Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization

Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Electrical Engineering journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compeleceng

Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization q R. Tamijetchelvy a,b,⇑, G. Sivaradje c a

Department of ECE, Perunthalaivar Kamarajar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Nedungadu, Karaikal, India Research Scholar, Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Pondicherry Engineering College, Puducherry, India c Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Pondicherry Engineering College, Puducherry, India b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 17 July 2014 Received in revised form 13 March 2015 Accepted 13 March 2015 Available online xxxx Keywords: Vertical handover Heterogeneous network Convergence Mobility management Mobile IP Session initiation protocol

a b s t r a c t The accessibility of different wireless access technologies has become an essential aspect of mobile communications. Integrating heterogeneous wireless networks should guarantee the best quality of service (QoS) and cooperation among all layers. Seamless service is achieved by an optimized handover decision. Hence, the IEEE 802.21 Media Independent Handover (MIH) standard provides sufficient information for handover operations across heterogeneous environments. The present work aims at the integration of available networks and analyzes user mobility behavior based on the IEEE 802.21 MIH standard and the cooperative Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) and Session Initiation Protocols (SIP) to assist fast handover operations. The handover performance metrics are compared with various existing mechanisms in terms of handover delay, packet loss, network load and different traffic classes. Simulation results prove that the combined PMIPv6-SIP protocol considerably minimize handover delay and improve the system throughput for both real-time and non-real-time QoS efficiency. Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction In recent years, consumer demand for the execution of high-speed data access with seamless connectivity to the bestconnected network at anytime and anywhere has become an important issue in improving the future generation of wireless networks. The interworking of different wireless access technologies, such as Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX), Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) and Universal Mobile Telecommunication System (UMTS), all aim to satisfy users’ needs in terms of the data rate and traffic class, etc. In such a heterogeneous environment, seamless mobility management remains a challenging task in allowing the mobile user to continue an ongoing session even if the point of attachment (PoA) changes. Handover across heterogeneous networks has different characteristics in terms of security, the data rate, bandwidth, the priority of the traffic class and guaranteeing QoS. Therefore, the implemented work adopts the IEEE 802.21 MIH standard for the execution of seamless handover procedures across inter-domain movement. The main contributions of this paper are as follows:  We analyze the handover performance (handover delay, packet loss, signaling overhead, etc.) based on different mobility management protocols (i.e., MIPv6, SIP and cooperative PMIPv6-SIP) in various heterogeneous architectures. q

Reviews processed and recommended for publication to the Editor-in-Chief by Associate Editor Dr. M.H. Rehmani.

⇑ Corresponding author at: Assistant Professor, Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Perunthalaivar Kamarajar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Karaikal, India. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (R. Tamijetchelvy), [email protected] (G. Sivaradje). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017 0045-7906/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

2

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

 We ensure that the handover procedure follows the IEEE 802.21 MIH standard.  We ensure that the handover decision is based on multiple criteria. The MIH framework provides intelligent information about handover operations (i.e., when to initiate handover, how to choose a target network from available candidate networks, and when to trigger to a new PoA in order to avoid failure and the likelihood of unnecessary handover). A larger handover delay results in packet loss and causes service disruption (ongoing session termination). Hence, the interworking architectures presented here (WiMAX/WLAN and UMTS/WLAN) efficiently use the MIH procedure with combined mobility protocols (PMIPv6-SIP) to execute fast handover in comparison to MIPv6 and SIP protocols alone. The handover decision should be based on various criteria, including received signal strength (RSS), QoS, security, the data rate, etc. In the first scenario, the mobile node (MN) initiates handover from the WLAN to the WiMAX network due to poor QoS. In the second scenario, the MN executes handover to a candidate UMTS network as it receives bad signal strength from the WLAN PoA. Hence, in both architectures different handover decisions are executed and analyzed. It is proved that the combined PMIPv6-SIP protocols with the MIH operation outperform the existing models (MIPv6, SIP, Hierarchical MIPv6 (HMIPv6), fast handovers for MIPv6 (FMIPv6)) in terms of handover delay, the packet dropped ratio, traffic end-to-end delay, jitter, network load and throughput. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 summarizes the related work and Section 3 briefly discusses the IEEE 802.21 MIH protocol stack and mobility management protocols across various layers. The analysis of IEEE 802.21 MIH with cooperating mobility management protocols is presented in Section 4. The implementation details are described in Section 5 and, finally, Section 6 concludes with the results and discussion. 2. Related work This section discusses several related studies for handover optimization in a heterogeneous wireless environment. Numerous vertical handover schemes have been proposed which are not sufficient in themselves to handle inter-domain mobility. A comprehensive survey of different vertical handover decision algorithms [1,2] provides one idea about handover estimation. The vertical handover decision algorithms are classified on the basis of RSS, bandwidth, the cost function and combinational algorithms. For multimedia applications, RSS and security factors are not sufficient parameters for analyzing handover [3]. Hence, an application-layer SIP protocol is implemented to make proper vertical handover decisions. Seamless and proactive vertical handover (VHO) is proposed in [4] considering network conditions and applications. Later, an improvement in QoS was suggested [5,6] and Vertical Handover Decision (VHD) was achieved based on traffic classes. The importance and improvement of IEEE 802.21 MIH for intelligent handover procedures are discussed in [7]. The optimized fusion of integrated networks based on MIH is proposed in [8], which implements the Layer 2.5 (L 2.5) protocol and provides a comprehensive solution for optimized handover operations. The context-aware mobility management system (CAMMS) is proposed in [9] for seamless handover in heterogeneous networks. A handover agent, a Vertical Handover Management Engine (VHME) and enhanced mobility management (EMM) functionalities are discussed in [10–12] to reduce the signaling overhead and handover latency. Another two important mechanisms, cost-based competitive online (COL – in the base station) and auto-regression RSS prediction (in the MN) are presented in [13] for efficient handover transmission quality. The zone-based concepts are summarized in [14], in which the total coverage area is divided into zones (strong, average and weak) based on RSS to achieve minimum handover delay. The intelligent location of the MN based on the dual region mobility management (DrMOM) approach is analyzed in [15] for a simplified handoff process. Route optimization through traffic-driven pseudo-binding updating (TDPBU) and pre-binding updating using PMIPv6 and HMIPv6 is discussed in [16,17] for better throughput improvement. The QoS is improved by proper resource allocation through multi-homing and network coding. However, the energy consumption of the MN is directly proportional to the smart selective-channel scanning process [18]. However, the existing schemes pay less attention to the improvement of seamless handover. Implementation details, various handover performance parameters and comparative analysis are not considered in detail. Hence, the present work utilizes the IEEE 802.21 MIH standard for the provision of intelligent decisions for seamless handover optimization in a heterogeneous environment. The cooperative PMIPv6-SIP mobility protocols across different layers assist in fast handover execution for both real-time and non-real-time applications. 3. An overview of the MIH standard and mobility management protocols An efficient way to optimize mobility management is by using the IEEE 802.21 MIH standard. The IEEE 802.21 MIH standard does not realize mobility management protocol actions. Hence, it needs to cooperate with various mobility protocols at different layers to achieve optimized network-initiated handovers. 3.1. The IEEE 802.21 MIH protocol stack The IEEE 802.21 MIH protocol stack is important for efficient and seamless mobility management in heterogeneous networks. The important element of the MIH standard is the MIH Function (MIHF), which resides across the MIH User (MIHU) and lower-link layer device interface. The MIHF provides cross-layer control information for making proper handover Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

3

decision and execution phases. Communications between the MIHF and other functional entities are based on a number of defined service primitives which are grouped in service access points (SAPs). The MIH_SAP provides for communication interface between the MIHF and the higher-layer MIHU. The MIH_LINK_SAP interfaces the lower-link layers with the MIHF, and the MIH_NET_SAP provides for an interface between local and remote entities. The MIH standard provides three important services for an efficient handover process, namely a Media Independent Event Service (MIES), a Media Independent Command Service (MICS) and a Media Independent Information Service (MIIS), as shown in Fig. 1. The MIES provides information about the current link status and reports to higher layers with detected new PoAs. It supports three important triggers based on the link quality, MIH_Link_Up, MIH_Link_Down, MIH_Link_GoingDown events. These triggers are sufficient to enable intelligent handover across heterogeneous networks. MICS enables higher layers to control the physical, data and logical link layers for event subscription and threshold configuration. Finally, the MIIS provides information about the candidate network by querying the information server. The information server collects information about the neighboring network during deployment. The MIIS command is also used to enquire as to resource availability and other handover-related parameters in the candidate network. 3.2. Mobility management protocols – PMIPV6 and SIP In an IP-based infrastructure, seamless session continuation can be achieved by various mobility protocols across different layers. MIPv6, FMIPv6, HMIPv6 and PMIPv6 are the network-layer protocols. Their performance is analyzed in terms of handover latency, QoS, throughput, packet loss and traffic conditions. Based on the analysis, the handover latency is greater in MIPv6 and is directly proportional to the round trip time for binding update (BU) messages. In FMIPv6, the handover is prepared in advance. It provides fast BUs and tunnels between old Care of Address (CoA) and new CoA in order to reduce the handover latency [19]. HMIPv6 introduces a mobile anchor point (MAP) for fast handover. Its purpose is to reduce the amount of signaling information between the correspondent node (CN) and the home agent. In PMIPv6, a proxy agent in the network does the handover on behalf of the MN. The mobility management issues are handled by the network, and thus provide an efficient and fast vertical handover to the candidate networks. The functional entities of PMIPv6 include a mobility access gateway (MAG) and a local mobility anchor (LMA). The MAG is simply an access router, and its function is to track the movement of the MN in the localized mobility domain. The LMA maintains the routes for MNs connected to its domain. During the registration process, the MAG sends proxy BU (PBU) messages to the LMA, which includes the MN home prefix (MHP) and router solicitation (RS) address. The LMA creates a binding cache entry (BCE) and establishes a bidirectional tunnel across the MAG and the LMA [20]. Finally, all the packets are tunneled between the LMA and the MAG. If the user moves from its home network to another network, as shown in Fig. 2(a),

Fig. 1. The IEEE 802.21 MIH protocol stack.

Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

4

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Fig. 2. Mobility management protocols: (a) PMIPv6 and (b) SIP signaling.

MAG1 detects the movement of the MN away from the network. It sends a PBU message to the LMA to deregister the MN states. The LMA accepts the PBU and waits for a minimum delay to delete from BCE. Meanwhile, and at the same time, MAG2 detects the MN attachment in its network, immediately sending the PBU to the LMA to register the new states of the MN. Afterwards, the LMA sends the PBA to MAG1 for successful deregistration. The MN follows the same registration process with MAG2. Finally, the packets are routed through the new PMIPv6 tunnel to the MN. An application-layer SIP protocol supports seamless mobility across different wireless access technologies. SIP defines several elements, including registrars, user agents, redirects and proxy servers, as shown in Fig. 2(b). SIP supports terminal mobility, session mobility and service mobility. The SIP user agent has two basic functions; listens to the incoming SIP messages and then sends the SIP messages following user actions. When an SIP user agent moves from one network to another, it first registers itself with the location server using new a URL logical address in order to route the calls to the correct location. Afterwards, a direct link is established between the communicating parties. The SIP redirect server returns to the current location of the host using route optimization. Hence, in the architecture presented here, IEEE 802.21 MIH is combined with mobility management protocols at various layers in order to realize soft handover across an inter-domain environment. 4. Analysing IEEE 802.21 MIH in an heterogeneous architecture with cooperative PMIPv6-SIP mobility management protocols Seamless interworking across a heterogeneous network requires cross-layer cooperation among all elements of the network architecture. Hence, the presented system adopts the IEEE 802.21 MIH and PMIPv6-SIP protocols to support fast handover given inter-domain mobility. The two scenarios presented describe the vertical handover performance with an enriched MIH operation for WLAN/WiMAX and UMTS/WLAN networks. 4.1. Integrated WLAN/WiMAX and UMTS/WLAN networks – basic integrated issues The basic integrated issues behind these wireless access technologies include: how to integrate the MAC layer, QoS mapping, coverage area and data rates. Which parameter should we carefully take into account for seamless handover? The IEEE 802.21 MIH working group fills this gap by providing a media-independent framework to support seamless handover operations. In order to adopt MIH services, they should be integrated into a common core environment and mobile devices with multiple interfaces. Both WLAN and WiMAX networks provide a media-specific extension to interaction with IEEE 802.21 MIH services for realizing a soft handover. Two integrated scenarios – WLAN/WiMAX and UMTS/WLAN – describe the vertical handover signaling based on the IEEE 802.21 MIH framework. In the first scenario, the MN initiates handover from the WLAN to the WiMAX network for the best QoS support for VoIP application. The second scenario depicts the handover signaling across the UMTS network and WLAN based on the signal strength. The mobile user executes handover to the UMTS network, since its current connectivity across the WLAN PoA will be lost. Both these scenarios describe how the IEEE 802.21 MIH and mobility protocols improve the handover performance irrespective of the effectiveness of the handover decision. 4.2. Vertical handover between a WLAN and a WiMAX network using IEEE 802.21 MIH signaling The combined operation of IEEE 802.21 MIH with cooperative mobility management protocols improves the handover performance in a heterogeneous architecture. The deployment of PMIPv6 includes MAG and LMA, featuring MIHF and MIHU to control the handover procedures. SIP is a signaling mobility protocol between the MN and IP multimedia subsystem (IMS). If an MN needs an IMS service, it must register before it can set up an active session. The call session control function (CSCF) is an important node in the IMS which processes SIP signaling. The SIP entity includes a proxy CSCF (P-CSCF) and is a first point of contact for the MN, being located either in the home network or else in the visited network. The serving CSCF (SPlease cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

5

CSCF) is an SIP server located in the home network which handles profile information, SIP registration, and the maintenance and termination of the session during mobility. The interrogating CSCF (I-CSCF) is another SIP function located in the administrative domain. Let us assume that the MN is in a visited network, then the registration process first flows from the P-CSCF and examines the home domain by sending a request to the I-CSCF, which in turn queries the HSS to find the location of the S-CSCF. The HSS finds the new S-CSCF and responds to the I-CSCF. Finally, the I-CSCF sends the register information to the S-CSCF of the MN. Fig. 3 depicts the implemented vertical handover architecture, in which the MN is equipped with multiple wireless interfaces. Initially, the MN is within the WLAN coverage as well as within the range of the WiMAX networks belonging to same network operator. The MN exchanges the information to the CN with the supporting IP core infrastructure. The MIHU is installed in the WLAN PoA (MAG and LMA) and the WiMAX BS, and the MN is equipped with MIHF. The MIHF in the MN periodically reports the link-layer information to the upper MAG1 through the MIES command. Let us assume that the MN initiates handover from the WLAN to the WiMAX network due to poor support for the QoS guarantee of the traffic class VoIP. Hence, it will be moving away from the serving network and toward the WiMAX network. In this case, the MN receives a bad signal strength from the current serving network and the MIES reports the MIH_Link_Down trigger to MAG1, indicating the need for handover. Figs. 4 and 5 clearly illustrate the handover preparation and execution phases based on IEEE 802.21 MIH signaling. 4.2.1. The vertical handover preparation phase The handover preparation phase starts with candidate network discovery, a scanning process and resource availability checking. Information about the candidate network is obtained by the information server. The MIHF in MAG1 sends MIH_Get_Information.request to the LMA to query the MIIS server for candidate networks. The MIIS server, on the other hand, responds with a list of neighbor networks that are accessible. Next, the MIHU in MAG1 commands the MN to scan for the signal strength of the target network. At the same time, MAG2 (the WiMAX network) detects the MN attachment in its serving area. After the scanning process is completed, the MN notifies the serving network that WiMAX is accessible. The WLAN MIHU checks for resource availability in the WiMAX network for VoIP applications in order to execute handover. The resource availability information from WiMAX is obtained through MIH_HO_Resourcecheck.request. If everything is satisfactory, WiMAX is selected as a target network for handover. 4.2.2. The vertical handover execution phase Once the target network is selected, the MN has to establish link-layer connectivity with the WiMAX networks. In parallel with this, MAG2 sends a PBU message to the LMA to register the MN state for a bidirectional tunnel toward the new PoA. The LMA deregisters the MN’s previous state and registers the new MAG2 address. At the same time, the SIP client sends the SIP session INVITE message to the target network for session continuation. Next, the SIP client deregisters the old IP address and re-registers the new one with the SIP proxy server. When MAG2 receives a PBA message from LMA, it sends a router advertisement message to the MN to configure the new IP address. Therefore, a new bidirectional tunnel is established between MAG2 and the LMA.

Fig. 3. WLAN/WiMAX mobility management based on IEEE 802.21 MIH with the PMIPv6-SIP protocol.

Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

6

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Fig. 4. The vertical handover preparation phase based on IEEE 802.21 MIH signaling.

Fig. 5. The vertical handover execution phase based on IEEE 802.21 MIH signaling.

4.3. Vertical handover between UMTS and WLAN networks using IEEE 802.21 MIH signaling In order to support seamless service among heterogeneous networks, the delay occurring during the handover preparation and execution phases should be minimized. The major contribution of handover delay is lies in the target network’s selection – the worst case results in packet loss and service degradation. Initially, the MN is within WLAN coverage and exchanges its information with the CN through MAG1 and the LMA. Later on, the MN moves away from the WLAN hotspot

Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

7

Fig. 6. Vertical handover based on IEEE 802.21 MIH in a UMTS/WLAN heterogeneous network.

and joins the UMTS network, as shown in Fig. 6. The WLAN is coupled with a Serving GPRS Supporting Node (SGSN) via a Gateway GPRS Support Node (GGSN) of a UMTS network with a separate Radio Network Controller (RNC). The SGSN tracks the movement of the MN and also performs security functions. The GGSN provides interworking with the packet data networks and connects to the SGSN. In this scenario, the MN initiates handover to the UMTS network as it receives a bad signal strength from the current serving network due to mobility. The handover procedure is similar to the previous case. The MIHF is installed in the MN and the MIHU is equipped in the SGSN. When the MIHF detects the MIH_Link_GoingDown event from the lower layers, the MIHU in the WLAN identifies the UMTS is the target network and immediately begins handover preparation to the UMTS network. At the same time, the SGSN detects the MN attachment in its network. In order to maintain seamless connectivity, SIP REFER [21] is chosen for handling vertical handover. The WLAN interface notifies the UMTS with the SIP REFER request, which contains the destination resource identifier and replaces the existing session with a new session. During the handover preparation phase, MAG1 exchanges information with MAG2 through the LMA. The MN scans the signal strength of the UMTS base station to determine accessibility. If it is accessible, the MN will query the target network for resource availability. If everything is satisfied, the UMTS is chosen as the target network to handover. 5. Simulation results and discussion This section examines the vertical handover performance characteristics between the WLAN/WiMAX and UMTS/WLAN networks based on IEEE 802.21 MIH with cooperative PMIPv6-SIP mobility management protocols. The first scenario is integrated for a WLAN and a WiMAX network with an overlay structure of cells and it covers outdoor hotspots. The WLAN infrastructural mode (802.11b) with a cell radius of 1 km, a transmission power of 0.005 W, an 11 Mbps data rate and a bandwidth of 20 MHz is considered for the simulation environment. The MNs are placed in random positions and mobility is confined to within the network. The mobility configuration is done for MN1 and MN2 and moves at a velocity of 20 m/s or 10 m/s, respectively, toward the WiMAX network. The WiMAX network supports medium mobility and covers an area of up to two miles with a transmission power of 0.5 W. In the second scenario, the UMTS provides sufficient coverage for the MN throughout the simulation process, with a bit rate of 384 kbps. The mobility configuration is done for two MNs and in order to ensure handover from the WLAN to the UMTS network given poor signal strength due to mobility. These scenarios are implemented in the OPNET software and the simulation parameters are listed in Table. 1. The log-distance path-loss model is used for the mobile propagation environment to predict the loss over a long distance between the MN and its PoA. 5.1. The integrated WLAN and WiMAX network – handover performance evaluation (first scenario) The performance analysis of the WLAN and the WiMAX network is described from the following results. Fig. 7(a) and (b) describes the vertical handover delay between the IEEE 802.11 and IEEE 802.16 networks based on MIPv6 and cooperative Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

8

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Table 1 Simulation parameters. Parameters (MN configuration)

Value

Parameter (AP configuration)

Value

Route Optimization Home Agent Address Binding Update Interval Binding Update Max. Retry Lifetime Requested Routability Test Max. Retry Mobility Decision Factor RSVP Waiting Time (s) Refresh Interval (s) SIP UAC Service Max. Simultaneous Calls

Enabled 2005:0:0:3:0:0:0:1 10 6 100 6 3 1.0 30 Enabled Unlimited

Max. no. of MN Maximum Queue size Router Advertisement Hop Limit Advertised Lifetime (s) Home Agent Binding Lifetime WLAN Physical Characteristics Data Rate (bps) Transmit Power (W) Packet Rx. Power threshold AP Beacon Interval (s)

100 4 Enabled 32 Half hour 100 Direct sequence 11 Mbps 0.005 95 0.02

(a)

Handover Delay Based on MIPv6 Protocol 0.6 HO Delay for MN1 HO Delay for MN2

Handover Delay Based on MIH with PMIPv6-SIP Protocols 0.2

Handover Delay (sec)

Handover Delay (sec)

0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

(b)

0.15 HO Delay for MN1 HO Delay for MN2

0.1

0.05

0 0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Simulaon Time (sec)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Simulaon Time (sec)

Fig. 7. Vertical handover delay for multiple users: (a) MIPv6 and (b) combined MIH with PMIPv6-SIP.

MIH with the PMIPv6-SIP protocols. Two different users (MN1 and MN2 in Fig. 3) are simultaneously handover to the candidate (WiMAX) network. It is observed that the vertical handover delay is maximum for MIPv6 [22] and smallest for the MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols. The reason for this is that the network prepares the handover in advance (i.e., it follows MIH procedures) when the Link_Down event is triggered, and immediately identifies the candidate network from the MIIS server, quickly executing the handover when the Link_Going_Down event is triggered. In addition, the exchange of the signaling information during the handover process is less due to the excellent route optimization in the PMIPv6 protocol. The time difference between the two MNs to execute the handover operation will vary, since both choose the WiMAX network and it takes more time to check the resource availability for MN2 compared to MN1. The other reason is that MN1 and MN2 respectively move at velocities of 20 m/s and 10 m/s, and therefore the handover delay is somewhat larger for MN2. The exchange of signaling information during the handover process is less for the MIHassisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols compared to MIPv6. This is because MIPv6 provides triangular routing and thus the signaling overhead is increased, as depicted in Fig. 8. The unnecessary handover and handover failure probability (the ‘ping pong’ effect) are completely limited in MIH operations – as shown in Fig. 9 – since the handover is executed only if the Link_Going_Down event is triggered. Accordingly, the handover to the candidate network and the handover occurrence probability [23] are expressed in Eqs. (1)–(3):

PrfRSSt 6 RSSthr & RSStþ1 6 RSSthr g ( ) tþ1 \ Pr RSSt > RSSthr j RSSj < RSSthr j¼t

(

PrðRSSt ; RSStþ1 Þ ¼

ð1Þ ð2Þ !

#)   2 rRSStþ1  1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi exp  2 ð3Þ RSStþ1  lRSStþ1  q RSSt  lRSSt rRSSt 2rRSStþ1 ð1  q2 Þ 2prRSStþ1 1  q2 1

"

The end-to-end Ethernet delay for different applications, like web access, FTP, email-based on MIPv6 and MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols, are shown in Fig. 10(a) and (b). During handover execution, the time taken for the data packets sent from the WLAN to the WiMAX network is quite large due to the queuing of packets in the access gateway (WiMAX). It is observed that the Ethernet delay is lower (0.000028 s) for the MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocol. This is due to reduced handover delay, and hence the packets are immediately released from the queue following handover execution. Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

9

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Signalling Overheads during HO Process

MAC Signalling Overhead (symbols)

0.18 MIH with PMIPv6-SIP MIPv6

0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 -0.02 0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Simulaon Time (sec) Fig. 8. The MAC signaling overhead.

Probability of Handover Failure

Probability of Unnecessary Handover 1

50

100

150

0.1

0.01

0.001

MIPv6 MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

0.0001

Unnecessary Handover Probability

Handover Failure Probability

1 0

0

50

100

150

0.1

0.01 MIPv6 MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

0.001

0.0001

0.00001

Velocity of Mobile Node (Km/h)

Velocity of Mobile Node (Km/h)

Fig. 9. Probability of handover failure and unnecessary handover.

Ethernet Delay based on MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

Ethernet Delay based on MIPv6 EMAIL Traffic FTP Traffic HTTP Traffic

0.00003

0.00003

Ethernet Delay for Di. Applicaon (sec)

Ethernet Delay for Different Applicaon (sec)

0.000035

0.000025 0.00002 0.000015 0.00001 0.000005 0 0

2000

4000

EMAIL Traffic FTP Traffic HTTP Traffic

0.000025 0.00002 0.000015 0.00001 0.000005 0

0

200

400

Simulaon Time (sec)

Simulaon Time (sec)

(a)

(b)

600

Fig. 10. Ethernet delay for HTTP, FTP and email traffic based on: (a) MIPv6, and (b) MIH with PMIPv6-SIP.

The main contribution of the network delay depends upon many factors, such as handover latency, packet queuing, mobility protocols and routing parameters. The queuing delay for the particular node depends upon the number of currently queued packets to that specific node during handover [24]. Therefore, in our presented approach, the overall handover candidate delay (including queue size and execution delay) is reduced to minimum level by providing an efficient route optimization path, as shown in Fig. 11. The routing information for the different mobility protocols is shown in Fig. 12(a), in Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

10

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

WiMAX Network - HO Connecon Queue Size MIH with PMIPv6-SIP MIPv6

2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5

0

1000

2000

3000

WiMAX Network - HO Execuon Delay

WiMAX HO Execuon Delay (sec)

WiMAX Connecon Queue Size (bytes)

3

0.045 MIH with PMIPv6-SIP MIPv6

0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0

4000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Simulaon Time (sec)

Simulaon Time (sec)

Fig. 11. The WiMAX network – connection queue size and handover execution delay.

Route Table - Time Beetween Updates 3

Route Table Update Time (sec)

RIP Traffic Received (bits/sec)

Roung Informaon Protocol (RIP) Traffic 2500 FMIPv6 HMIPv6 MIPv6 PMIPv6

2000 1500 1000 500 0 0

200

400

600

2.5

FMIPv6 HMIPv6 MIPv6 PMIPv6

2 1.5 1 0.5 0

0

200

400

Simulaon Time (sec)

Simulaon Time (sec)

(a)

(b)

600

Fig. 12. (a) RIP traffic and (b) route table update time.

which the PMIPv6 protocol takes the least time to compute the best route by providing the most routing information as compared to the MIPv6 (triangular routing), HMIPv6 (MAP) and FMIPv6 (previous and new access router) protocols. The number of entries in the route table for PMIPv6 is 8.5, since it updates every 0.5 s and computes an optimum route for the MN, as in Fig. 12(b). The handover delay is directly related to the packet loss ratio, which in turn affects the system throughput. The MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols provide better handover performance, which is less than 0.03 s when compared to the MIPv6 protocol. The mobility signaling overhead during handover is completely limited in the present work. Upon increasing demand for VoIP applications, many networks now provide services with high QoS. The presented approach also implements VoIP applications to improve the efficiency of the system. In VoIP, packet delay variation and the packet loss ratio are the most important parameters in determining the network’s performance, and they also affect the user-perceived QoS. A higher the packet delay variation leads to congestion of the data, which in turn tends to lose some of the packets. The jitter, packet delay variation and packet dropped ratio are directly proportional to the handover latency, which are shown in Figs. 13 and 14. It is observed that the MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols provide less voice jitter at 0.00015 s, which can be tolerated and compensated for within the voice decoder. Similarly, the number of packets dropped due to PMIPv6 is very low when compared to other protocols. This is because other protocols involve more time to execute the handover process due to an excessive MAC signaling overhead. The RSS measurement, neighbor node advertisement and scanning process fluctuate because of the fading phenomenon. Therefore, the MN must process these signals in addition to the path loss associated with the distance to achieve the satisfied uplink and downlink SNR. Most of the network resources (e.g., transmission power) are wasted during the handover preparation phases due to the scanning of the candidate network. With MIPv6, the candidate network is recognized by sending and receiving additional advertisements, which results in more power loss. However, with MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP, the transmission power is well maintained throughout the simulation process since it immediately recognizes the candidate network from the information server, as shown in Fig. 15. The resources allocated to the MN are released after handover completion, which thus saves power by sending the MIH_Link_PowerDown message to the WLAN network. Finally, the MN communicates with the CN

Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

11

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Voice Packet Delay Variaon during HO Process

Voice Jier during HO Process MIPv6 MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

Voice Jier (sec)

0.0004 0.0003 0.0002 0.0001 0 0

2000

4000

Voice Packet Delay Variaon (sec)

0.0005

0.0012

MIPv6 MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

0.001 0.0008 0.0006 0.0004 0.0002 0

-0.0001

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Simulaon Time (sec)

Simulaon Time (sec)

Fig. 13. VoIP applications – jitter and packet delay variation.

IP Traffic Dropped during HO Process MIH with PMIPv6-SIP MIPv6

0.025

0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 0

1000

2000

3000

Packet Dropped Rao in WiMAX Network during HO

4000

Downlink Packet Dropped Rao (packets/sec)

IP Traffic Dropped (packets/sec)

0.12

FMIPv6 HMIPv6 MIPv6 PMIPv6

0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 0

200

400

600

-0.005

-0.02

Simulaon Time (sec)

Simulaon Time (sec)

Fig. 14. The packet dropped ratio in the IP core and the WiMAX network.

WiMAX Total Tx. Power based on MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

30 Tx. Power for MN1 Tx. Power for MN2 Tx. Power for MN3

25 20 15 10 5 0 0

1000

2000

3000

Simulaon Time (sec)

4000

Total Transmission Power (dBm)

Total Transmission Power (dBm)

WiMAX Total Tx. Power based on MIPv6 27.5

Tx. Power for MN1 Tx. Power for MN2 Tx. Power for MN3

27 26.5 26 25.5 25 24.5 24

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Simulaon Time (sec)

Fig. 15. Total transmission power in WiMAX network.

through the bidirectional tunnel established between MAG2 and the LMA. The SIP proxy server re-invites the new IP address and begins a continuous the ongoing real-time session with the new IP address. The traffic now flows through the WiMAX networks by balancing both the network loads, improving the system throughput when compared to the MIPv6 protocol (as in Fig. 16). The WiMAX network load is well balanced in the presented architecture, since the candidate information is properly exchanged during the handover process by MIH signaling. Tables 2 and 3 summarize the various performance factors of the presented scheme with different mobility protocols. The tabulation results prove that the presented architecture provides the best QoS by taking the velocity of the MN into account. Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

12

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

WiMAX Network Load Aer HO Process MIH with PMIPv6-SIP MIPv6

2500

WiMAX Throughput (bits/sec)

WiMAX Load (bits/sec)

3000

2000 1500 1000 500 0

2500

WiMAX Network Throughput Aer HO Process MIH with PMIPv6-SIP MIPv6

2000 1500 1000 500 0

0

2000

4000

0

Simulaon Time (sec)

2000

4000

Simulaon me (sec)

Fig. 16. The WiMAX network load and throughput after the handover process.

Table 2 Comparative analysis of different mobility management protocols. Parameters

MIPv6

HMIPv6

FMIPv6

PMIPv6

RIP traffic Received (Bits/s) Ethernet Delay (s) WiMAX delay(s) WiMAX Load (bits/s) WiMAX Throughput (bits/s) IPv6 Packet drop (packets/s) Downlink packet drop (packets/s) IP Traffic dropped (packets/s) Route table time b/w updates (s) Route table size (no of entries) Uplink SNR (dB) Downlink SNR (dB) Total Transmission power (dBm)

400 0.000018 0.0055 500 180 0.45 0.020 0.8 1.8 6 14 22 26

600 0.000020 0.0040 900 210 0.35 0.07 0.38 1.6 8 22 25 26

900 0.000021 0.0025 600 200 0.49 0.07 1 0.8 8 14 23 25

2200 0.000025 0.0035 1100 250 0.15 0.04 0.38 0.4 9 22 27 26

Table 3 Performance comparison of the MIPv6 and MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols. Parameters

MIPv6 protocol

MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

Handover Delay – MN2 (s) WiMAX connection delay (s) Ethernet Delay (s) Voice Jitter (s) Voice packet End-to-End delay (s) Voice packet delay variation (s) FTP Download response time (s) FTP Upload response time (s) WiMAX delay(s) WiMAX Load (bits/s) WiMAX Throughput (bits/s) Neighbor advert. received (bits/s) Scanning Interval activity WiMAX Downlink Packet dropped WiMAX Uplink Packet dropped WiMAX Downlink BLER WiMAX Uplink BLER IP Traffic dropped (packets/s) RIP Network Convergence duration (s) RIP Traffic sent (bits/s) RIP Traffic received (bits/s) WiMAX Uplink SNR (dB) WiMAX Downlink SNR (dB) WiMAX window size WiMAX Queue delay Path loss (dB) Sub channel Transmission power (dBm)

0.21 0.050 0.000022 0.00039 0.50 0.0010 18 8 0.039 2500 1800 12,000 Time slot 25(packets/s) 5.5 0.5 0.15 0.11 7.5 1800 1300 7.5 4 2 0.011 130 5

0.02 0.025 0.000015 0.00015 0.45 0.0003 2 8 0.024 800 2000 18,000 Continuous 7(packets/s) 0.70 0.01 0.00060 0.045 8.5 2000 1400 14 25 3.5 0.01 110 7.5

Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

13

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

5.2. The Integrated UMTS and WiMAX network – handover performance evaluation In the UMTS/WLAN integrated architectures, the handover procedure follows exactly the same process as in the previous case. The vertical handover from the WLAN to the UMTS network occurs when the MN receives bad signal strength from the serving network due to mobility. UMTS provides an overlay network with a large coverage area around the WLAN network. In the simulated scenario, the UMTS cell accommodates more than 20 nodes in the baseline system and provides efficient channel utilization. The IEEE 802.21 MIH-enabled routers provide the necessary signaling for the execution of seamless handover. First, the handover delay is compared with the MIPv6, SIP [25] and MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols for multiple users. It is observed that the handover delay is 0.5 and 0.8 s in the case of SIP, 0.45 and 0.62 s for MIPv6, and 0.06 and 0.2 s for MIH with the PMIPv6-SIP protocols, as in Figs. 17 and 18(a). The handover delay is larger for the SIP and MIPv6 protocols because the WLAN is overlaid within the UMTS coverage and this causes the switching module to update the exact IP address to the GGSN. The GGSN takes some time to receive this update message, and in turn experiences a large service activation (handover) delay; whereas in case of MIH with the PMIPv6-SIP protocols the handover delay is lower due to excellent route optimization by the MAG and the LMA. The packets received from the IP core network are slightly delayed, but not so as to introduce service disruption. With the client data of many wireless users, the test was conducted with email, FTP and web applications for the SIP, MIPv6 and PMIPv6 protocols. It was assumed that all the MNs transmit the same amount of traffic simultaneously during the handover process. The SIP model results in good performance when compared with other models, since it handles the UDP traffic optimally in the IP core, as in Figs. 18(b) and 19. The end-to-end and radio access channel (RACH) delay for different traffic classes are based on the TCP response in an IP core. It is observed that MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP achieves less end-to-end and RACH delay (0.18 s and 0.064 s respectively) when compared to the other protocols. The reason for this is that the MIPv6 and SIP protocols provide for a poor dimensioning configuration, which requires enough bandwidth to support the required QoS for different traffic classes. The GPRS

UMTS HO Delay Based on MIPv6 for Mulple User

UMTS HO Delay Based on SIP for Mulple User 1

UMTS Handover Delay (sec)

UMTS Handover Delay (sec)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4

HO Delay for MN1 HO Delay for MN2

0.3 0.2 0.1 0

0

1000

2000

3000

HO Delay for MN1 HO Delay for MN2

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0

4000

0

1000

Simulaon Time (sec)

2000

3000

4000

Simulaon Time (sec)

Fig. 17. UMTS handover delay based on MIPv6 and SIP protocols.

UMTS HO Delay - MIH with PMIPv6-SIP for Mulple User 120

HO Delay for MN1 HO Delay for MN2

0.6

Different Traffic Rx. aer HO (bytes/sec)

UMTS Handover Delay (sec)

0.7

0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

0

1000

2000

Traffic Rx. in WiMAX Network Aer HO Based on MIPv6

3000

4000

100 80 60

EMAIL Traffic Received FTP Traffic Received HTTP Traffic Received

40 20 0 -20

0

1000

2000

3000

Simulaon Time (sec)

Simulaon Time (sec)

(a)

(b)

4000

Fig. 18. (a) UMTS handover delay based on MIH assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols, and (b) Traffic Rx. based on MIPv6.

Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

14

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Traffic Rx. in WiMAX Network Aer HO MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

Traffic Rx. in WiMAX Network Aer HO Based on SIP Different Traffic Rx. aer HO (bytes/sec)

EMAIL Traffic Received FTP Traffic Received HTTP Traffic Received

150 100 50 0 0

2000

4000

Different Taffic Rx. aer HO (bytes/sec)

200

200

-50

EMAIL Traffic Received FTP Traffic Received HTTP Traffic Received

150 100 50 0 0

2000

4000

-50

Simulaon me (sec)

Simulaon Time (sec)

Fig. 19. Different traffic Rx. based on the SIP and MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols.

UMTS Uplink & Downlink Tunnel Delay MIPv6, SIP

Uplink & Downlink Tunnel Delay (sec)

UMTS End-to-End Delay - MIPv6, SIP and MIH with PMIPv6-SIP UMTS End-to-End Delay (sec)

0.25 MIPv6 SIP MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0

0

1000

2000

3000

0.0001

Downlink Tunnel Delay - MIPv6 Downlink Tunnel Delay - SIP Uplink Tunnel Delay - MIPv6 Uplink Tunnel Delay - SIP

0.00008 0.00006 0.00004 0.00002 0

4000

0

2000

4000

Simulaon Time (sec)

Simulaon Time (sec)

(a)

(b)

Fig. 20. (a) UMTS end-to-end delay, and (b) UMTS tunnel delay based on MIPv6 and SIP.

0.00012

UMTS RACH Access Delay (sec)

Uplink & Downlink Tunnel Delay (sec)

UMTS Uplink & Downlink Tunnel Delay - MIH with PMIPv6-SIP Downlink Tunnel Delay

0.0001

Uplink Tunnel Delay

0.00008 0.00006 0.00004 0.00002 0

0

2000

4000

0.08

UMTS RACH Access Delay - MIPv6, SIP and MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 MIPv6 SIP MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

0.02 0.01 0

0

1000

2000

3000

Simulaon Time (sec)

Simulaon Time (sec)

(a)

(b)

4000

Fig. 21. (a) UMTS tunnel delay – MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP, and (b) UMTS RACH access delay.

tunneling protocol (GTP) has separate tunnels for different QoS applications. The uplink and downlink tunneling delay for the MIPv6 and SIP protocols are lower, at 0.000039 s and 0.000085 s for MIPv6, and 0.000039 s and 0.000070 s for SIP, due to the distribution of data packets at the RNC and GGSN levels. The comparison results for QoS, end-to-end delay, tunnel delay and RACH delay for MIPv6, SIP and MIH-assisted PMIPv6-SIP protocols are shown in Figs. 20 and 21. Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

15

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx Table 4 Performance comparison of the integrated UMTS and WLAN networks. Parameters

MIPv6

SIP

MIH with PMIPv6-SIP

Handover Delay (s) –Multiple User

0.62 0.45 0.27 2.3 4.5 0.60 0.19 22 0.00035 110 57 95 0.19 0.00007 0.000035 0.50 110

0.8 0.5 0.33 1.1 60 0.55 0.23 24 0.00020 170 50 100 0.05 0.00008 0.000035 0.07 220

0.07 0.19 0.32 0.25 15.5 0.55 0.18 14 0.00030 170 70 90 0.045 0.0001 0.000030 0.02 220

TCP Delay (s) TCP Segment Delay (s) GPRS Attach Delay (s) Service Activation Delay (s) UMTS End to End Delay (s) Email Upload Response Time (s) Ethernet Delay (s) Email Traffic Received (bytes/s) FTP Traffic Received (bytes/s) HTTP Traffic Received (bytes/s) IP Traffic Dropped (packets/s) UMTS Uplink Tunnel Delay (s) UMTS Downlink Tunnel Delay(s) UMTS RACH Access Delay (s) UMTS Throughput (bits/s)

The MIH with the PMIPv6-SIP protocol achieves lower handover delay, which results in a lower packet dropping ratio and thus increases the system throughput. Table 4 provides the performance evaluation of the integrated UMTS and WLAN networks. From the simulation results, it is proved that the presented IEEE 802.21 MIH with cooperative PMIPv6-SIP protocols strongly supports seamless connectivity across heterogeneous networks. Proper handover signaling achieves a lower handover delay, a lower dropped packets ratio, and fewer retransmission attempts. Hence, the implemented work proves to be more efficient for both real-time and non-real time QoS efficiency. 6. Conclusion The presented integrated WLAN/WiMAX and UMTS/WLAN architectures provide an optimized handover procedure across inter-domain mobility. Moreover, the user benefits from widespread coverage and high-speed connectivity. This work proves to be energy efficient and more secure, with a number of gateways and lower vulnerability to attackers. During the handover preparation phase, the discovery of the neighboring network is immediately known from the MIIS server. Hence, the vertical handover from the WLAN to the WiMAX network or from the WLAN to the UMTS network takes less time and maintains its ongoing communication session without any service interruption. Two architectures are presented to analyze the handover performance. In both cases, the MN initiates handover to the candidate network due to poor support for the QoS guarantee of the real-time traffic class and bad signal strength reception at the serving network. After handover is completed, the traffic flows through the candidate network and the load is sufficiently well balanced in both the networks. The qualitative results suggest that the combined PMIPv6-SIP protocol is well suited for both delay-sensitive and delay-tolerant applications when compared to other schemes (MIPv6, SIP, HMIPv6 and FMIPv6) in terms of handover delay, the packet dropped ratio, traffic end-to-end delay, jitter, network load and throughput. Another attractive feature of our approach is that it maintains seamless connectivity, which is particularly applicable for the design of the future generation of wireless networks. References [1] Yan Xiaohuan, Ahmet Sßekercioglu Y, Narayanan Sathya. A survey of vertical handover decision algorithms in fourth generation heterogeneous wireless networks. Comput Netw 2010;54:1848–63. [2] Tamilselvan S, Tamizhselvan C. IEEE 802.21 media independent handover mechanism for heterogeneous networks. In: Proceedings of international conference on communications and signal processing (ICCSP), April 2012. p. 27–31. [3] Achour Amel, Haddadou Kamel, Kervella Brigitte, Pujolle Guy. A SIP-SHIM6-based solution providing interdomain service continuity in IMS-based networks. Commun Mag 2012;50:109–19. [4] Ma Dong, Ma Maode. A QoS oriented vertical handoff scheme for WiMAX/WLAN overlay networks. Parallel Distrib Syst 2012;23(4):598–606. [5] Singhrova A, Prakash N. Vertical handoff decision algorithm for improved quality of service in heterogeneous wireless networks. IET Commun 2012;6:211–23. [6] Jailton Jose, Carvalho Tassio, Valante Warley, Natalino Carlos, Frances Renato, Dias Kelvin. A quality of experience handover architecture for heterogeneous mobile wireless multimedia networks. Commun Mag 2013:152–9. [7] Omheni N, Zarai F, Obaidat MS, Hsiao KF, Kamoun L. Enhanced handover architecture in IEEE 802.21-enabled heterogeneous wireless networks. In: Proceedings of international conference on computer, information and telecommunication systems (CITS), May 2013. p. 1–5. [8] Lampropoulos George, Skianis Charalabos, Neves Pedro. Optimized fusion of heterogeneous wireless networks based on media-independent handover operations. Wirel Commun 2010;17(4):78–87. [9] Fernandes Stenio, Karmouch Ahmed. Vertical mobility management architectures in wireless networks: a comprehensive survey and future directions. Commun Surv Tutorials 2012;14(1):45–63. [10] BalaMurali Krishna K, Tamma, Bheemarjuna Reddy. An enhanced media independent handover framework for heterogeneous wireless networks. In: Proceedings of 12th IEEE international conference on intelligent systems design and applications (ISDA), November 2012. p. 610–5.

Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017

16

R. Tamijetchelvy, G. Sivaradje / Computers and Electrical Engineering xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

[11] Zekri Mariem, Jouaber Badii, Zeghlache Djamal. An enhanced media independent handover framework for vertical handover decision making based on networks reputation. In: Proceedings of international workshop on performance and management of wireless and mobile networks; 2012. p. 673–8. [12] Cardoso Tiago, Neves Pedro, Ricardo Manuel, Sargento Susana. Media independent handover management in heterogeneous access networks – an empirical evaluation. In: Proceedings of 73rd IEEE international conference on vehicular technology, May 2011. p. 1–5. [13] Chang Ben-Jye, Liang Ying-Hsin, Chang Po-Yen, Chen Chine-Ta. Cost-based CAC with media independent handover for wireless heterogeneous networks. In: Proceedings of international conference on world telecommunications congress (WTC), March 2012. p. 1–6. [14] Khan Murad, Han Kijun. A zone-based self-organized handover scheme for heterogeneous mobile and ad hoc networks. J Distrib Sensor Netw 2014:1–8. [15] Chen Ray, Li Yinan, Mitchell Robert, Wang Ding-Chau. Scalable and efficient dual-region based mobility management for ad hoc networks. Ad Hoc Netw 2014;23:52–64. [16] Jia Wen-Kang. A unified MIPv6 and PMIPv6 route optimization scheme for heterogeneous mobility management domains. Comput Netw 2014;75:160–76. [17] Park Jongdae, Ryu Hoyoung, Lee Soon Seok, Bae Sueng Jae, Lee Ju Yong, Kim Mihui, et al. Cost-efficient vertical handover between cellular networks and WLAN based on HMIPv6 and IEEE 802.21 MIH. Netw Manage 2013;23(3):155–71. [18] FatihTuysuz Mehmet. An energy-efficient QoS-based network selection scheme over heterogeneous WLAN – 3G networks. Comput Netw 2014;75:113–33. [19] Ray Sayan Kumar, Pawlikowski Krzysztof, Sirisena Harsha. Handover in mobile WiMAX networks: the state of art and research issues. Commun Surv Tutorials 2010;12(3):376–99. [20] Corujo Daniel, Guimaraes Carlos, Santos Bruno, Aguiar Rui L. Using an open-source IEEE 802.21 implementation for network-based localized mobility management. Commun Mag 2011;49(9):114–23. [21] Munasinghe Kumudu S, Jamalipour Abbas. An analytical evaluation of mobility management in integrated WLAN-UMTS networks. Comput Electr Eng 2010;36(4):735–51. [22] Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. An optimized fast vertical handover strategy for heterogeneous wireless access networks based on IEEE 802.21 media independent handover standard. In: Proceedings of 4th international conference on advanced computing; 2012. [23] Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. An optimal vertical handover for heterogeneous networks based on IEEE 802.21 MIH standards. In: Proceedings of fifth international conference on advanced computing (ICoAC); 2013. [24] Munirand Arslan, Gordon-Ross Ann. SIP-based IMS signaling analysis for WiMax-3G interworking architectures. IEEE Trans Mobile Comput 2010;9(5):733–50. [25] Navitha M, Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Robust vertical handover scheme using IEEE 802.21 media independent handover. In: Proceeding of international conference on communication and signal processing, April 3–5, 2014. p. 1436–40. R. Tamijetchelvy received the B.Tech degree from Pondicherry Engineering College, Pondicherry University, India in 2004 and the M.E degree from Anna University in 2007. She is currently doing her research in Wireless Communication. Her research interests include Wireless Communication, Network Security and VLSI. G. Sivaradje received the B.E degree from Madras University, M. Tech and Ph.D degrees from Pondicherry University, Pondicherry, India. He is a Professor in Electronics and Communication Engineering at Pondicherry Engineering College. His research interests include Wireless Communication, Mobile Computing and Convergence Networks. He has published a number of papers in reputed international Journals and Conferences.

Please cite this article in press as: Tamijetchelvy R, Sivaradje G. Analysis of IEEE 802.21 media independent handover with mobility management protocols for handover optimization. Comput Electr Eng (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2015.03.017