For Full-Text PDF, please login, if you are a member of IEICE,|
or go to Pay Per View on menu list, if you are a nonmember of IEICE.
Intra-AS Performance Analysis of Distributed Mobility Management Schemes
Oshani ERUNIKA Kunitake KANEKO Fumio TERAOKA
IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information and Systems
Publication Date: 2015/08/01
Online ISSN: 1745-1361
Type of Manuscript: PAPER
Category: Information Network
Distributed Mobility Management (DMM), router-level ISP topology,
Full Text: PDF(4.2MB)
>>Buy this Article
Distributed Mobility Management (DMM) defines Internet Protocol (IP) mobility which does not depend on centralized manipulation. DMM leads to the abatement of non-optimal routing, a single point of failure, and scalability problems appearing in centralized Mobility Management (MM). The fact that most DMM schemes are in the proposal phase and non-existence of a standardization, urge to investigate the proposed schemes thoroughly to confirm their capabilities and thereby, to determine the best candidate practice for DMM. This paper examines five novel DMM proposals discussed in the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) using router-level Internet Service Provider (ISP) topologies of Sprint (USA), Tiscali (Europe), Telstra (AUS), and Exodus (USA), as user mobility within an ISP network is considered the most realistic and recurrent user movement in the modern scope. Results reflect behavioral differences of schemes depending on the network. ISPs closer to the Internet core with high density of Point of Presences (PoPs) such as Sprint show poorer outcome when centralized anchors/controllers are employed while Proxy Mobile IP (PMIP) based enhancements offer higher reliability. In contrast, smaller ISPs that reside farther away from the Internet core yield better performance with SDN-Based and Address Delegation schemes. Although the PMIP-Based DMM schemes perform better during handover, their outturn is trivialized due to higher latency in the data plane. In contrast, the Address Delegation and SDN-Based schemes have excessive cost and latency in performing handover due to routing table updates, but perform better in data plane, suggesting that control/data plane split may best address the optimal routing.