Transcript Power Saving Mobility Protocol for Sensor Network

PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF
VERTICAL HANDOVER
STRATEGIES FOR PSDR
HETEROGENEOUS NETWORK
學生:鄭宗建
學號:697430023
1
Outline





Abstract
Introduction
Overview of high-level strategies for VHO
Performance Evaluation
Conclusion
2
Abstract



In this article we suggest a vertical handover (VHO)
solution able to optimize mobility management over
heterogeneous networks in terms of handoff delay
and signaling load.
The article presents the operational scenarios where
integration between TETRA and WiFi/WiMAX is
needed and the main resulting benefits.
Performances of the suggested VHO management
scheme are described and evaluated against other
protocol solutions.
3
Introduction

TETRA( Terrestrial Trunked Radio)


TETRA provides radio capabilities encompassing
network controlled services and direct mobile-to-mobile
communications, with a range of functionalities such as
group calls, instantaneous connections of calls, encryption, real-time localization, and high-priority connections.
However, the access capability offered by TETRA is not
enough to satisfy the requirements needed to support the
new generation of mobile applications.

An integrated network architecture is to be realized in order to
guarantee PSDR users technology-independent access to a
common IP-based core network.
4
Introduction

Some critical issues are solved concerning radio resources, network,
quality of service (QoS), and mobility and security management


Mobile IP (MIP) and Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) are the two
major protocols for IP-based mobility management.
A joint integrated approach is suggested in [7]that exploits the
complementary capabilities of MIP and SIP


SBC ( Session border controller)

SIP location management and handover procedures
Security weaknesses, reliability issues, and the lack of QoS support
in MIP, as well as the increase of signaling load and handoff delay
in centralized SIP SBC system are only a few problems which are to
be solved.

A integrated MIP-SIP with SBC architecture
5
Introduction


The performance of the PTS strategy is evaluated
compared to typical approaches.
A TETRA user can gain access to services
exploiting the coverage offered by other communication networks, provided that interworking
procedures are implemented.


Non-overlapping
Overlapping

Always best connected (ABC) paradigm
6
Introduction


Multimode handheld terminals are to be realized, able to access
TETRA as well as other available networks, discriminating the
most suitable technology based on an opportune policy.
The core network of the integrated system

TETRA Switching and management infrastructure (SwMI)
 Switching networking gateway
 database management
 Interfacing capabilities for the system
7
Overview of high-level strategies for
VHO

Single-Layer Approach

MIP

In MIP two mobility agents, home and foreign agents (HA/FA),
are introduced to handle location updates and route traffic.




In basic MIP, the corresponding host (CH) sends IP packets to the
mobile host (MH) using the MH’s IP home address (HoA).
The HA encapsulates the packets using the MH’s care-of address
(CoA) and forwards them to the MH’s foreign network.
Then the FA decapsulates the packets and sends them to the MH
Route optimization
 It allows a CH to cache a dynamic binding of the MH HoA and
CoA.
8
Overview of high-level strategies for
VHO
 SIP



As for SIP, it was initially designed as an application-layer
multimedia signaling protocol
However, it has potential capabilities for personal, session,
and service mobility.
Mobility management


The SBC hosts a mobility management server (MMS) that, in
conjunction with the mobility management client (MMC) in the
MH, allows the user agent (UA) to be reached in case of
incoming calls and to keep ongoing sessions active despite
changes in the access networks.
The MMS in the SBC updates its media proxy, and starts
transmitting and receiving over the target network
9
Overview of high-level strategies for
VHO


Actually, a single registration mechanism between the MH and the
SBC is needed as a replacement for procedures of CH reinviting
and registration of a new IP address at the SIP registrar server
A multilayer protocol strategy combining MIP and SIP

Both MIP and SIP signaling and data flows are handled through
home/foreign mobility servers (HMS/FMS)



Integrating the traditional MIP HA/FA and SIP home/foreign
servers (HS/FS)
manage various addresses
The HMS and FMS are optimized to minimize any functionality
redundancy or signaling duplication between MIP and SIP
10
Overview of high-level strategies for
VHO

Scheduling

Although MIP alone can handle mobility for both real-time (RT)
and non-real-time (NRT) traffic, we let it handle only NRT
traffic, while SIP is charged with mobility management in case
of RT traffic.
11
Performance Evaluation
12
Performance Evaluation
13
Performance Evaluation
14
Conclusion


The article presents an innovative vertical handover
solution for mobility management over heterogeneous networks.
We report the signaling messages flows and the
timelines for various analyzed mobility protocols.
15

End
16