c
  

 

 

    










 
Performance Evaluation of Hando3 between 802.11 & 802.16 based on Mobile IP
and Stream Control Transmission Protocol for improving the signal switching.

Various wireless networks, contemporarily, have evolved as prime communication

methods, encountering convergence paradigm among heterogeneous technologies
including applications based on IP, which has given enormous impacts in our way of
life because of its proved robustness and scalability as well as ample services. With
the synergy of the two technologies, ubiquitous access to all-IP information sources
has become reality.

For wireless IP services, IP mobility is one of the ma jor issues that should be
resolved. Especially, the performance of hando3 mechanism is a pithy issue that
determines the performance of application level services. Although Mobile IP (MIP)
and its extensions, as network layer solutions, have been proposed and standardized,
their hando3 mechanisms bring unavoidable transmission throughput degradation
due to packet loss, registration delay, and transport layer blocking. Moreover, to
accommodate MIP, signi¿cant quantity of modi¿cations should be brought into each
heterogeneous network architecture. In this thesis, we evaluate the performance of a
transport layer hando3 approach, mobile SCTP (mSCTP), and compare it with that of
a network layer solution, MIP. mSCTP is based on Stream Control Transmission
Protocol (SCTP), the third general purpose transport layer protocol, standardized by
IETF. SCTP conceptually enables seamless hando3 in transport layer without any
change in IP protocol stack by its multihoming feature and dynamic address
recon¿guration (DAR) extension. We analyze the performance of mSCTP and MIP
by introducing hando3 delay, end-to-end transmission throughput, and packet loss,
and conduct a simulation study of the two protocols in 802.11 WLAN-only and
802.16 integrated networks using NS-2 network simulator.


 


 

The Internet protocol suite has become one of the most essential and prevalent
networking technologies in computer networks as well as telecommunication
networks. Based on its layered architecture and packet switching capability, IP
technology o3 ers uni¿ed, Àexible and scalable services to various applications over
many heterogeneous networks. IP technology also enables cost e3 cient business
transactions in highly advanced forms of user applications. The bene¿ts of IP, in turn,
make today¶s research and business move toward all-IP era. Contemporarily, wireless
technology eradicated the limitation of user mobility, which is originally ascribed to
¿xed wires. As wireless technology evolved, mobile users have become able to
connect to various wireless information systems with di3 erent purposes.
Among various wireless access technologies, wireless local area networks (WLAN)
and cellular networks have turned out to be the most widely deployed infrastructures
providing mobile access to voice and data services upon users¶ needs. The two
technologies have di3 erent characteristics in terms of physical speci¿cations. WLAN,
standardized as 802.11b, 802.11g, and 802.11a, provides fairly fast data rates to
nomadic users. Among the speci¿cations, 802.11b is the most widely deployed
standard using 2.4 GHz frequency band providing up to 11 Mbps data rates within a
few hundred meters range. On the other hand, cellular networks are, inherently,
designed to cover much wider areas with relatively low bandwidth. Second generation
(2G), GSM and CDMA networks, 2.5G, the General Packet Radio Service (GPRS)
and Enhanced Data rates for Global Evolution (EDGE) networks, and emerging third
generation (3G) Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS),
CDMA2000 1x Evolution Data and Voice (EV-DV) are the major commercial
cellular networks.

For instance, 3G UMTS is designed to support up to 384 Kbps data rate for pedestrian
users and 2Mbps rate for vehicular users within a few kilometers coverage areas. In
this reason, exploiting their complimentary advantages, WLAN and 3G cellular
networks can o3 er good quality of convergent services in a complimentary form. Due
to the advantages of IP protocol and wireless technology, we have encountered
wireless IP era based on their synergic e3 ects. Having succeeded already, copious IP
applications are to be ported into wireless services for mobile users. It is an apparent
trend that IP leads the existing wireless access technologies to evolve into all-IP-
based networks. The next generation all-IP wireless networks will enable us to exploit
all the IP-based services in ubiquitous manner. To achieve the uni¿ed IP-based
wireless networks and services, the integration of the existing networks and
technologies are required.

In the evolution of wireless IP networks, we encounter quite a few problems. IP

mobility is an importunate topic among them. Due to the inherent properties of
wireless communication networks, hando3 between two independent physical
networks are inevitable. Hando3 procedures a3 ect the overall performance of
application level services. Since wireless IP networks provide IP applications and
services to mobile users, IP-based seamless hando3 solution is required. Moreover, in
order to integrate heterogeneous networks, IP-based vertical hando3 solution is also
needed. In the thesis, we discuss two IP-based hando3 solutions, Mobile IP (MIP),
anetwork layer solution, and mobile SCTP (mSCTP), a transport layer solution in 3G
and WLAN integrated networks.
c

 !
"

IP protocol has been designed based on the assumption that nodes have permanent IP
addresses which are ¿xed at particular points in the Internet. The concept of IP
address had not been a problem before we encountered needs of change of point of
attachment of nodes. In order to support node movements in IP networks, mobility
management should be supported with the original protocol speci¿cation.

Mobility management contains two components: location management and hando3

management. Location management is a node¶s location update process to allow its
up-to-date location to be informed by other nodes while hando3 anagement is to
maintain on-going connections irrespective of node movements between independent
networks. In the thesis, we focus on the latter: the performance of hando3
management.

The basic functionalities required in IP-based hando3 solutions include a node

movement detection when a node moves across a new IP subnet, and a mobility
transparent packet transmission. To support IP-based hando3 , quite a few solutions
have been proposed as network layer solutions including MIP, HAWAII, Cellular IP,
and IDMP. HAWAII, a domain-based mobility solution, Cellular IP, and IDMP are
micro-mobility solutions proposed to solve out the signaling overhead problem of
macro-mobility when a node frequently moves in foreign domain. MIP is an Internet
standard to support network layer mobility. MIP hando3 consists of two phases:
agent discovery and registration. Although the proposed IP-based hando3 solutions
solved the fundamental problem of node movement in the Internet, they still incur
signi¿cant hando3 delays which a3 ect the quality of applications and services,
especially in mobility-oriented environments. Hence, seamless IP-based hando3
solutions are de¿nitely required for future wireless IP networks.


!

#$


 

We have addressed current trend toward wireless IP networks and

networkconvergence. We have also noted that IP-based mobility solutions are in the
pithy parts of the evolution toward uni¿ed all-IP wireless networks. In future wireless
IP networks, the performance of IP-based hando3 solutions will determine the
performanceand reliability of the system and services. As discussed many legacy IP-
based hando3 solutions have been proposed as network layer solutions since the role
of network layer is the manipulation of IP address and packet forwarding. Although
MIP is a representative network layer hando3 solution which has been widely
deployed, it cannot avoid inherent de¿cits: registration and tunneling overhead.

Meanwhile, we will discuss a new method of IP-based hando3 in transport layer

using Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP).SCTP provides a multihoming
feature with which a mobile node can hold multiple IP connections at a given moment.
Based on multi-homing feature of SCTP, an extension, called dynamic address
recon¿guration (DAR), has been proposed as an Internet draft. DAR consists of pairs
of request and response messages to update IP address information between two end
nodes. The multi-homing feature of SCTP and DAR extension enables a transport
layer seamless hando3 by eliminating registration delay and tunneling overhead.
Hence, we have brought our attention to the performance evaluation of the two IP-
based hando3 solutions, MIP and mSCTP, in wireless IP convergent networks. MIP,
as a network layer solution, has been an Internet standard and most widely deployed
but also incurs signi¿cant hando3 delay. mSCTP, on the other hand, does not incur
signi¿cant hando3 delay based on the multi-homing feature of SCTP and DAR
extension. In that, we have a strong motivation in studying and comparing mSCTP, a
new transport layer solution, with MIP such that we verify the feasibility of the
transport layer hando3 comparing to MIP in future wireless IP networks. In the thesis,
we study the mechanism of MIP and mSCTP, and introduce three performance
metrics to compare the performance of MIP and mSCTP. These three performance
metrics include total hando3 delay, end-to-end throughput, and packet loss. With the
three performance metrics, we conduct an analysis and a simulation study using NS2
network simulator to evaluate the performance of MIP and mSCTP in UMTS/802.11b
integrated networks. We have observed the following characteristics of mSCTP over
MIP:

GÊ Total hando3 delay of mSCTP is constant regardless of hando3 rate while that
of MIP increases proportional to hando3 rate and period a mobile node
resides in foreign links.

GÊ End-to-end throughput of mSCTP is constant irrespective of hando3 rate while

that of MIP decreases proportional to hando3 rate.

GÊ mSCTP does not incur any packet loss based on its zero hando3 delay while
packet loss of MIP increases proportional to hando3 rate such that transport
layer transmission behavior can have negative e3 ects.

GÊ mSCTP does not require any third party agent while MIP needs additional
e3 orts with the integration of agents into legacy architectures. This implies
that mSCTP is easier to be deployed in heterogeneous networks.







!
"




Here we describe two IP-based hando3 solutions: a network layer approach, Mobile
IP (MIP) and, a transport layer approach, mobile SCTP (mSCTP) that are evaluated in
this study. First, we will describe the basic mechanism of MIP: agent discovery,
registration, and tunneling. Then, Stream control transmission protocol (SCTP) and
dynamic address recon¿guration (DAR) extension of SCTP are covered to examine
mSCTP mechanism.


!
 

%"


 

Mobile IP (MIP) is a network layer mobility solution for wireless IP networks. MIP
de¿nes three basic components:

GÊ MN A mobile node that wanders within MIP network.

GÊ HA An home agent, which is a special agent sitting on a router located in MN¶s

home link. MN is initially given an IP address, called home address, in its
home network.

GÊ FA A foreign agent, which is another special agent built in a router residing

in foreign links.

These three components cooperate to locate and register the current IP address of an
MN as it moves across di3 erent IP subnets. MIP is also designed to provide mobility
transparent packet transmission service, called tunneling, to upper layer protocols.
MIP became an Internet standard based on its network layer mobility capability, but
incurs signi¿cant hando3 delay due to its registration procedure and tunneling
overhead. The hando3 delay also brings performance degradations to connection
oriented Internet applications. In this section, we discuss the procedure of MIP
hando3 : agent discovery, registration, and tunneling. We also introduce several
enhancement efforts that have been aimed to improve MIP performance.


&

"#'

 

MIP hando3 consists of two phases: agent discovery and registration. Agent
discovery is a period in which an MN detects its movement from one subnet to
another and obtains a new IP address, called Care-of-Address (CoA). Registration is
a procedure in which an MN informs the HA its CoA, and the HA advertises the
reachability of the MN to other routers. (1) andmsg (2) are agent discovery messages;
msg (3) and msg (4) are registration messages exchanged during an MIP hando3 . The
details of agent discovery and registration are followed.





&

" 
Through agent discovery period, an MN tries to detect its movement in a new subnet
and, if so, it obtains a CoA of the foreign link. Agent discovery period is composed of
two messages: msg (1) agent solicitation, msg and (2) agent advertisement. Although
FA broadcasts msg (2) agent advertisement message periodically, an MN can actively
request msg (2) agent advertisement by sending an msg (1) agent solicitation. By
sending an msg (1) agent solicitation, an MN can trigger a hando3 more promptly.
The following shows the message format of agent solicitation de¿ned in [RFC2002].

Agent solicitation message format is derived from the ICMP router solicitation
message format. The message format is exactly the same as that of ICMP router
solicitation. It should be noticed that Time to Live ¿eld is set to 1 to probe one-hope
only. Source Address ¿eld is set with an MN¶s home address, and Destination
Address ¿eld is ¿lled with normal broadcast or multicast address. Type ¿eld in ICMP
portion of the message is set to 10 which denotes ICMP solicitation. Other ¿elds are
¿lled according to regular IP header and ICMP message speci¿cations. Once an agent
received msg (1) agent solicitation, the agent broadcasts an msg (2) agent
advertisement message. The following shows the message format of msg (2) agent
advertisement. Msg (2) agent advertisement message format is also derived
fromICMProuter advertisement messageformat. In additiontotheoriginal ICMP router
advertisement message, mobility agent advertisement extension and optional pre¿x
length extension are added. As shown an msg(2) agent advertisement message carries
CoAs to the MN.

Type ¿eld of ICMP message portion is set to to denote ICMP advertisement.

NumAddrs means how many pairs of Router Address and Preference Level values are
contained. Addr Entry Size represents the size of a pair of Router Address and
Preference Level ¿elds. Life time ¿eld is set with the period of time this
advertisement is valid. (i.e., how often an agent broadcasts an advertisement
message.) Optional Pre¿x-Length Extension is used for MN to calculate network
pre¿x portion of agent address, in order to identify MN itself has been moved. Upon
reception of msg (2) agent advertisement ,the MN dispatches a CoA from the message
and set the CoA as a new foreign address in its MIP implementation. Upon the
completion of agent discovery, the MN performs registration of its CoA with HA.


'

 

Once an MN detects its movement into a new subnet and obtains a CoA through agent
discovery period, the MN tries to register its CoA with the HA. Registration is a
procedure to have a HA create, update, or delete the binding information of an MN¶s
home address and its CoA. So, when a given lifetime of a binding information is
about to expire, the corresponding MN should register its CoA again with the HA.
Registration is composed of two messages: msg registration request and msg
registration response. Msg registration request and msg registration response
messages are exchanged in UDP packet format.Shows registration request message
format.

Msg registration request can be sent by MN to HA directly when MN obtained

collocated CoA as well as via FA when MN obtained FA¶s CoA. In the latter case,
FA receives amsg registration request and relays the message to HA. It should be
noticed that msg registration request must be authenticated such that HA can con¿rm
the message is not delivered from any malicious party. Source Address ¿eld and
Destination Address ¿eld of IP header are ¿lled with an MN¶s home address and the
address of an FA obtained during agent discovery period, respectively. (If an MN
obtains a collocated CoA rather than an FA¶s CoA, the collocated CoA and the
address of HA are set, instead.) In the header portion of the UDP message,
Destination Port ¿eld is set to 434 identifying MIP registration message. Type ¿eld in
Fixed-Length Portion of Registration Request identi¿es registration request message.
Lifetime ¿eld of registration request denotes a period of time for which MN wants the
binding information lasted. MN Home Address, HA Address, and Care- of-Address
¿elds deliver the values their name designate. Identi¿cation ¿eld is used for MN to
identify a particular registration request it send, in order to prevent itself from
malicious replaying attack.


!
" c
 



c 

MIP is designed to provide mobility-transparent packet forwarding to MN Regard less

of its location in foreign links. This mobility support is based on tunneling capability.
From the information given by agent discovery, an HA sets up a virtual tunnel , which
is a particular route ,to the CoA of MN (either an FA¶s CoA or aollocated CoA).

MIP provides three tunneling options: IP in IP encapsulation, minimal encapsulation,

and genericroutingencapsulation(GRE). First, IPinIPencapsulationisan
original tunnelingmechanisminwhichanoriginal IP datagram.



 

So far in this section, we described MIP mechanism including agent discovery,

registration, and tunneling. Although MIP resolves host mobility in IP layer,
additional agents and tunneling overheads degrade performance of data transmission
to/from mobile host when handoff occurs. Such problems are listed below:

‡ High handoff delay MIP handoff delay is ascribed to agent discovery delay and
registration delay as we discussed in this section. As we discuss, MIP handoff delay
increases proportional to handoff rate and period of time MN stays in foreign links.
Hence, MIP handoff can cause significant performance degradation, especially in
highly mobility-oriented environments.

‡ Tunneling overhead Tunneling mechanism of MIP offers mobility transparent

routing service to upper layer protocols. However, two major drawbacks exist in
tunneling. First, an additional IP header should be attached to an original IP datagram.
The 20-byte overhead decreases end-to-end transmission throughput. Second, since
tunneling generates triangular routing path, additional network delay cannot be
avoided.

((

 
In order to reduce handoff delay and tunneling overhead incurred by MIP, quite a few
enhancement efforts have been made. There have been many other extensions and
drafts in terms of more general mobility architecture and performance, but we focus
on MIP extensions regarding handoff performance. We discuss two major internet
drafts MIP with route optimization and hierarchical MIP.

‡ Optimized routing Optimized routing is an MIP extension to reduce tunneling

overhead. In this extension, MN informs its CoA to CN directly so that CN can send
data packets to the CoA directly without tunneling by HA. In order to realize the
optimized routing, CN maintains a binding cache in which CoAs of MN are being
updated as MN moves.

‡ Regional registration and hierarchical Mobile IP MIP regional registration and

HMIP are another MIP extension to reduce signaling overhead. Hierarchical MIP is
categorized as a micro-mobility solution. When the frequency of an MN movement
inside of a subnet increases, signaling overhead for the MN¶s registration of its CoA
with the HA increases and cause high handoff delay. In order to reduce the signaling
overhead, a hierarchical mobility agent, called gateway foreign agent (GFA), is
defined. Whenever a handoff is triggered from an MN movement, the MN registers its
CoA with the most nearby local GFA. As the HA had already been noticed about the
tunneling information to the GFA in the previous (or the first) registration, the
tunneling of packets are processed in a hierarchical manner from the HA to the GFA,
and the GFA to the FA, and the FA to the MN.


$cc


%"


 

Mobile SCTP (mSCTP) is a transport layer handoff solution based on StreamControl
Transmission Protocol (SCTP) and dynamic address reconfiguration (DAR)extension.
Originally designed to support telephony signaling messages, SCTP hasbeen adopted
as the third general purpose transport protocol 1 by IETF, inheriting mainfeatures of
TCP including the concept of flow control and congestion control. SCTP,in addition,
provides two novel features, multi-homing and multi-streaming. Multihomingis a
concept that two end hosts can hold multiple connections at the same timewhile multi-
streaming is a feature that multiple streams of data can be delivered underindependent
controls within a single connection.

Mobile SCTP (mSCTP) utilizes multi-homing feature of SCTP in such a waythat two
end hosts hold two transport layer connection identities at the same time whenan MN
stays in an overlapped region moving from one subnet to another. In addition,DAR
extension is used to deliver messages of add-ip, delete-ip, and set-primary-ip requests.
All the mSCTP handoff procedures are processed between two end-to-end hosts
without involving any third party agent. As discussed one of the major problems of
MIP is that an MNcannot keep communicating with a CN while it has to deal with its
registration ofits CoA with the HA during handoff period. However, mSCTP can
provide a seamlesshandoff solution based on its multi-homing feature and DAR
extension. In the followingsubsections, we discuss SCTP details and DARextension.


$


c





)$c* 
We introduce Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), the third general
purpose transport layer protocol, in this subsection. SCTP provides a
connectionoriented, reliable transport service over IP network as TCP does. SCTP
also supports congestion control and packet loss recovery function. In addition, SCTP
has unique features including multi-homing and multi-streaming. Based on these two
features, SCTP was originally designed to provide a reliable transport between two
end hosts using multiple, independent control of streams.

¦ $c

Endpoint and Association: Multi-homing A transport endpoint in TCP/IP network is
canonically defined as a pair of IP address and port number. In TCP, a connection is
established between two (IP address port number) endpoints, and a TCP connection is
always one-to-one relationship of a single IP address from each endpoint. Unlike in
TCP, an SCTP endpoint can multiplex multiple IP addresses on a multi-homed
(interfaced) host. An SCTP association is defined as [a set of IP addresses at
A]+[Port-A]+[a set of IP addresses at Z]+[Port-Z].

That is, two SCTP endpoints, having set of IP addresses, comprise an SCTP
association. The Endpoint A, having IP(A1) and IP(A2), established an SCTP
association with Endpoint B, which has IP(B1) and IP(B2). In this example, Endpoint
A uses IP(A2) as its primary IP address while Endpoint B uses IP(B2). Meanwhile, an
SCTP endpoint can establish multiple sessions (associations) to other endpoints at the
same time. That is, an SCTP endpoint can utilize its multihomed network interfaces to
signal to more than two peer nodes at a given moment. The following shows
concurrent associations from an endpoint, Endpoint A, to a set of endpoints, Endpoint
B, Endpoint C, and Endpoint D. Based on association and multisession features, an
SCTP node can support multi-homing capability as shown in the MN and the CN
establish an SCTP association. Within the association, multi-homed MN can utilize
multiple-path communications by signaling to the AP and the BS at the same time,
and notice the CN to use either of the MN¶s IP addresses as a destination IP address.
In this example, having two network interfaces, the MN moves from the BS area to
the AP area. While the MN stays in the coverage of both networks, the MN is able to
exploit its multiple network interfaces to communicate with the CN based on
association and multi-session capability. More details of mSCTP handoff will be
discussed. It should be noticed that an SCTP association is different from multi-
homed.

TCP connections in such a way that an SCTP association has a single control over
multiple IP addresses while each TCP connection is controlled in totally independent
manner. Prospective applications of SCTP multi-homing, based on the concept of
association, are a reliable signaling with failover support, transport load balancing for
multi-homed hosts, elimination of head-of-line blocking (with the help of multi-
streamof SCTP), and transport layer handoff. the AP and the BS at the same time, and
notice the CN to use either of the MN¶s IP addresses as a destination IP address. In
this example, having two network interfaces, the MN moves from the BS area to the
AP area. While the MN stays in the coverage of both networks, the MN is able to
exploit its multiple network interfaces to communicate with the CN based on
association and multi-session capability. More details of mSCTP handoff will be
discussed.
It should be noticed that an SCTP association is different from multi-homed TCP
connections in such a way that an SCTP association has a single control over multiple
IP addresses while each TCP connection is controlled in totally independent
manner.Prospective applications of SCTP multi-homing, based on the concept of
association,
are a reliable signaling with failover support, transport load balancing for multi-
homed hosts, elimination of head-of-line blocking (with the help of multi-stream of
SCTP), and transport layer handoff.

x  $





Since SCTP is a connection-oriented transport protocol, two endpoints should
establish an association (see item 1. SCTP Endpoint and Association: Multi-homing
in this subsection) before exchanging data chunks. Unlike TCP, SCTP uses four-way
handshake
to setup an association. Four-way handshake can prevent TCP SYN-floodingattack,
which is ascribed to the three-way handshake of the connection initialization of TCP.
This shows the signaling of an SCTP association setup process. Endpoint A starts
four-way handshake association setup process by sending an INIT chunk. Upon
receiving INIT chunk, endpoint B responds by sending an INITACK chunk. INIT-
ACK chunk contains a state cookie, which should be sent back to itself (endpoint B)
by endpoint A. State cookie prevents well-known TCP SYNflooding attack, which is
attributed to the fact that a malicious node sends SYN packet continuously until the
other endpoint runs out of its resources. Endpoint B verifies the authenticity of a state
cookie delivered back in a COOKIE-ECHO chunk. Once endpoint B recognizes an
authentic state cookie value, a COOKIE-ACK chunk is responded to endpoint A.
After finishing the four-way handshake, an SCTP association between endpoint A and
endpoint B has been setup and reliable connection-oriented data transmissions are
followed. It should be noted that COOKIE-ECHO chunk and COOKIE-ACK chunk
are able to be bundled with data chunks. As SCTP is a reliable transport protocol, it
also provides a way to close an existing association. This shows the signaling of an
SCTP association close SCTP association close is a three-message handshake process.
Endpoint A sends a SHUTDOWN chunk to endpoint B. From this moment, endpoint
A does not take any data from upper layer. Once endpoint B received SHUTDOWN
chunk, endpoint B does not accept any user data from upper layer protocol, and send
SHUTDOWN-ACK chunk to endpoint A. Upon receiving SHUTDOWN-ACK chunk,
endpoint A enters the CLOSE state of the association, and respond with
SHUTDOWN-COMPLETE chunk to endpoint B. With the reception of the
SHUTDOWN-COMPLETE chunk, the association enters CLOSE state in endpoint B
as well. One of major differences between SCTP association close and TCP
connection close process is that SCTP does not allow half-closed state that TCP does.

+ !



An SCTP packet is composed of an SCTP common header and number of chunks. A

chunk is a unit of information within an SCTP packet [37]. As a unit of SCTP
message building block, many different types of chunks have been defined,
categorized into either control chunks or data chunks. This shows an SCTP message
formats including its common header and chunks. In common header, source port
number field is set with a sender¶s endpoint port number. Destination port number
field represents the port number of the destination endpoint. Verification tag is used to
provide a distinction between current packets and packets from previous associations.
It also prevents endpoints from being exposed to malicious packet-injecting attack.
Adler-32 checksum supports received data integrity check. The checksum covers
common header and all the appended chunks. Chunks are the actual building blocks
of SCTP. Each chunk consists of chunk type, chunk flags, chunk length, and chunk
data fields. Chunk type identifies the type of chunk. Chunk flags provides special
flags used for the chunk. Chunk length is set with the length of the chunk in bytes. At
the end of a chunk, chunk data is followed. shows the defined chunk types in [RFC
2960] [35]. Multiple chunks can be bundled together in an SCTP packet, regardless of
whether they are controlchunks or data chunks. By exploiting this feature of SCTP,
mSCTP handoff carries twoadditional types of control chunks, ASCONF and
ASCONF-ACK (which we discuss inthe next subsection), with data chunks in a same
packet. This factor is one of the advantages of SCTP that allows seamless handoff
without any handoff delay in transport layer.

‰ &c

$

$




Once an association has been established, two SCTP endpoints can transfer user data.
First, application data are chopped into smaller pieces if they are too big to be fit in an
SCTP packet according to the path maximum transmission unit (MTU). Application
data are entered data chunk queue in SCTP layer to be packed in an SCTP packet. At
the same time, if any type of control chunk is ready at the control chunk queue in
SCTP layer, the control chunks are bundled together with data chunks in the front of
data queue. On the other endpoint, upon reception of an SCTP packet, chunks are
unbundled into control chunks and data chunks. For fragmented data chunks, data
chunks are reassembled in SCTP layer and put into stream reordering queues.
Unbundled control chunks also conduct their anticipated functions in SCTP layer.
SCTP provides congestion control mechanism to adapt its transmission rate in shared
networks. SCTP congestion control has been designed based on the rateadaptive
window-based scheme of TCP. Hence, SCTP reduces the transmission rate whenever
a network congestion is detected. However, several unique features, apart from TCP,
are introduced. Based on its mandatory SACK mechanism, SCTP supports inherent
fastrecovery functionality without explicit mechanism. The mandatory SACK
mechanism allows SCTP avoid slow start after multiple segment losses in a single
window. The SACK mechanism, as a result, increases throughput of SCTP by
efficient bandwidth usage. In slow start and congestion avoidance stage of SCTP,
congestion window (cwnd) is increased by the number of acknowledged bytes while
TCP refers to the number of ACK segments to increase its cwnd. In congestion
avoidance stage of SCTP, cwnd can be increased only after full cwnd is consumed.
SCTP, also, waits its fast retransmission until four Duplicated ACKs are received.

&"
'


)&'* 

As we discussed in Subsection 2.2.1, SCTP allows both end nodes to hold multiple IP
addresses at a given moment. Dynamic address reconfiguration (DAR) extension, in
addition, defines three major parameters with which mSCTP handoff can be
performed: Add IP Address (add-IP), Delete IP Address (delete-IP), and Set Primary
Address (set-primary-IP). Add-IP is a parameter to add new IP addresses in an active
association. Delete-IP is to delete an old IP addresses from an existing association.
Set-primary-IP function is used to inform the other end node to change the destination
IP address of its IP datagram to the designated IP address. Now, we discuss these
three DAR parameters with more details.

1. Add-IP, Delete-IP, and Set-Primary-IP parameters

The three new parameter types defined in DAR, add-IP, delete-IP, and setprimary-IP,
are employed in mSCTP to perform seamless transport layer handoff. The word,
seamless, in this context, means data transmission is almost not affected by handoff
procedure. In mSCTP, this seamless handoff is guaranteed by exploiting multihoming
feature of SCTP and dynamic IP address configurations of DAR extension. Add IP
address (add-IP) is an ASCONF parameter to inform the other end node to add a new
IP address in its active association. Thisshows the message format of add-IP
ASCONF parameter. The value, 0xC001, of type field identifies add-IP parameter.
Length field is variable since address parameter can carry multiple IP addresses.
ASCONF-request correlation ID is used for a sender of the ASCONF chunk to
distinguish the particular chunk from other chunks. Address parameter field holds IP
address (either IPv4 or IPv6 address) in TLV format, which is described in 3.3.2.1 of
RFC2960 [35]. Thisshows delete-IP ASCONF parameter, which is used to notice the
other end node to delete IP addresses, specified in the chunk, from an active
association. Type field is set with the value, 0xC002, to be identified as delete-IP
ASCONF parameter. Length field is variable as it is in add-IP ASCONF parameter;
Address parameter can be organized with multiple IP addresses. ASCONF-request
correlation ID identifies a particular chunk from other chunks so that the sender of the
chunk can discriminate it. TLV type of address parameter is followed. Thisshows the
message format of set-primary-IP address ASCONF parameter.The value of 0xC004
in type field describes it is a set-primary-IP ASCONFparameter. Length, ASCONF-
request correlation ID, and address parameter are usedin the same purpose as in add-
IP and delete-IP ASCONF parameters. In order to deliver these DAR parameters, two
additional chunks, Address Configuration Change Chunk (ASCONF) and Address
Configuration Acknowledgment (ASCONF-ACK), are defined.

2. ASCONF/ASCONF-ACK Chunks

Address Configuration Change Chunk (ASCONF) and Address Configuration

Acknowledgment (ASCONF-ACK) are additional chunk types defined in DAR
internet draft. Table 2.2 shows ASCONF and ASCONF-ACK chunk types. ASCONF
chunk carries DAR ASCONF parameters including add-IP, delete-IP, and set-
primary-IP. It should be noticed that ASCONF chunks can be bundled with other data
chunks in an active association during an mSCTP handoff procedure. This property of
SCTP and DAR makes mSCTP handoff delay be neglected as we will
discussing.Thisshows the message format of ASCONF chunk. Type field is filled
with the value, 0xC1, to identify ASCONF chunk. Chunk flags filed is not used in
ASCONF chunk and set to 0. Chunk length denotes the length of the chunk itself.
Serial number is set to a value from 0 to 4294967295 (2°-*32 - 1) range, in order to
distinguish a particular ASCONF chunk from other chunks.Address parameter is set
to a sender address to help receiver find the related association. ASCONF parameter
fields contain add-IP, delete-IP, and set-primary-IP parameters which will be
discussed later in this subsection. ASCONF-ACK chunk delivers a reply message to
an ASCONF request. Thisshows the message format of ASCONF-ACK chunk. The
value of 0x80 in type field identifies it is an ASCONF-ACK chunk. Chunk flags field
is not used and set to 0. Chunk length represents the length of the chunk itself. Serial
number carries the serial number of ASCONF chunk which it replies to. ASCONF
parameter response fields deliver the processed status of the ASCONF requests. By
default, without any error occurred in ASCONF-ACK sender side, no ASCONF
parameter response field is appended. That is, if no error occurs, only type,chunk
flags, chunk length, and serial number fields are returned in an ASCONF-ACKchunk.
As discussed in the subsection, DAR extension, based on multi-homing feature of
SCTP, allows seamless mSCTP handoff in transport layer. In the next subsection,we
discuss how mSCTP handoff works based on multi-homing and DAR extension.


$c! ,

 ,
 ! 
&' 

´Make-before-break handovers involve a mobile node making the new link while
maintaining the old link; when the new link is ready, the old link can be broken.´ In
this section, we have discussed essential components of mobile SCTP (mSCTP)
including Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) and dynamic address
reconfiguration (DAR) extension. Based on multi-homing feature of SCTP and DAR,
makebefore break IP-based handoff is able to be performed.

During a handoff period, legacy network layer handoff mechanisms, including MIP,
have a certain period in which an MN must communicate with agents other than its
peer node, CN. Hence, the existing active connection suffers from packet loss, waste
of bandwidth by transport layer slow start, and so on. As handoff delay increases, the
performance degradation becomes bigger. On the other hand, mSCTP node can utilize
two network adapters in an association to make a new data path while still
communicating with its peer node. To perform a handoff, mSCTP exchange at most
three pairs of ASCONF/ASCONF-ACK control chunks bundled with data chunks
with its peer node. This shows mSCTP handoff signaling messages.

The MN has communicated with the CN through the BS node. For this
communication, the MN used the network interface-1. During its movement toward
the AP, the MN exchanges router solicitation and router advertisement with the AP
using the network interface-2. The router discovery process is performed
independently from the data transmission in the network connection-1. Once the MN
obtained a new IP for the network interface-2, the MN bundle an add-IP ASCONF
chunk into other data chunks in the network connection-1. The CN responds with
ASCONF-ACK chunk bundled with SACK chunks for received data. When the MN
determines to use the interface-2, the MN sends set-primary-IP ASCONF chunk
together with data chunks to the CN. The CN replies back with ASCONF-ACK. Upon
reception of the ASCONF-ACK chunk, the MN begins to use the interface-2. Delete-
IP ASCONF and ASCONF-ACK can be exchanged to erase the old IP address from
the association.
-










Here we talked about the evolving IP based wireless services and addressed the
inherent mobility problem. we introduced a network layer mobility solution, Mobile
IP (MIP), and a transport layer solution, mobile SCTP (mSCTP). It is an apparent
trend that such IP-based handoff solutions will be deployed in future wireless IP
networks. In the mean time, we have quite a few different wireless access
technologies and service networks at the same time, we discuss one of the
encountered trends among the contemporary wireless services: Network and Service
Convergence. We also discuss the architectures of IP-based vertical handoff between
heterogeneous networks based on MIP and mSCTP.




$

c


Various wireless network services, including 2G, 2.5G/3G, and 802.11 Wi-Fi, are
contemporarily provided for different needs from customers. This variety comes from
the fact that network operators decide type of network based on required coverage of
network, target user base, their business profit, and so forth. The deployed networks
are divided into three categories: wireless LAN (WLAN), wireless MAN, and
wireless WAN. Wireless LAN includes 802.11b, 802.11g, and 802.11a. Wireless
MAN, which is targeting mobile Internet users in a city area, includes 802.16a,
802.16b, and 802.16e. Wireless WAN includes all the current cellular infrastructure
access networks such as CDMA2000, GSM, GPRS, and UMTS.

Among the different wireless access networks and services, Wireless LAN and
wireless WAN have complementary characteristics. Wireless LAN generally provides
relatively high data rate with small coverage while wireless WAN networks offer
relatively low data rate with large coverage area. For instance, a WLAN standard,
802.11b, provides up to 11Mbps data rate with a few hundred meters of radius while
UMTS , UTRAN supports up to 2Mbps data rate for fixed node and 386Kbps for
pedestrian users with a few kilometers of radius. Therefore, by using both of the
network services, wide coverage area is guaranteed with high data rate where WLAN
services are available. This shows an example of network and service convergence
and user mobility. The user accesses the best network in terms of the data rate,
communication expense, etc. However, we should notice that certain problems exist
due to the heterogeneity of the different technologies. Since it is wireless mobile
communication, mobility support is again one of the most fundamental problem to be
solved. In this thesis, in order to evaluate the performance of handoff effects in
integrated networks, UMTS/802.11b integrated networks are investigated. In the next
section, we discuss the IP-base handoff mechanism for the vertical handoff between
UMTS and 802.11b networks.

 -

!c./0x ¦¦

In addition to the existing IP-based networks and services (either it is fixed networks
or wireless access networks such as Wi-Fi hot spots), commercial cellular networks
and services are also evolving toward all-IP networks due to many technological and
economical reasons. Thus, IP-based handoff solutions will be the essential part of
future wireless IP convergent networks. In this section, we discuss the architecture
and performance issues of UMTS/802.11b integrated networks, as a case study, to
examinethe IP-based Handoff solutions: Mobile IP (MIP) and mobile SCTP. In the
thesis, in order to focus on only the handoff performance, we study loosely-coupled
vertical handoff architecture where 802.11b WLAN does not have any correlation
with UMTS network but directly connected to public IP networks.

!
 -



Mobile IP (MIP), as an Internet Standard, has been deployed widely in various

networks and services. For instance, 3GPP2 adopted MIP as a standard IP mobility
solution and uses MIP in the packet switching domain of the networks. Moreover, the
deployed MIP service has already been used to integrate the CDMA2000 network and
the 802.11 WLAN network. An example of this integrated network services is the
network service product called, NETSPOT SWING, provided by a Korean network
operator, KTF. The concept of the service is that the multi-homed user device always
connects to the CDMA2000 cellular service and MIP Handoff occurs whenever the
userenters a Wi-Fi hotspot area.For UMTS network, MIP has not yet been adopted as
a standard IP mobilitysolution. One of the disadvantages of MIP in architectural point
of view is that itrequires additional components: Home Agent (HA) and Foreign
Agent (FA) which haveto be installed in certain routers and/or network gateways.
Moreover, as we will discusslater in the thesis, MIP incurs significant handoff delay
due to the inevitable registrationprocedure.

To install MIP capability into UMTS (3GPP R991) network, agent modulesshould be
implemented in SGSN or corresponding network gateways. Thisshowsan MIP
vertical handoff architecture in UMTS(3GPP R99)/802.11b integrated network. In
this architecture, the MN is registered to a home agent (HA), which is located in
either 802.11b domain or UMTS core network packet switching gateway. The MN,
having its home address, registers its new CoA with HA whenever it moves in a new
IP subnet and obtain a CoA. Only one transport connection is maintained between the
MN and a correspondent node (CN). All the packets destined to the MN¶s CoA are
tunneled to foreign agent (FA), which again forwards the original IP datagram to the
MN. It should be noted that vertical handoff is an inter-technology handoff. Hence,
MIP registration and tunneling incur higher delay than that of in homogeneous
environment due to the routing overhead between different technologies. This shows
MIP vertical handoff architecture in UMTS(3GPP R52)/802.11b integrated network.
In 3GPP R5 all-IP network, agent modules can be sit on RNC. In this architecture,
UMTS UTRAN supports IP-based protocol stack. This all-IP access network provides
more flexible IP routing service, but MIP handoff overhead cannot be avoided. In
MIP vertical handoff architecture, certain modification has to be made into legacy
network components. This task is not very favorable to network operators.


$c-



Unlike MIP vertical handoff, mSCTP vertical handoff does not require any additional
modification on existing components. (In the thesis, we focus on handoff functionality
of IP mobility. Location management of mSCTP can be resolved with DNS service
and not covered in the thesis.) As discussed ,mSCTP directly interacts with CN to
trigger transport layer handoff. This end-to-end handoff procedure is one of the most
important advantages that SCTP offers such that no handoff architecture difference
exists between homogeneous environments and heterogeneous environments.
The following shows mSCTP vertical handoff architecture in UMTS(3GPP
R99)/802.11bintegrated network. No additional component is installed, and the MN
directly interactswith CN in end-to-end manner.Thisrepresents mSCTP vertical
handoff architecture in UMTS(3GPP R5)/802.11b integrated network. mSCTP does
not required any modification in this architecture, either. mSCTP, using multi-homing
feature of SCTP, does not incur any handoff delay in UMTS/802.11b integrated
network as well. We will conduct a performance analysis of MIP and mSCTP with
regard to end-to-end throughput, total handoff delay, and packet loss, and represent
the simulation and results including vertical handoff architecture.

Ê



"
!
 
$c
 

We have discussed the network layer handoff, Mobile IP (MIP), and the transport
layer handoff, mobile SCTP (mSCTP), in terms of their mechanisms in this context,
we conduct a theoretical analysis of MIP and mSCTP handoff with regard to handoff
delay, end-to-end throughput, and packet loss. These three parameters are very
important performance metrics since they show whether a given handoff procedure
can make seamless end-to-end transmission for ubiquitous users and feasible to be
deployed, especially in a highly mobile-oriented environment. After the analysis of
MIP and mSCTP.we conduct a simulation study with corresponding system models.
We provide a performance evaluation on the simulation results of MIP and mSCTP in
802.11b WLAN-only network and UMTS/802.11b integrated network.


&"

In this section, we will analyze handoff delay incurred by MIP and mSCTP. Handoff
delay represents delayed period by a given handoff procedure; otherwise, total
amount of transferred data would be the same as in fixed network. As we discussed
the agent discovery and registration of CoA with HA generate MIP handoff delay. In
case of mSCTP, no significant handoff delay occurs since dynamic address
reconfiguration (DAR) control chunks can be bundled with other data chunks. For
analysis of handoff delay, we begin with the definitions of parameters.

TMIP , MIP handoff delay (second)

TmSCTP , mSCTP handoff delay (second)
Tad , MIP agent discovery delay
Trd , mSCTP router discovery delay
Treg , MIP CoA registration delay
TDAR , mSCTP dynamic address reconfiguration delay
Tas , MIP agent solicitation time
Taa , MIP agent advertisement time
TCoA , MIP CoA processing time
TregíREQ , MIP registration request time
TBU , MIP registration binding update
TregíRES , MIP registration response time
Trs , mSCTP router solicitation time
Tra , mSCTP router advertisement time
TnewíIP , mSCTP new-IP processing time
TaddíIP , mSCTP add-IP time
TdelíIP , mSCTP delete-IP time
TsetíprimaryíIP , mSCTP set-primary-IP time
TASCONF , mSCTP ASCONF chunk send delay
TASCONFíACK , mSCTP ASCONF-ACK chunk send delay

Each parameter above denotes certain time of delay in particular operations occurring
during handoff procedures of either MIP or mSCTP. By summing up all the delay
parameters taken by partial operations of MIP and mSCTP, TMIP and TmSCTP
represent handoff delay of MIP and mSCTP, respectively. Here we will discuss TMIP
and TmSCTP , respectively.


&"!
 c! 

Handoff delay is defined as the period of time between the moment at which an
existing IP address becomes not available for end-to-end data transmission by
movement of a node into a new subnet and the moment at which the end node
receives a sequence of end-to-end packet using a newly obtained IP address. During
the defined handoff delay period, MIP incurs two activities, agent advertisement and
registration, to process a handoff .Hence, MIP handoff delay (TMIP ) consists of two
phases: agent discovery (Tad) period and registration (Treg) period. That is,

TMIP = Tad + Treg

Agent discovery (Tad) and registration (Treg), in turn, are composed of the following
operations, respectively:

1  


")c* Agent discovery (Tad) period consists of agent solicitation
(Tas), agent advertisement (Taa), and CoA processing time (TCoA) of an MN.As we
have discussed ,MIP handoff occurs when an MN moves from one subnet to another.
For the movement detection of MN, agent discovery (Tad) is executed by an MN and
an FA (or possibly HA) cooperation. Agent solicitation (Tas) is a modified ICMP
message broadcasted by an MN to search for an agent. Agent advertisement (Taa) is
also a modified ICMP broadcast message sent by an agent. CoA processing time
(TCoA) represents time taken by MN to dispatch a CoA from FA¶s agent
advertisement message. As a result, the delay incurred by agent discovery is:

Tad = Tas + Taa + TCoA

D







  

 










  





 




‡ Registration (Treg) Once an MN obtained a CoA from FA¶s agent advertisement, it
triggers registration (Treg) of its CoA with the HA. Registration (Treg) period is
composed of registration request (TregíREQ) by MN, binding entry update for a new
CoA (TBU) by the HA, and registration response (TregíRES) by the HA. That is,

Treg = TregíREQ + TBU + TregíRES

Registration process can be successfully completed only when all the parties do not
encounter any error during TregíREQ, TBU, and TregíRES periods. If anyerror
occurs (mostly authentication failure), the HA sends a registration reply message with
a corresponding error code and registration request message is retransmitted by the
MN after proper handling of the error specified in error code field. In order to prevent
denial-of-service attack, which an unauthorized malicious node can flood registration
traffic to an HA, registration request (TregíREQ) and registration response
(TregíRES) messages should be authenticated by an HA and an MN, respectively. As
we discussed ,registration request (TregíREQ) and registration response (TregíRES)
are delivered in UDP packets. Finally, agent discovery period and registration period
constitutes MIP handoff delay (TMIP ):

TMIP = Tad + Treg

= |Tas + Ta{az+ TCoA}+|TregíREQ + T{BzU + TregíRES}

In Equation (4.4), agent discovery (Tad) period is an inevitable procedure due to the
fact that the movement of an MN should be detected at IP layer. However,
registration (Treg) period is MIP-specific handoff delay. Since MIP is a network layer
mobility mechanism, the actual logic behind the transparent data transmission is a
modified routing mechanism. MIP updates this routing information located in HA¶s
binding update table upon a registration request from an MN which obtained a new
CoA.

Including binding update (TBU) period and an additional authentication overhead,

registration delay (Treg) can be significantly long when an MN communicates with
others in a highly movement-oriented environment. It should be noticed that handoff
delay (TMIP ) may interrupt on-going data transmission such that end-to-end
throughput decreases and data packet loss possibly occurs.


&"
$cc$c

Handoff delay is the period of time from the moment at which an existing IP address
becomes not available for end-to-end data transmission by movement of a node into a
new subnet to the moment at which the end node receives a sequence of end-to-end
packet using a newly obtained IP address. During this period, mSCTP handoff
generates router discovery procedure performed between an MN and an access router,
and dynamic address reconfiguration (DAR) procedure between an MN and a CN.
Hence, in order to analyze mSCTP handoff delay (TmSCTP ), we employ router
discovery period (Trd) and DAR period (TDAR) defined early in this section. This
represents

$c
")c$c*

TmSCTP = Trd + TDAR (4.5)

Router discovery (Third) period and DAR (TDAR) procedure, in turn, are
composedof the following operations, respectively:

‡ Router discovery (Trd) Router discovery (Trd) period is composed of router

solicitation(Trs), router advertisement (Tra), and processing time of newly obtained
IP (TnewíIP ) in an MN¶s protocol stack. That is,

Trd = Trs + Tra + TnewíIP

Router discovery (Trd) procedure of mSCTP is different from agent discovery (Tad)
of MIP in two folds. First, agent advertisement (Taa) of MIP uses a modified ICMP
router advertisement (Tra). On the other hand, mSCTP handoff can use a standard
ICMP router advertisement message, which is at least 12-byte shorter than an agent
advertisement of MIP. This means that the signaling overhead in router discovery
(Trd) of mSCTP is not greater than that of agent discovery (Tad) of MIP. That is,

MIP : Tad >mSCTP : Trd

Second and more importantly, router discovery (Trd) of mSCTP can be performed
while transmitting data packets in an SCTP association exploiting multi-homing
feature of SCTP. Hence, actual delay caused by mSCTP router discovery (Trd) can be
neglected. That is,

‡ Dynamic address reconfiguration (TDAR) The other part of mSCTP handoff

procedure is a transport layer dynamic IP address configuration procedure employed
from dynamic address reconfiguration (DAR) extension of SCTP. DAR procedure
period (TDAR) consists of three ASCONF parameters: add-IP (TaddíIP ) procedure,
set-primary-IP (TsetíprimaryíIP ) procedure, and delete-IP (TdelíIP ) procedure.
That is,

TDAR = TaddíIP + TsetíprimaryíIP + TdelíIP

Each ASCONF parameter is delivered an ASCONF chunk and replied by an

ASCONF-ACK chunk. Therefore, three pairs of ASCONF/ASCONF-ACKs are
exchanged.

TaddíIP = TASCONF + TASCONFíACK

TsetíprimaryíIP = TASCONF + TASCONFíACK
TdeleteíIP = TASCONF + TASCONFíACK

As we discussed ,all the control chunks in DAR procedure can be bundled with other
data chunks in mSCTP transmission. Thus, the actual delay caused by DAR (TDAR)
procedure can also be converged to zero. This is a very important fact such that the
handoff delay of mSCTP (TmSCTP ) can be zero. Consequently, mSCTP handoff
delay is expressed as:

TmSCTP = Trd + TDAR

= (Trs + Tra + TnewíIP ) + (TaddíIP + TsetíprimaryíIP + TdelíIP ) =
( |Trs + Tra{+z TnewíIP}) + [3 °² (TASCONF + TASCONFíACK)| {z }

In the Third can be neglected because router discovery can be processed in an

interface while data are being transmitted in another interface. TDAR period can be
considered to be zero by bundling ASCONF and ASCONF-ACK control chunks with
other data chunks. Although DAR procedure incurs a constant throughput decrease, it
allows mSCTP supports quasiseamless handoff.


( 
(c

 

Here, we analyzed the handoff delay of MIP and mSCTP. The second parameter we
analyze is end-to-end transmission throughput of MIP and mSCTP. Here MIP incurs
certain delay due to the MN¶s agent discovery and registration of its CoA with HA.
Handoff delay directly affects end-to-end throughput decrease since data
communication should be paused during handoff period. In addition, tunneling
overhead is to be considered as a throughput degradation factor as well. In case of
mSCTP, router discovery and DAR procedure are required to allow a CN become
aware of the newly obtained IP address of an MN. However, mSCTP handoff delay
can be neglected as shown, and no other significant factors affect end-to-end
throughput of mSCTP. In this section, we introduce a new variable, number of
handoff, to analyze end-to-end throughput of MIP and mSCTP with regard to handoff
rate. End-to-end transmission throughput shows how the two different handoff
protocols affect the overall transmission efficiency.

As defined above, MIP and mSCTP denote end-to-end throughput of MIP and
mSCTP in bit-per-second, respectively. ȝTCP and ȝSCTP represent total prospective
data load of TCP and SCTP with fixed end node (i.e., handoff never occurs). is the
number of handoff during the transmission time (Ts) employed to evaluate the
variation of end-to-end throughput with regard to handoff rate. lMIP (i) and lmSCTP
(i) denote the amount of data loss, in number of bits, due to ith handoff delay in MIP
and mSCTP, respectively. Tfl represents the time period that MN stays in foreign
links other than its home link. Tsdenotes the total transmission duration. Here we use
the defined parameters, we discuss end-to-end throughput of MIP and mSCTP,
respectively.