A Comparative Study of IP Mobility Protocols: Fast Handover vs. Mobile IPv6 


Vol. 29,  No. 6, pp. 651-659, Jun.  2004


PDF
  Abstract

The Fast Handover protocol [I] provides seameless handover in wireless IP networks by minimizing handover latency, which uses anticipation based on layer 2 (L2) trigger information. Therefore, it incurs higher signaling costs compared with the basic Mobile IP protocol. Furthermore, since the L2 trigger is based on fluctuating wireless channel states, the handover anticipation may sometimes be incorrect. In the case of incorrect anticipation, unnecessary buffer space may be used for the purpose of providing a smooth handover. Therefore, it is essentical to analyze these overhead costs, in order to evluate and compare the performance of Fast Handover with that of the basic Mobile IP protocol. In this paper, we analyzed the overhead associated with Fast Handover including the signaling cost and the packet delivery cost. We formulated these costs based on a timing diagram and compared Fast Handover with basic Mobile IPv6 in terms of their packet loss rates and buffer requirements. Also, we studied the impact of the L2 triggering time on the total overhead cost.

  Statistics
Cumulative Counts from November, 2022
Multiple requests among the same browser session are counted as one view. If you mouse over a chart, the values of data points will be shown.


  Cite this article

[IEEE Style]

S. Pack and Y. Choi, "A Comparative Study of IP Mobility Protocols: Fast Handover vs. Mobile IPv6," The Journal of Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 651-659, 2004. DOI: .

[ACM Style]

Sangheon Pack and Yanghee Choi. 2004. A Comparative Study of IP Mobility Protocols: Fast Handover vs. Mobile IPv6. The Journal of Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences, 29, 6, (2004), 651-659. DOI: .

[KICS Style]

Sangheon Pack and Yanghee Choi, "A Comparative Study of IP Mobility Protocols: Fast Handover vs. Mobile IPv6," The Journal of Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 651-659, 6. 2004.