Mobility Support in the Internet
MetadataShow full item record
This Master Thesis has first of all given an explanation of the mobility incompatibility with internet and how this problem is being handled. Different proposals have been described of which objective is providing mobility support to an internet which was designed without it. Their features and its possible weakness have been pointed out. After this state of the art description, the Thesis has tackled one of its main objectives, developed one proposal to provide mobility to internet, Fast Routing Mobility scheme. As it has been explained, FRM is a scheme that avoids the use of CoA or tunnels, one of the major causes of excessive delay in some mobility proposals. In FRM, MNs have an invariable IP address which they keep wherever they are located. This feature allows identify the MN easier and achieve a faster handoff. Other of the objectives of this proposal was reducing the charge of signalling and the overload of the routers (in the networks and in internet). Two features helps to achieve this: - The use of a hierarchical structure in each Network, favours routing the packets across the network. This mechanism is provided by the IPv6 s addressing features. - Use of IPv6 s Routing header to handle the mobility embedding the mobility information in data packets. FRM is one of the schemes which consume less routers resources across the network. For the normal functionality of FRM, the protocol only needs routers direct the packets with routing headers. A common router with IPv6 s support will have this feature. Only in the handoff, a router needs to carry out a packets forwarding during some seconds, but only a router is involve in each handoff. The handoff delay obtained by FRM is very competitive and considerably under the highest delay supported by the real-time applications, which has been proved. This is possible because FRM limit the amount of messages to the minimal and it makes independent functionality from the handoff the most possible. Whereas other schemes, like MIPv6, carry out the updating of the CoA in the middle of the handoff and this does not finish until the HA is update, FRM does the updating of the LM independently of the handoff process. The MN only needs to interrupt some milliseconds the communication during the handoff, immediately when it is attached to the new Access Router it can start to receive packets from the CNs. FRM allows the mobility of the nodes in macro-mobility scenarios without any variation or attachment. The simplicity of its design makes it possible to direct extrapolation to the macro-mobility case. Furthermore FRM have the lowest handoff delay between the proposals analyzed in a macro-mobility scenario.