By Topic

Multicast-based mobility: a novel architecture for efficient micromobility

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

3 Author(s)
Helmy, A.A.-G. ; Dept. of Electr. Eng., Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA ; Jaseemuddin, M. ; Bhaskara, G.

Handover performance is very important when evaluating IP mobility protocols. If not performed efficiently, handover delays, jitters, and packet loss directly impact application performance. We propose a new architecture for providing efficient handover, while being able to coexist with other protocols. We propose a paradigm for multicast-based micromobility (M&M), where a visiting mobile is assigned a multicast address to use while moving within a domain. The multicast address is obtained using algorithmic mapping, and handover is achieved using multicast join/prune mechanisms. This paper outlines a framework for the design and evaluation of micromobility protocols. We define a suite of protocols (called candidate access router set) to enable multiple-access routers to receive traffic for the mobile node. By changing the number of such routers, timing, and buffering parameters, the protocol may be fine-tuned for specific technologies (e.g., 802.11) and handover scenarios. Extensive NS-2 simulations are used to compare M&M with other micromobility schemes-cellular Internet protocol (CIP) and handoff-aware wireless access Internet infrastructure (HAWAII). For proactive handover scenarios, our results show that M&M and CIP show lower handover delay and packet reordering than HAWAII. M&M, however, handles multiple border routers in a domain, where CIP fails. Also, for scenarios of reactive handover and coverage gaps M&M clearly outperforms CIP and HAWAII.

Published in:

Selected Areas in Communications, IEEE Journal on  (Volume:22 ,  Issue: 4 )