Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 4

N. A. Fikouras, K. El Malki, S. R. Cvetkovic

Page 1 of 4

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF MOBILE IP HANDOFFS

N. A. Fikouras, K. El Malki, S. R. Cvetkovic Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to study the performance of Mobile IP hand-offs. It is determined that the key issue is the movement detection method (i.e. Lazy Cell Switching, Prefix-Matching, Eager Cell Switching). For this paper all three movement detection methods are studied. The study involves single agent subnetworks and simple movement patterns, i.e. straight movement from one subnetwork to another with no comeback. It is assumed that the wireless technology is unable to pass link-layer information to the IP layer and that it also restricts the Mobile Node from contemporarily participating in multiple subnetworks when in their overlap area (e.g. IEEE802.11). The principle findings are two formulas that determine the average Mobile IP hand-off delay. These formulas are verified by real Mobile IP hand-off results. It is also shown that Eager Cell Switching based Mobile IP hand-offs complete faster than their Lazy Cell Switching counterparts. Finally, it is presented that TCP communications suffer more than UDP communications because of the exponential back-off and the path maximum transmission unit discovery algorithms of TCP.

I. Introduction

TCP/IP was originally designed without any considerations for mobile computing. Its greatest resistance to mobile computing resides in the routing service of the IP layer. Mobile IP (MIP) [1] is an enhancement to the IP protocol which allows transparent routing of traffic to Mobile Nodes in the Internet. Mobile IP introduces three new entities required to support the protocol: the Home Agent, the Foreign Agent and the Mobile Node but may alternatively operate without Foreign Agents by replacing them with a dynamic host configuration service (DHCP).

According to Mobile IP, the Mobile Node is required to notify (register) the Home Agent of its current location. For every supported Mobile Node the Home Agent creates a record of its current location and acts as its proxy into the home network. Intercepted incoming traffic is redirected through packet encapsulation by the Home Agent to the Mobile Node’s registered location.

ISP network Router Correspondent Nod Foreign Foreign Home Agent Agent Agent Home Network Subnetwork A/
ISP network
Router
Correspondent Nod
Foreign
Foreign
Home
Agent
Agent
Agent
Home Network
Subnetwork A/
Subnetwork B/
Foreign Network
Foreign Network
Mobile Node

Figure 1: Testbed Setup

A typical scenario is presented in Figure 1. It illustrates

two networks, called Subnetwork A and Subnetwork B and

a Mobile Node (MN) that moves (hands-off) between

subnetworks A and B. The Home Agent that lays at the home network is responsible for redirecting incoming traffic for the Mobile Node to its current foreign network. Every time a Mobile Node immigrates from a Mobile IP network

to another it must register its current location with the Home

Agent. This location is represented either by the IP address

of a Mobility Agent (care-of address) or is an IP address

temporarily allocated to the Mobile Node through a dynamic host configuration service (collocated care-of address).

In the absence of a communication between the link and

IP layers that would enable a Mobile Node to forecast an upcoming hand-off, Mobile IP has to rely on alternative means to detect movement. Specificly, every Mobility Agent is required to advertise its existence and all available care-of addresses in fixed period intervals. A Mobile Node entering a new subnetwork will detect its movement by receipt of an "unknown" advertisement. As such, a Mobile Node entering a network with multiple advertising agents may be prone to performing several hand-offs prior to re- establishing network connectivity. Several movement detection algorithms have been defined [1,5] that provide the shortest movement detection interval for various scenarios.

It is noted that in the duration of the movement detection

and registration processes the Mobile Node is experiencing network disruption. That is, prior to the registration, the Home Agent delivers all intercepted traffic to the Mobile Node’s old registered care-of address and as such it is not delivered to the Mobile Node.

The scenarios studied in this paper involve single Foreign Agent subnetworks and a wireless technology that does not co-operate with higher layers. Moreover, it is unable to provide connectivity to multiple wireless segments when the Mobile Node resides in their overlap. An example of such a technology is the IEEE 802.11 standard for Wireless Area Networks [2]. All of the test cases presented in this study use the Transport Control Protocol (TCP) [3] as the transport-layer protocol for the transfer of data. This was selected because the majority of

Internet traffic today consists of TCP traffic as it is the

protocol of choice for most World Wide Web applications. Furthermore, as it will be shown, during Mobile IP handoffs TCP communications suffer more than their User Datagram Protocol (UDP) [3] counterparts. All of the conclusions drawn in this study hold for UDP communications as well. The movement patterns studied assume straight Mobile Node movement between two subnetworks with no

comeback that leads to a single Mobile IP hand-off.

N. A. Fikouras, K. El Malki, S. R. Cvetkovic

II. Mobile IP Hand-offs

The only means by which a Mobile Node is made aware of its location is through evaluation by the movement detection algorithm of periodically received agent advertisements. The duration of the movement detection process is critical as it determines the start of the registration process. The duration of the two consists the Mobile IP hand-off delay:

t MIP hand-off = t movement_detection + t registration

(1)

where t movement_detection is the movement detection delay and t registration is the Mobile Node registration delay. The registration delay is the time taken for a Mobile Node registration request to reach the Home Agent and the reply

to return from the Home Agent to the Mobile Node. As

Home Agent processing of a single registration request is considered negligible it is concluded that t registration is equivalent to the Mobile Node – Home Agent round trip delay. Although this is insignificant for a small testbed such

as the one presented in Figure 1, it may prove to be a

significant overhead in the Internet. This is a problem that may only be surpassed through the introduction of Mobility Agent Hierarchies [4], that reduces the tregistration delay

by managing registrations locally within the Foreign Network. From this and (1) it is derived that the duration of

a Mobile IP hand-off is equivalent to the movement detection delay:

t MIP hand-off = t movement detection

(2)

A. Movement Detection Algorithms

In this paper the three known movement detection algorithms are considered, namely: Lazy Cell Switching (LCS) [5], Prefix Matching (PM) [5] and Eager Cell Switching (ECS) [5].

The LCS method has the main characteristic that after the Mobile Node has registered a care-of address with the Home Agent it holds on to it until the agent's lifetime is expired. This occurs when the Mobile Node misses 3 successive agent advertisements indicating that it has left the subnetwork. In that case the Mobile Node must discover a new agent and register one of its care-of addresses with the Home Agent. This method can be applied to scenarios where the Mobile Node lays within the overlap area of several Mobile IP networks. If enabled by the wireless technology it will receive several different advertisements. Assuming that Mobile Node movement is rare, this algorithm chooses not to hand-off and ignore any newly discovered agents. In the absence of the capability of the

wireless technology to contemporarily participate in several Mobile IP subnetworks the laziness of this algorithm results

to an unnecessary delay.

The PM method has a similar functionality to the LCS with the only difference being that it includes a prefix- length extension to agent advertisements. This extension contains the prefix length of the agent's IP address and it enables the Mobile Node to determine whether two agent advertisement have been received from the same or different subnetworks. Although, this can be useful in

Page 2 of 4

multiple-agent subnetworks the study presented in this paper is restricted to single agent subnetworks. In this case, PM tends to operate like the LCS and therefore a dedicated study of the performance of Mobile IP hand-offs with PM support has been omitted.

The ECS method tends to function in a way opposite to that of the LCS. It assumes that Mobile Nodes change their direction of movement very slowly. That is, if they are moving forward in one direction it is unlikely that they will stop and turn back. Hence, it is appropriate for Mobile Nodes to hand-off immediately upon discovering a new agent. This method tends to reduce the movement detection interval in comparison to the LCS method and therefore manages faster Mobile IP hand-offs. The study of Mobile IP hand-offs with ECS support presented in this paper assumes only single-agent subnetworks. Research on the behaviour of the ECS in multi-agent subnetworks is under way.

B. The Movement Detection Delay

lost advertisements

 
       
   
       
 
       
 

x

   

A

y z 0 Time
y
z
0
Time
 
 
     
 
     
 
     
       
           
 
           
 

B

x

 
 
 
 

Figure 2: Agent Advertisements timing graph

Figure 2, illustrates the agent advertisements timing graph of subnetworks A and B. The areas over and below the time line illustrate the broadcasting of agent advertisements for subnetworks A and B as indicated by the corresponding letters. Both advertisements occur at the fixed period interval x and the synchronisation difference between them is y. A Mobile Node may receive the advertisements of only one subnetwork and may hand-off at any point between two consecutive advertisements of the same agent. If a Mobile Node in subnetwork A hands-off prior to time point z and enters subnetwork B, it will have to wait between 0 and y until the first new agent advertisement is received. If the Mobile Node hands-off after time point z the same delay would be between y and x. In total a Mobile Node would have to wait for the new first agent advertisement between 0 and x. Considering that the point at which the Mobile Node hands-off is completely random then it can be derived that its waiting time is a continuous random variable that follows the uniform distribution. The mean for this distribution is given by:

E( f ) =

x

2

(3),

where x is the periodic interval, or else 1/advertisement rate.

According to the description of the LCS movement detection algorithm, a Mobile Node has to miss three consecutive agent advertisements prior to registering a new care-of address. From Figure 2 and (3) it can be derived that the average LCS movement detection delay is:

N. A. Fikouras, K. El Malki, S. R. Cvetkovic

t LCS

=

5x

2

(4)

Similarly, the average ECS movement detection delay is equivalent to (3):

t LCS

=

x

2

(5)

From (2) and (4) it is derived that the duration of a Mobile IP hand-off based on LCS is given by:

t MIP hand-off = t LCS

(6)

Similarly, from (2) and (5) it is derived that the duration of a Mobile IP hand-off based on ECS is given by:

t MIP hand-off = t ECS

(7)

It will be shown in the following sections that equations (6) and (7) are verified by the results of Mobile IP hand-offs.

III. Experimental Setup

This paper analyses the performance of Mobile IP hand- offs. For this only Mobile IP handoffs with LCS and ECS support are studied as in single-agent subnetworks the PM algorithm performs the same as the LCS algorithm.

The testbed setup is illustrated in Figure 1. It consist of Pentium PCs that are running RedHat 5.2 Linux. The Mobile IP software used is SunLabs Mobile IP [6] for RedHat 5.x Linux that was modified to support all three movement detection algorithms. Network connectivity is provided with Ethernet. The Mobile Node is attached through two Ethernet links to the Foreign Agents of subnetworks A and B. By manipulating these interfaces the Mobile Node is capable of performing hand-offs. The tool used for the generation and benchmarking of TCP traffic is the public-domain ttcp benchmarking software [7]. Network monitoring was managed with the public-domain tcpdump network analyser [8]. Each LCS and ECS Mobile IP hand- off was performed for 50 times. The results presented in this study represent an average case. In every trial a TCP communication was established between the Correspondent Node and the Mobile Node.

IV. Experimental Results

Figure 3 illustrates two Mobile IP handoffs with LCS and ECS support respectively. The testbed topology for these tests is presented in Figure 1. In every experiment the transmission rate of agent advertisements is set to the value recommended by [1] of one advertisement per second. A Mobile Node will seize to use a care-of address after missing three successive corresponding agent advertisements, that is 3 seconds.

From (6) and (7) it is derived that for x=1 the LCS movement detection delay is t LCS =2.5 seconds and the ECS delay is t ECS =0.5 seconds.

From Figure 3 it can be seen that the experimental results verify the theoretical results. The LCS and ECS delays are 2.5 and 0.5 seconds respectivelly. It can also be seen that TCP reacts to the network disruption with successive

Page 3 of 4

7e+06 A Packet Trace of TCP Traffic during a MIP Handoff with LCS support 6.95e+06
7e+06
A Packet Trace of TCP Traffic during a MIP Handoff with LCS support
6.95e+06
6.9e+06
6.85e+06
MIP handoff
started
LCS MIP handoff
completed
6.8e+06
6.75e+06
1st timeout
5th timeout
0.2 sec
3rd timeout
3.2 sec
6.7e+06
0.8
sec
6.65e+06
6615260
6.6e+06
6.55e+06
2nd timeout
4th timeout
6.5e+06
0.4 sec
1.6 sec
Slow Start
Packet loss due to Path MTU Discovery
6.45e+06
6.4e+06
6.35e+06
6.3e+06
ECS MIP handoff
completed
6.25e+06
6.2e+06
1.6 sec. difference in TCP handoff
recovery time
2.5 sec. difference between
ECS and LCS MIP handoffs
A Packet Trace of TCP Traffic during a MIP
Handoff with ECS support
3.35e+06
3.3e+06
3rd timeout
0.8
sec
3.25e+06
3.2e+06
1st
timeout
4th timeout
0.2 sec
1.6 sec
3.15e+06
3.1e+06
3072756
3.05e+06
3e+06
Slow start
2nd
timeout
0.
4 sec
Packet loss due to Path MTU Discovery
2.95e+06
2.9e+06
2.85e+06
0
0.7
2.8e+06
0.2 0.6 1.4
2.7 3
6.2
TCP Packet Sequence Numbers of ECS test
TCP Packet Sequence Numbers of LCS test

Time (in Seconds)

Figure 3: TCP packet traces for ECS and LCS Mobile IP hand-offs

timeouts and packet retransmissions. The functionality of the TCP retransmission scheme is to dynamically determine the value of the TCP timeout interval with every packet transmission. In the case of a timeout, TCP doubles that interval. This functionality is called TCP exponential

FA advertisement TCP Seq #: 6610880 (DF) Correspondent TCP Seq #: 6615260 (DF) Foreign Agent
FA advertisement
TCP Seq #:
6610880
(DF)
Correspondent
TCP Seq
#: 6615260 (DF)
Foreign Agent
Mobile Node
Node
TCP Seq #:
6615260
(DF)
-0.5
6615260
TCP Seq #:
(DF)
0
6615260
(DF)
TCP Seq #:
0.2
1st timeout
0.6
2nd timeout
1.4
3rd timeout
Reply
UDP Registration
TCP Seq #: 6615260 (DF)
2.5
TCP
#: 6615260
(DF)
TCP
Seq Seq
#: 6625480
2.7
6628400
TCP Seq #:
3.0
4th timeout
5th timeout
6.2
UDP Registration Request
Movement Detection Delay (t movement detection)
Registration Delay (t registration)
TCP Handoff Recovery Time (t TCP Handoff Recovery)
TCP Path MTU Discovery Recovery Time (t TCP Path MTU Discovery recovery)
TIME

Figure 4: Frame Sequence of TCP during a Mobile IP handoff with LCS support

TIME

N. A. Fikouras, K. El Malki, S. R. Cvetkovic

Correspondent

Node

Foreign Agent

Mobile Node

FA advertisement TCP Seq #: 3072220 (DF) TCP Seq #: 3072756 (DF)
FA advertisement
TCP Seq #: 3072220 (DF)
TCP Seq #: 3072756 (DF)

0

TCP Seq #: 3073292

(DF)

TCP Seq #: 3073828 (DF)

TCP Seq #: 3077580 (DF)

TCP Seq #: 3072756

(DF)

TCP Seq #: 3072756 (DF)

0.2 1st timeout

2nd timeout

0.6

0.5

Dropped

Packets

UDP Registration 0.7 UDP Registration Request New Agent advertisement
UDP Registration
0.7
UDP Registration Request
New Agent
advertisement

Reply

TCP Seq #: 3072756

(DF)

1.4

3rd timeout

# : 3 0 7 2 7 5 6 (DF) 1.4 3rd timeout TCP Seq #:
# : 3 0 7 2 7 5 6 (DF) 1.4 3rd timeout TCP Seq #:
TCP Seq #: 3072756 (DF) TCP Seq #: #: #: 3072756 4th timeout TCP Seq
TCP Seq #: 3072756 (DF)
TCP
Seq #: #: #: 3072756
4th timeout
TCP
Seq
3077044
TCP Seq
3077580

3.0

Movement Detection Delay (t movement detection)4th timeout TCP Seq 3077044 TCP Seq 3077580 3.0 Registration Delay (t registration) TCP Handoff Recovery

Registration Delay (t registration)3077580 3.0 Movement Detection Delay (t movement detection) TCP Handoff Recovery Time (t TCP Handoff Recovery)

TCP Handoff Recovery Time (t TCP Handoff Recovery)(t movement detection) Registration Delay (t registration) TCP Path MTU Discovery Recovery Time (t TCP Path

TCP Path MTU Discovery Recovery Time (t TCP Path MTU Discovery recovery)TCP Handoff Recovery Time (t TCP Handoff Recovery) Figure 5: Frame Sequence of TCP during a

Figure 5: Frame Sequence of TCP during a Mobile IP handoff with ECS support

backoff [3]. During a Mobile IP handoff TCP experiences several successive timeouts that increase the timeout interval beyond the duration of the handoff. As a result the TCP communication remains halted even after the completion of the Mobile IP handoff. This problem can not be surpassed without applying any changed to the TCP retransmission scheme. Furthermore, it can be seen that even after the handoff an extra packet is lost due to the Path Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) Discovery algorithm [3]. This algorithm is responsible for discovering the Path MTU so as to avoid unnecessary packet fragmentation. Although, packet loss due to Path MTU discovery may not take place in every Mobile IP handoff, it needs to be considered that either packet size increase due to packet encapsulation or the change in the communication path may often lead to packet loss due to Path MTU Discovery. Finally, the TCP communication is resumed with the slow start congestion avoidance algorithm [3]. It is noted that in the case of UDP traffic the network disruption would have only been for the duration of the Mobile IP hand-off, hence for the duration of the movement detection delay.

Figure 4 illustrates the TCP frame sequence during a Mobile IP handoff based on LCS. It is illustrated that the

last Foreign Agent advertisment (old agent) is received half

a second before the last succesfully received TCP packet.

The latter is perceived as the time of the Mobile IP handoff and the start of the movement detection process. From that point on severe packet loss is witnessed. The Mobile Node

is unable to receive and transmit traffic until registration is

completed. In total it can be that the LCS hand-off lasts for 2.5 seconds. From Figure 5 it can be derived that the corresponding delay for the ECS hand-off is 0.5 seconds.

Page 4 of 4

V. Conclusions

In this paper the performance of Mobile IP hand-offs has

been evaluated. The study assumes single-agent subnetworks and inability of Mobile Nodes to contemporarily participate in multiple subnetworks when in their overlap area. It is identified that the duration of a

Mobile IP hand-off is directly dependent on the movement

detection algorithm. Under the assumed conditions it is

presented that the Prefix-Matching algorithm has a similar

performance to the Lazy Cell Switching, therefore only the

Lazy and the Eager Cell Switching algorithms have been considered. It was shown that Mobile Node movement between two mobility agents follows the uniform distribution. Two generic formulas were derived for the average delays of the Lazy Cell Switching and Eager Cell

Switching algorithms. The results of these formulas also matched the results of two average Mobile IP hand-offs based on these algorithms. Finally it was shown that during a Mobile IP handoff a TCP communication suffers severally due to the exponential back-off and Path MTU Discovery algorithms. It was theoretically and experimentally determined that in a testbed with small round trip delays and an agent advertisement rate of 1 per second, on average, an LCS Mobile IP hand-off would require 2.5 seconds to complete while its ECS counterpart would require 0.5 seconds.

References

[1] Perkins C., “IP Mobility Support.”, RFC 2002, (Oct.

1996).

[2] IEEE Std 802.11-1997. “Wireless LAN Medium Access control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) specifications.”, (1997) [3] Stevens, R., “TCP/IP Illustrated Volume 1.”, Reading:

Addison Wesley Professional Computing Series,

(1995).

[4] El Malki K., Fikouras N., Cvetkovic S.,”Fast Handoff Method for Real-Time Traffic over Scaleable Mobile IP Networks”, draft-elmalki-mobileip-fast-handoffs- 01.txt, Work in Progress, June 1999 [5] Perkins C., “Mobile IP, Design Principles and Practices.”, Addison Wesley, (1998).

[6] Sunlabs

[ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/mobile-ip/] [7] “ttcp: Test TCP.” U. S. Army Ballistics Research Lab, (Dec 1984). [8] tcpdump: the protocol packet capture and dumper program, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, [http://ee.lbl.gov/]

IP,

Mobile