1 Mobility Management for All-IP Mobile Networks: Mobile IPv6 vs. Proxy Mobile IPv6 Ki-Sik Kong;...
-
Upload
brooklynn-capers -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 Mobility Management for All-IP Mobile Networks: Mobile IPv6 vs. Proxy Mobile IPv6 Ki-Sik Kong;...
1
Mobility Management for All-IP Mobile Networks: Mobile IPv6 vs. Proxy Mobile IPv6
Ki-Sik Kong; Wonjun Lee; Korea University
Youn-Hee Han;Korea university of Technology and Education
Myung-Ki Shin;Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI)
HeungRyeol YouKorea Telecommunication (KT)
IEEE Wireless Communications, 2008
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.
12[*] S. Gundavelli, K. Leung, V. Devarapalli, K. Chowdhury and B. Patil, Proxy Mobile IPv6, Aug. 2008, IETF RFC 5213.
PBU/PBA
[*]
13
Outline
• Introduction• Why Network-Based Mobility Management• Network-Based Mobility Management: PMIPv6• Qualitative Analysis• Quantitative Analysis• Concluding Remarks
16
Outline
• Introduction• Why Network-Based Mobility Management• Network-Based Mobility Management: PMIPv6• Qualitative Analysis• Quantitative Analysis• Concluding Remarks
17
• 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)
18
• 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
22
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