Implementation and evaluation of the Shim6 protocol in the Linux kernel

Barré, Sébastien; Ronan, John; Bonaventure, Olivier

doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2011.03.005

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 41 publications

(56 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The implementation feature indicates whether or not some real prototype implementation is available. Implementations or descriptions of implementation can be found for the following systems: ABPS [11]; DCCP [81]; FLowMob [82]; Hi3 [83]; Hidden Proxy [66]; HIP [84,85]; I-TCP [15]; LIN6 [61,75]; LISP [86,87]; MCoA (monami6) and NEMO [88,89,90]; MIPv6 [80,88,89,90]; MMUSE [91]; MPTCP [17,18]; MSOCKS [20]; NIIA [92]; Shim6 [93,85]; SIP-IAPP [13]; TCPmigrate [94]; TMSP [59]; UPMT [67,95].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A survey on handover management in mobility architectures

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work presents a comprehensive and structured taxonomy of available techniques for managing the handover process in mobility architectures. Representative works from the existing literature have been divided into appropriate categories, based on their ability to support horizontal handovers, vertical handovers and multihoming. We describe approaches designed to work on the current Internet (i.e. IPv4-based networks), as well as those that have been devised for the "future" Internet (e.g. IPv6-based networks and extensions). Quantitative measures and qualitative indicators are also presented and used to evaluate and compare the examined approaches. This critical review provides some valuable guidelines and suggestions for designing and developing mobility architectures, including some practical expedients (e.g. those required in the current Internet environment), aimed to cope with the presence of NAT/firewalls and to provide support to legacy systems and several communication protocols working at the application layer. application level. While throughput remains a major goal of system design, the main concern of mobility architectures is how to best manage situations where a MN changes network. This event is currently referred to as handover (or handoff ).By default, current operating systems installed on smartphones adopt the following strategy for data transmission: one Network Interface Card (NIC) at a time is configured and employed to send data. If a WiFi network is available, the terminal switches to WiFi; otherwise a cellular network is utilized, if the latter is available too. During the handover, communications are interrupted. While the widespread use of current smartphones confirms that in general such a simple approach may be a viable solution, in some cases this strategy has some severe limitations. Just as an example (which is actually a true story), let us consider the case of an employee working in an institution/company composed of several buildings, all covered by a WiFi network (e.g. a researcher in a university campus). Suppose that the researcher is a commuter and, just before leaving for going home, he/she receives an important Voice over IP (VoIP) phone call. Since he needs to leave to take the last train home, he decides to answer the call using his/her mobile phone; today, there are plenty of smartphone apps that offer very efficient VoIP services. At that moment, the device is connected through WiFi, but when he gets out of the building, the WiFi signal is lost and the smartphone automatically switches to 4G without any handover management at the application level, thus experiencing a first communication interruption. While moving, he passes through other buildings (hence, within their WiFi coverage); as a consequence, the smartphone switches back to WiFi (i.e. a second communication interruption occurs), and then back to 4G (i.e. yet another communication interruption) and so on. One might suggest that the employee should turn off the WiFi NIC before leaving, thus using the cellular...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A survey on handover management in mobility architectures

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It can provide more than one IPv6 addresses for each host. A host employs Shim6 can use more than one prefix of IPv6 addresses if the host has more than one interface for networks attachment points [20]. The HIP protocol proposed a new layer called the host identity layer.…”

Section: B Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Smart Virtualization Packets Forwarding During Handover for Beyond 5G Networks

Yaseen

Al-Raweshidy

2019

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Keeping a connection continuity during the movement of a mobile node (MN) between access points without any suspension of provided services is one of the most pressing issues should be solved. Long handover processing causes interruptions in session connection, high rate of data loss, and long end-to-end delay time. Smart virtualization means the cooperation of different virtualization technologies with novel ideas. In this paper, we proposed a mobile network architecture compatible with cloud computing of 5G and beyond networks. We invented a new idea to create a tag to be used as an MN's identity, which consists of the standard E.164 numbering and MAC address. Based on the uniqueness of E.164 numbering and MAC which are processed together to generate the MN tag (T H ). T H is used to handle the packets inside the mobile networks. The software-defined networking (SDN) provides a capability of separating the control plane from the data plane. This decoupling is a suitable candidate to exploit it in our proposed system that uses the SDN and other virtualization technologies. The requirements of the 5G and beyond for future mobile communications encouraged us to think in a novel packet forwarding during the handover to keep real-time connection continuity for an MN. Our proposed system has been simulated and performed by MATLAB and Mininet platforms. The results showed that the packet loss rate decreased to 4% of the date that was lost during the handover delay time or packets re-direction mechanism. At the same time, the MN could receive 96.4% of the data that were lost during the handover process.INDEX TERMS 5G, control plane, communication networks, SDN, NFV.

show abstract

“…Network layer approaches ( [2], [5]) are easy to deploy and totally transparent to applications and involve only minimal changes in contrary to the application and transport layer solutions which involve many changes in the infrastructure.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving TCP-Friendliness for mHIP

Polishchuk

Gurtov

2011

Access Networks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Multihomed environments are getting increasingly common, especially for mobile users. mHIP was designed to provide secure multipath data transmission for the multihomed hosts and boost throughput of a single TCP connection by effectively distributing data over multiple available paths. In this paper we develop a TCP-friendly congestion control scheme for mHIP secure multipath scheduling solution. We enable two-level control over aggressiveness of the multipath flows to prevent stealing bandwidth from the traditional transport connections in the shared bottleneck. We demonstrate how to achieve a desired level of friendliness at the expense of inessential performance degradation. A series of simulations verifies that the proposed congestion control for mHIP meets the criteria of TCP-compatibility, TCP-equivalence and TCP-equal share, preserving friendliness to UDP and another mHIP traffic.

show abstract

Implementation and evaluation of the Shim6 protocol in the Linux kernel

Cited by 6 publications

References 41 publications

A survey on handover management in mobility architectures

A survey on handover management in mobility architectures

Smart Virtualization Packets Forwarding During Handover for Beyond 5G Networks

Improving TCP-Friendliness for mHIP

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About