMM WG • Network-based • expected to expedite the real deployment of IP mobility management

  5. Global Mobility Management Protocol [$] • A mobility protocol used by the mobile node to change the global, end-to-end routing of packets when movement causes a topology change. • Localized Mobility Management [$] • Any protocol that maintains the IP connectivity and reachability of a mobile node when the mobile node moves • signaling is confined to an access network. [$] J. Kempf (DoCoMo), Problem Statement for Network-Based Localized Mobility Management (NETLMM), April 2007, IETF RFC 4830.

  6. Why Network-Based Mobility Management? • Mobile IPv4/6, hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (HMIPv6), fast handover for Mobile IPv6 (FMIPv6) • Require protocol stack modification of the MN • Increased complexity • Network-based mobility management approach • the serving network handles the mobility management on behalf of the MN • the MN is not required to participate in any mobility-related signaling

  7. salient features and advantages of Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) • Deployment perspective • does not require any modification of MNs • expected to accelerate the practical deployment • multiple global mobility management protocols can be supported • Performance perspective • Host-based approach • mobility related signaling and tunneled messages exchanged on the wireless link • Wireless channel access delay and wireless transmission delay • Network-based network layer approach • the serving network controls the mobility management on behalf of the MN • No additional signal on the wireless link

  8. Network service provider perspective • network-based mobility management • enhance manageability and flexibility • enabling network service providers to control network traffic • Easily be expected from legacy cellular system, such as IS-41, GSM • Similar to GPRS • PMIPv6 could be used in any IP-based network

  9. Network-Based Mobility Management: PMIPv6 • Primary features [4][8] • Support for unmodified MNs • Support for IPv4 and IPv6 • Efficient use of wireless resources • Link technology agnostic • Handover performance improvement • extends MIPv6 signaling and reuses many concepts • Support an MN in a topologically localized domain [4] J. Kempf, “Problem Statement for Network-Based Localized Mobility Management (NETLMM),” IETF RFC 4830, Apr. 2007. [8] J. Kempf, “Goals for Network-Based Localized Mobility Management (NETLMM),” IETF RFC 4831, Apr. 2007.

  10. Overview of PMIPv6 access authentication

  11. LMA address, supported address configuration mode, and so on from the policy store

  12. PBU/PBA [*] [*] S. Gundavelli, K. Leung, V. Devarapalli, K. Chowdhury and B. Patil, Proxy Mobile IPv6, Aug. 2008, IETF RFC 5213.

  13. Outline • Introduction • Why Network-Based Mobility Management • Network-Based Mobility Management: PMIPv6 • Qualitative Analysis • Quantitative Analysis • Concluding Remarks

  14. typically a shared tunnel

  15. Outline • Introduction • Why Network-Based Mobility Management • Network-Based Mobility Management: PMIPv6 • Qualitative Analysis • Quantitative Analysis • Concluding Remarks

  16. handover latency • the time that elapses between the moment the layer 2 handover completes and the moment the MN can receive the first data packet after moving to the new point of attachment. • the movement detection delay (TMD), • address configuration delay (TDAD), • the delay involved in performing the AAA procedure (TAAA), and • location registration delay (TREG)

  17. TMD = (MinRtrAdvInterval + MaxRtrAdvInterval)/4 • TDAD = RetransTimer × DupAddrDetectTransmits • TAAA = 2 × 2ta = 4ta • TREGMIPv6 = 2(tmr+ tra + tah) + 2(tmr + tra + tac) + 2(tmr + tra + tah+ thc) • TREGHMIPv6 = 2(tmr + tra + tam) • TREGPMIPv6 = 2tam • DHOMIPv6 = TMD + TDAD + TAAA + TREGMIPv6 • DHOHMIPv6 = TMD + TDAD + TAAA + TREGHMIPv6 • DHOPMIPv6= TAAA + TREGPMIPv6 + tmr + tra Reg. to HA Reg. to CN RR. procedure to CN Reg. to MAP Reg. to LMA

  18. Impact of Wireless Link Delay (tmr)

  19. Impact of Delay between MN and CN(tmr+tra+tac) reg. to CN needed

  20. Impact of Movement Detection Delay(TMD) No TMD needed

  21. Conclusion • first to provide qualitative and quantitative analyses of MIPv6 and PMIPv6 • demonstrate the superiority of PMIPv6 • PMIPv6 could be considered a promising compromise between telecommunications and Internet communities. • reflects telecommunication operators’ favor, enabling them to manage and control their networks more efficiently • interactions between MIPv6 and PMIPv6 is possible • Future research • explore cross layering • e.g., PMIPv6 over IEEE 802.11 or 802.16e networks • route optimization • fast handover

  22. comments • Host-based vs. Network-based mobility management • Mobile IPv6  HiMIPv6, FMIPv6  Proxy Mobile IPv6 • Handover performance of PMIPv6 • QoS is easy to be achieved • Multiple interface • Soft handover, fault tolerance, load balancing • seamless handover • Proxy Mobile IPv6 + NEMO

More Related