File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Handoff performance comparison of Mobile IP, Fast Handoff and mSCTP in mobile wireless networks

TitleHandoff performance comparison of Mobile IP, Fast Handoff and mSCTP in mobile wireless networks
Authors
Issue Date2008
PublisherIEEE Computer Society Press.
Citation
Proceedings Of The International Symposium On Parallel Architectures, Algorithms And Networks, I-Span, 2008, p. 45-52 How to Cite?
AbstractWe compare the performance of three handoff protocols, namely Mobile IP, Fast Handoff and mSCTP. Among the three schemes, Mobile IP suffers from the lowest data throughput and longest handoff latency. Fast Handoff can perform better, provided that the mobile node can handoff to the new base station at an appropriate time instant when data forwarding between network routers begins. mSCTP supports multihoming; the mobile node does not need to determine the exact handoff time. Nevertheless, packet reordering and the subsequent fast retransmission degrades its handoff performance. To avoid these problems, adding some flow control operations in the transport layer is necessary. Flow control should be carried out in-sync with the handoff operations. This implies the transport layer should additionally recognise when do the handoff procedures start or finish. We therefore come up with a natural choice in designing a handoff scheme, which is to centralise the handoff and flow control operations in the transport layer. © 2008 IEEE.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/93109
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTsang, KCKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWang, CLen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLau, FCMen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-25T14:51:09Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-25T14:51:09Z-
dc.date.issued2008en_HK
dc.identifier.citationProceedings Of The International Symposium On Parallel Architectures, Algorithms And Networks, I-Span, 2008, p. 45-52en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/93109-
dc.description.abstractWe compare the performance of three handoff protocols, namely Mobile IP, Fast Handoff and mSCTP. Among the three schemes, Mobile IP suffers from the lowest data throughput and longest handoff latency. Fast Handoff can perform better, provided that the mobile node can handoff to the new base station at an appropriate time instant when data forwarding between network routers begins. mSCTP supports multihoming; the mobile node does not need to determine the exact handoff time. Nevertheless, packet reordering and the subsequent fast retransmission degrades its handoff performance. To avoid these problems, adding some flow control operations in the transport layer is necessary. Flow control should be carried out in-sync with the handoff operations. This implies the transport layer should additionally recognise when do the handoff procedures start or finish. We therefore come up with a natural choice in designing a handoff scheme, which is to centralise the handoff and flow control operations in the transport layer. © 2008 IEEE.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherIEEE Computer Society Press.en_HK
dc.relation.ispartofProceedings of the International Symposium on Parallel Architectures, Algorithms and Networks, I-SPANen_HK
dc.titleHandoff performance comparison of Mobile IP, Fast Handoff and mSCTP in mobile wireless networksen_HK
dc.typeConference_Paperen_HK
dc.identifier.emailWang, CL:clwang@cs.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailLau, FCM:fcmlau@cs.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityWang, CL=rp00183en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLau, FCM=rp00221en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1109/I-SPAN.2008.43en_HK
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-49149085518en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros149523en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-49149085518&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.spage45en_HK
dc.identifier.epage52en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTsang, KCK=36927681100en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWang, CL=7501646188en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLau, FCM=7102749723en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats