DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Scalability Analysis of Cost Essence for a HA entity in Diff-FH NEMO Scheme

  • Hussein, Loay F. (Department of Computer Science, Jouf University) ;
  • Abass, Islam Abdalla Mohamed (Department of Computer Science, Jouf University) ;
  • Aissa, Anis Ben (Department of Computer Science, Jouf University)
  • Received : 2022.03.05
  • Published : 2022.03.30

Abstract

Network Mobility Basic Support (NEMO BS) protocol has been accredited and approved by Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) working group for mobility of sub-networks. Trains, aircrafts and buses are three examples of typical applications for this protocol. The NEMO BS protocol was designed to offer Internet access for a group of passengers in a roaming vehicle in an adequate fashion. Furthermore, in NEMO BS protocol, specific gateways referred to Mobile Routers (MRs) are responsible for carrying out the mobility management operations. Unfortunately, the main limitations of this basic solution are pinball suboptimal routing, excessive signaling cost, scalability, packet delivery overhead and handoff latency. In order to tackle shortcomings of triangular routing and Quality of Service (QoS) deterioration, the proposed scheme (Diff-FH NEMO) has previously evolved for end-users in moving network. In this sense, the article focuses on an exhaustive analytic evaluation at Home Agent (HA) entity of the proposed solutions. An investigation has been conducted on the signaling costs to assess the performance of the proposed scheme (Diff-FH NEMO) in comparison with the standard NEMO BS protocol and MIPv6 based Route Optimization (MIRON) scheme. The obtained results demonstrate that, the proposed scheme (Diff-FH NEMO) significantly improves the signaling cost at the HA entity in terms of the subnet residence time, number of mobile nodes, the number of DMRs, the number of LFNs and the number of CNs.

Keywords

References

  1. Perkins, C., Ed., WiChorus Inc.: IP Mobility Support for IPv4, Revised. Internet Engineering Task Force, Request for Comments RFC5944, (2010).
  2. Johnson, D., Perkins, C., Arkko, J.: Mobility Support in IPv6. Request for Comments RFC3775, [online] Available: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3775.txt, (2004).
  3. Koodli, G. R., Ed.: Mobile IPv6 Fast Handovers. Network Working Group, Request for Comments RFC 5568, (2009).
  4. Soliman, H. C. Castelluccia , K. ElMalki and L. Bellier, :Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (HMIPv6) Mobility Management. Internet Engineering Task Force, Request for Comments RFC 5380, (2008).
  5. Jung, H. Y. H., Soliman, Koh, S.J., and Takamiya, N. : Fast handover for hierarchical MIPv6 (F-HMIPv6). Internet Engineering Task Force, [online] Available: http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/draft-jungmobopts-fhmipv6-00.pdf.,(2005)
  6. Devarapalli, V. Wakikawa, R., Petrescu, A., Thubert, P.: Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol. Internet Engineering Task Force, Request for Comments RFC 3963, (2005).
  7. Loay, F. Hussein, Aisha-Hassan, A., Mohamed,, H., and Wan, H.: An Adaptive DiffServ Approach to Support QoS in Network Mobility NEMO Environment. International Journal of Computer Networks & Communications (IJCNC) Vol.12, No.2., (2020).
  8. Loay, F., Aisha Hassan, A., Mohamed, H., Akram, M.: Performance comparison of (Diff-FH NEMO) scheme in IPv6-based network mobility. International Conference on Computer and Communication Engineering (ICCCE), IEEE Xplore, pp. 288-293., (2016)
  9. Calderon, M., Bernardos, C., Bagnulo, M., soto, I. & Oliva A.: Design and experimental evaluation of a route optimization solution for NEMO. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 24(9), pp. 1702-1716, (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/JSAC.2006.875109
  10. Bernardos, C., Bagnulo, M. & Calderon, and M.: MIRON: mobile IPv6 route optimization for NEMO. in Proc. 4th Workshop on Appl. Services in Wireless Network. pp. 189-197, (2004).
  11. Sangheon Pack, Taekyoung Kwon, Yanghee Choi, Eun Kyoung Paik: An Adaptive Network Mobility Support Protocol in Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Networks. IEEE transactions on vehicular technology, vol. 58, no. 7, (2009).
  12. Zong, L., Liu, F., Wang, X. and Ji, Y.: Fast handover scheme for supporting network mobility in IEEE 802.16e BWA system. Proceedings of the International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing (WiCom 2007), Shanghai, IEEE, New York, NY, pp. 1757-1760, (2007).
  13. Nerea T., Jean-Marie B., Marivi H., Eduardo J.: Host identity protocol based NEMO solutions: an evaluation of the signaling overhead.. VTC'11: IEEE 73rd Vehicular Technology Conference, Budapest, Hungary. pp.1-5, (2011)
  14. Shohrab Md., Mohammed A., William I.,: Cost Analysis of NEMO Protocol Entities. 13th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (ICCIT 2010), (2010).
  15. Ing-Chau, C., Ciou-Song, Lu. and Sheng-Chih, W.: Mathematical performance analysis for HCoP-B reactive fasthandover mechanisms for the nested mobile networks. International Journal for Computer-Aided Engineering and Software Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 127-148,(2014). https://doi.org/10.1108/EC-01-2013-0012
  16. Geng-Sheng K., and Kang Ji., :Novel Hierarchical Network Mobility Support Protocol with Bidirectional End-to-end Route Optimization Solution for Nested Mobile Networks. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM), Nov., pp. 1-6 (2006).
  17. Xiaohua Ch., Hongke Z., Yao-Chung C., Han-Chieh C.: Experimentation and performance analysis of multi-interfaced mobile router scheme. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory VOL.18, pp. 407-415, (2010) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2009.09.005
  18. Shahriar, A.Z.M., Hossain, M. S. & Atiquzzaman, M.: A cost analysis framework for nemo prefix delegation-based schemes. IEEE Trans. Mob. Computing, 11(7). pp. 1192-1206, (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMC.2011.124
  19. Xie, J. & Akyildiz, L. F.: A novel distributed dynamic location management scheme for minimizing signalling costs in Mobile IP. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 1(3). pp. 163-175, (2002). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMC.2002.1081753
  20. Lai, W.& Chiu, C.: Improving handoff performance in wireless overlay networks by switching between two-layer IPv6 and one-layerIPv6 addressing. IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun. 23(11). pp. 2129-2137, (2005). https://doi.org/10.1109/JSAC.2005.856828