A hybrid DMM solution and trade-off analysis for future wireless networks

Abstract Mobile Internet data traffic has experienced an exponential growth over the last few years due to the rise of demanding multimedia content applications and the increasing number of smart mobile devices. Seamless mobility support at the network level is envisioned as a key architectural requirement to deal with the ever increasing demand for data and content, cell densification and to efficiently utilize a plethora of heterogeneous wireless access networks (HetNets). Current and emerging efforts on that frontier aim to evolve mobility management protocols towards a more distributed operation to tackle shortcomings that stem from fully centralized oriented approaches. However, as will be detailed hereafter, there are instances where distributed mobility management result in lower performance, which might affect real time and several over the top (OTT) applications (as well as incur increased levels of signaling overhead in the network). To this end, in this paper we provide a meticulous analysis of the different trade-offs between centralized and Distributed Mobility Management (DMM) and based on the analysis we propose a Hybrid DMM solution that overcomes, in terms of mobility costs, both centralized and distributed mobility management protocols. Furthermore, we also conduct a comprehensive analytic and numerical comparison of the different mobility solutions. Our results indicate the significant benefits in terms of packet delivery cost and signaling overhead that Hybrid DMM solutions might bring. Finally, we conclude by discussing some open ended issues in mobility management in emerging and future wireless networks.

[1]  Hannes Hartenstein,et al.  Stochastic Properties of the Random Waypoint Mobility Model , 2004, Wirel. Networks.

[2]  Injong Rhee,et al.  Mobile data offloading: how much can WiFi deliver? , 2013, TNET.

[3]  Anass Benjebbour,et al.  Design considerations for a 5G network architecture , 2014, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[4]  Kyunghan Lee,et al.  On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility , 2008, IEEE INFOCOM 2008 - The 27th Conference on Computer Communications.

[5]  Myung-Ki Shin,et al.  Mobility management for all-IP mobile networks: mobile IPv6 vs. proxy mobile IPv6 , 2008, IEEE Wireless Communications.

[6]  Telemaco Melia,et al.  Distributed mobility management: A standards landscape , 2013, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[7]  Jorma T. Virtamo,et al.  Spatial node distribution of the random waypoint mobility model with applications , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[8]  Susana Sargento,et al.  Studying the integration of distributed and dynamic schemes in the mobility management , 2014, Comput. Networks.

[9]  Susana Sargento,et al.  Context-aware adaptive IP mobility anchoring , 2014, Comput. Networks.

[10]  Jean-Marie Bonnin,et al.  Distributed IP mobility management from the perspective of the IETF: motivations, requirements, approaches, comparison, and challenges , 2013, IEEE Wireless Communications.

[11]  Antonio de la Oliva,et al.  Analytic Evaluation and Experimental Validation of a Network-Based IPv6 Distributed Mobility Management Solution , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[12]  Fazirulhisyam Hashim,et al.  Design and evaluation of distributed and dynamic mobility management approach based on PMIPv6 and MIH protocols , 2015, Wirel. Networks.

[13]  Meryem Ouzzif,et al.  Performance Analysis on Network-Based Distributed Mobility Management , 2014, Wirel. Pers. Commun..

[14]  Saurabh Bagchi,et al.  Distributed mobility management for efficient video delivery over all-IP mobile networks: Competing approaches , 2013, IEEE Network.

[15]  Jean-Marie Bonnin,et al.  Host-based distributed mobility management support protocol for IPv6 mobile networks , 2012, 2012 IEEE 8th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob).