Transcript Mobility management for all-IP mobile networks: mobile

IEEE Wireless Communications, 2008
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 You
Korea Telecommunication (KT)
1
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Why Network-Based Mobility Management
Network-Based Mobility Management: PMIPv6
Qualitative Analysis
Quantitative Analysis
Concluding Remarks
2
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
3
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
4
• 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.
5
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
6
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
7
• 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
8
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.
9
Overview of PMIPv6
access
authentication
10
LMA address,
supported address configuration mode,
and so on from the policy store
11
PBU/PBA
[*]
[*] S. Gundavelli, K. Leung, V. Devarapalli, K. Chowdhury and B. Patil, Proxy Mobile IPv6, Aug. 2008, IETF RFC 5213.
12
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Why Network-Based Mobility Management
Network-Based Mobility Management: PMIPv6
Qualitative Analysis
Quantitative Analysis
Concluding Remarks
13
typically a
shared tunnel
14
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)
Reg. to HA
Reg. to CN
RR. procedure to CN
• TREGHMIPv6 = 2(tmr + tra + tam)
Reg. to MAP
• TREGPMIPv6 = 2tam
Reg. to LMA
• DHOMIPv6 = TMD + TDAD + TAAA + TREGMIPv6
• DHOHMIPv6 = TMD + TDAD + TAAA + TREGHMIPv6
• DHOPMIPv6 = TAAA + TREGPMIPv6 + tmr + tra
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
23