Abstract
Flattened cellular network architecture for the mobile internet is expected to meet the demands of rapidly increasing traffic from mobile users. Dynamic mobility anchoring (DMA) mechanism distributes the mobility management functions using such network architecture. In this paper, we compare DMA with a classical mobility protocol like proxy mobile IP (PMIP). A major cost factor of a mobility protocol is the management of contexts and tunnels. We propose an analytical model to compute the number of contexts and tunnels with DMA and with PMIP in a homogeneous network with random mobility of mobile nodes. The model is used under different configurations by varying the traffic loads and the capacities of access nodes in order to analyze the distributed and dynamic characteristics of DMA. The results show that the required number of contexts on an anchor node with DMA is significantly less than that required on an anchor node with PMIP and the required number of visitor contexts with DMA is significantly less in magnitude than that with PMIP for most of the configurations. The results also show that the number of required tunnels with DMA is less than those required with PMIP for most configurations.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Akl, R. G., Hegde, M. V., & Naraghi-Pour, M. (2005). Mobility-based CAC algorithm for arbitrary call-arrival rates in CDMA cellular systems. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 54(2), 639–651.
Bertin, P., Bonjour, S., & Bonnin, J.-M. (2009). Distributed or centralized mobility? In Proceedings of global communications conference (GlobeCom 2009).
Bertin, P., Bonjour, S., & Bonnin, J.-M. (2009). An evaluation of dynamic mobility anchoring. In IEEE 70th vehicular technology conference fall (VTC 2009-Fall) (pp. 1–5).
Bertin, P., Bonjour, S., & Bonnin, J.-M. (2008). A distributed dynamic mobility management scheme designed for flat IP architectures. In Proceedings of 3rd international conference on new technologies, mobility and security (NTMS 2008).
Castelluccia, C. (2000). HMIPv6: A hierarchical mobile IPv6 proposal. ACM Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 4(1), 48–59.
Chan, H.-A., Yokota, H., Xie, J., Seite, P., & Liu, D. (2011). Distributed and dynamic mobility management in mobile internet: Current approaches and issues. Journal of Communications, 6(1), 4–15.
Corujo, D., Guimaraes, C., Santos, B., & Aguiar, R. L. (2011). Using an open-source IEEE 802.21 implementation for network-based localized mobility management. IEEE Communications Magazine, 49(9), 114–123.
Enrico, D. R., Fantacci, R., & Giambene, G. (1999). Performance evaluation of different resource management strategies in mobile cellular networks. Springer Telecommunication Systems, 12(4), 315–340.
Frikha, M., & Maalej, L. (2006). Micro mobility in the IP networks. Springer Telecommunication Systems, 31(4), 337–352.
Giust, F., De La Oliva, A., Bernardos, C. J., & Da Costa, R. P. F. (2011). A network-based localized mobility solution for distributed mobility management. In 14th international symposium on wireless personal multimedia communications (WPMC), 2011 (pp. 1–5).
Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K., & Patil, B. (2008). Proxy mobile IPv6. IETF RFC 5213. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5213.txt. Accessed 25 Dec 2014.
Hong, & Rappaport, S.-S. (1986). Traffic model and performance analysis for cellular mobile radio telephone systems with prioritized and non-prioritized handoff procedures. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 35(3), 77–92.
Hossain, M. S., & Atiquzzaman, M. (2013). Cost analysis of mobility protocols. Springer Telecommunication Systems, 52(4), 2271–2285.
IETF DMM WG, http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/dmm/. Accessed 25 Dec 2014.
Johnson, D., Perkins, C., & Arkko, J. (2004). Mobility support for IPv6. IETF RFC 3775. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3775.txt. Accessed 25 Dec 2014.
Lee, J.-H., Ernst, T., & Chung, T.-M. (2010). Cost analysis of IP mobility management protocols for consumer mobile devices. IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 56(2), 1010–1017.
Lee, J.-H., Han, Y.-H., Gundavelli, S., & Chung, T.-M. (2009). A comparative performance analysis on hierarchical mobile IPv6 and proxy mobile IPv6. Springer Telecommunication Systems, 41(4), 279–292.
Li, Y., Su, H., Su, L., Jin, D., & Zeng, L. (2009). A comprehensive performance evaluation of PMIPv6 over IP-based cellular networks. In IEEE 69th vehicular technology conference (VTC 2009) (pp. 1–6).
Lim, S.-K., Jang, H.-S., Baek, J.-H., & Jeong, D.-G. (2000). Call/mobility processing capacity of the personal communication exchange. Springer Telecommunication Systems, 14(1–4), 121–139.
Makaya, C., & Pierre, S. (2008). An Analytical framework for performance evaluation of IPv6-based mobility management protocols. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 7(3), 972–983.
Melia, T., Giust, F., Manfrin, R., De La Oliva, A., Bernardos, C. J., & Wetterwald, M. (2011). IEEE 802.21 and proxy mobile IPv6: A network controlled mobility solution. Future Network & Mobile Summit (FutureNetw), 2011, 1–8.
Pack, S., & Choi, Y. (2004). A study on performance of hierarchical mobile IPv6 in IP-based cellular networks. IEICE Transactions on Communications, E87–B(3), 462–469.
Paxson, V., & Floyd, S. (1995). Wide-area traffic: The failure of poisson modeling. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON), 3(3), 226–244.
Perez-Costa, X., Schmitz, R., Hartenstein, H., & Leibsch, M. (2002). A MIPv6, FMIPv6 and HMIPv6 handover latency study: Analytical approach. In Proceedings of IST mobile and wireless communications summit (pp. 100–105).
Perkins, C. (2010). IP mobility support for IPv4, IETF RFC 5944. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5944. Accessed 25 Dec 2014.
Schmidt, T. C., & Wahlisch, M. (2005). Predictive versus reactive-analysis of handover performance and its implications on IPv6 and multicast mobility. Springer Telecommunication Systems, 30(1–3), 123–142.
Thomas, R., Gilbert, H., & Maziotto, G. (1988). Influence of the moving of the mobile stations on the performance of a radio mobile cellular network. In Proceedings of the 3rd nordic seminar on digital land mobile radio communications.
TR 101 112 V3.2.0. (1998). Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS), Selection procedures for the choice of radio transmission technologies of the UMTS (UMTS 30.03 version 3.2.0). http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/101112/03.02.00_60/tr_101112v030200p.pdf. Accessed 25 Dec 2014.
Xie, J., & Akyildiz, I. F. (2002). A novel distributed dynamic location management scheme for minimizing signaling costs in mobile IP. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 1(3), 163–175.
Acknowledgments
The work was done when K. Munir was a post doctoral researcher at Institut Mines Télécom/Télécom Bretagne, France.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The work was done when K. Munir was a post doctoral researcher at Institut Mines Télécom/Télécom Bretagne, France.
Appendices
Appendix 1: A steady state numerical solution of CTMC
Solving a continuous time Markov chain (CTMC) with \(n\) states corresponds to solving the set of steady-state equations of the form:
where \(Q\) is the \(n \times n\) infinitesimal generator matrix and \(\pi \) is the \(n\)-element steady-state solution vector. \(Q\) is singular and it can be shown that \(Q\) is of rank \(n-1\) for any Markov chain of size \(n\). The resulting set of equations is not linearly independent and one of the equations is redundant. To yield a unique solution, a normalization condition is imposed on Eq. (26). This can be done by substituting one of the columns (usually the last column) of \(Q\) with the unit vector \([1,1,\dots ,1]^T\). The resulting linear system of non-homogenous equations can be rearranged as \(Q^T\pi ^T = c^T\) with \(c=[0,0,0,\dots ,0,1]\) which yields an expression in the form \(Ax=b\). For this expression, a number of well known direct and iterative solution techniques exist. Let \(A=Q^T\), \(x=\pi ^T\), and \(b=c^T\); the system Eq. (26) can be written as:
We solve Eq. (28) by implementing a direct method in C++.
Appendix 2: Life-time of a Type-A context
We calculate \(\frac{1}{\mu _A}\) as follows:
Using binomial expansion, it can be written as:
where \({^k}\mathrm {C}_j = \frac{k!}{j!(k-j)!}\).
It can be further simplified as follows:
By using the formula, \(\displaystyle \int _0^\infty e^{-ax}dx=\frac{1}{a}\), we have:
Appendix 3: Life-time of a Type-V context which is created by a set of k sessions
We calculate \(\frac{1}{\mu _{V,k}}\) as follows:
Using binomial expansion, it can be written as:
where \({^k}\mathrm {C}_j = \frac{k!}{j!(k-j)!}\).
It can be further simplified as follows:
By using the formula, \(\displaystyle \int _0^\infty e^{-ax}dx=\frac{1}{a}\), we have:
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Munir, K., Lagrange, X., Bertin, P. et al. Performance analysis of mobility management architectures in cellular networks. Telecommun Syst 59, 211–227 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-014-9957-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-014-9957-5