MS-initiated handover decision criteria for VoIP over IEEE 802.16e

Niswar, Muhammad; Kashihara, Shigeru; Taenaka, Yoshiyuki; Tsukamoto, Kazuya; Kadobayashi, Youki; Yamaguchi, Suguru

doi:10.1109/pacrim.2009.5291321

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To maintain VoIP communication quality over WiMAX, we proposed a combined use of the following two handover triggers, Carrier to Interference plus Noise Ratio (CINR) and an MS's interface queue length (Niswar et al, 2009b). We first describe the CINR.…”

Section: Handover Triggers For Wimaxmentioning

confidence: 99%

End-to-End Handover Management for VoIP Communications in Ubiquitous Wireless Networks

Kashihara¹,

Niswar²,

Taenaka³

et al. 2011

VoIP Technologies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There have been numerous discussions about supporting an MS's mobility among wireless networks with different network addresses. In this section, we focus especially on handover management needed to keep VoIP communication quality during such movement. As End-to-End Handover Management for VoIP Communications in Ubiquitous Wireless Networks 3 described in Section 1, in the ubiquitous wireless networks, an MS may experience many handovers with changes of IP addresses. Mobile IPv4 (MIPv4) (Perkins, 2002) and Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) (Johnson et al., 2004) have received significant interest as a network-based mobility management method to support mobility with changes of IP address. To avoid communication termination due to a change of IP address, MIPv4/v6 employs agent servers in the wireless networks, and the agent servers manage the location of MSs and control packet transmission between an MS and a corresponding station (CS). Although the agent servers do keep communication connections even when the IP address of the MS is changed, MIPv4/v6 is not enough to provide a seamless handover. To move to another wireless network, an MS has to perform layer 2 and 3 handover processes and it cannot send and receive any packets during that time. Furthermore, location registration with the agent servers also introduces an interruption delay. Thus, such interruptions lead to degradation of VoIP communication quality.To support seamless handover with MIPv4/v6, many extension methods have been studied. In Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (HMIP) (Soliman et al., 2008), an additional server reduces the registration period inside the same domain. However, when an MS moves between different domains, the HMIP eventually requires layer 2 and 3 handover processes and a location update like the original MIPv4/v6. In Fast handover for Mobile IPv6 (FMIP) (Koodli, 2005), additional functions are added to allow an MS to update the location before executing handover. However, FMIP also needs layer 2 and 3 handover processes after updating the location. Therefore, it does not completely eliminate communication interruption due to layer 2 and 3 handover processes (Kim et al., 2005) (Montavont & Noel, 2003). In addition, since MIP-based methods require special agent servers, they cannot easily be used in ubiquitous wireless networks because a different provider independently manages each wireless network. Thus, it is desirable to provide an end-to-end handover management method without extra network facilities. As for end-to-end handover approaches, the mobile Stream Control Transmission Protocol (mSCTP) (Xing et al., 2002) and the Media Optimization Network Architecture (MONA) (Koga et al., 2005) have been proposed. The mSCTP is a mobile extension of the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) (Stewart, 2007), and allows an MS to simultaneously use two or more wireless interfaces for communications, i.e., multi-homing architecture. Compared with the single-homing architecture, the multi-homing architecture can contribute to elimination of communic...

show abstract

Section: Handover Triggers For Wimaxmentioning

confidence: 99%