Download Mobile IP - OoCities

Performance Validation of
Mobile IP Wireless Networks
Presented by
Syed Shahzad Ali
Advisor
Dr. Ravi Pendse
Agenda
 Objective
 Motivation
 Introduction
 Problems : IP Addresses, Location, Routing
 Solution: Mobile IP Protocol
 Ns-2 test-bed and results
 Router’s Lab setup
 Test-bed and result
 Future Work
Objective
Performance validation of mobile IP based
wireless networks by collecting results on
NS-2 simulator and by working in the LAB.
Validate the effects of mobility on the
transport layer
Implement a test bed for the measurement
of various parameters that might impact
wireless network performance
Motivation
Increasing mobile workforce
Dramatic improvement in size, weight, and
sophistications of notebook computers
To correctly predict current and future use
of Internet technology
Wireless Networking
Wireless networking is the use of Radio
Frequency (RF) technology to connect
workstations in a Local Area Network (LAN)
or LAN's in a Wide Area Network (WAN).
This technology allows ethernet speed with
a limited or no wired connections. It
transmits and receives information over the
air.
What is Mobile IP?
MIP defines how MN change their Point Of
Attachment to the Internet without changing
their IP address
Each MN is always identified by its home IP
address
HA sends datagrams for MN through a
tunnel to the COA
No protocol enhancement is required in
other hosts or routers
What if Node Moves
Routing decisions are based upon the
network-prefix portion of the IP
Destination Address
10.10.0.1/16
Router
130.10.1.0/24
Problem Due to Mobility
Mobile Node
130.1.x.x
CN
130.1.1.1
A
B
D
Route Next
130.1.x.x A
Internet
C
Route Next
130.1.x.x B
130.1.x.x
?
130.1.1.1
A
B
D
Route Next
130.1.x.x A
Internet
C
Route Next
130.1.x.x B
CN
Mobile IP Process
Agent Discovery to find Agent
Home agent and foreign agents periodically
advertise agent advertisements
They also respond to solicitation from mobile
node
Mobile Node selects an agent and uses CareOf-Address for further communication
Care-Of-Address
 IP Address associated with a mobile node
that is visiting a foreign network
 It generally changes every time MN moves
from one foreign network to another
 A FA COA can be any one of the FA’s IP
Address
 A FA COA can be shared by many MN
simultaneously
Mobile IP Process (Contd.)
Registration
Mobile Node registers its COA with home
agent either directly or through foreign agent.
Home agent then sends a reply back to mobile
node via FA about successful COA registration
Each mobility binding has a negotiated life time
limit
To continue further working in FN, registration
must be done within lifetime
Overview of Mobile IP
Functionality
CN
5.
4.
FA
1. and 2.
MN
HA
3.
 1. MN discovers agent
 2. MN obtains COA (Care Of Address)
 3. MN registers with HA
 4. HA tunnels packets from CN to MN
 5. FA forwards packets from MN to CN
Encapsulation/ Tunneling
Home Agent Intercepts mobile node’s
datagrams and forwards them to COA
Home Agent tells all hosts to send mobile
node’s datagram to it
Home Agent then send it to FA via Tunnel
Decapsulation: Datagram is extracted by
FA and sent to mobile node
Encapsulation/Tunneling
Correspondent Node
IP Cloud
Home Network
New Network/Foreign Network
Mobile Node
Foreign Agent
Home Agent
Tunnel
Mobile Node
Network Simulators
Simulation: a common technique used by
researchers
Test scenarios that yet not occurred in real
world
Predict performance to aid technology
design
Improve validation of the behavior of
existing protocols
NS-2 Simulator
 Object oriented, discrete event simulator
 NS development is supported by DARPA
(Defense Advanced Research Project Agency)
 NS-2 is written in C++ and Otcl (Object tool
command language)
 Network scenarios are written into Tcl language
 Large and complex trace files are generated
 Software package extracts the data from trace file
 Complicated and long process
Trace File Format
r 68.423159 3 1 tcp 1020 ------- 2 0.0.0.1 2.0.0.1 6319 12983
+ 68.423159 1 2 tcp 1020 ------- 2 0.0.0.1 2.0.0.1 6319 12983
- 68.423159 1 2 tcp 1020 ------- 2 0.0.0.1 2.0.0.1 6319 12983
r 68.423209029 _6_ AGT --- 12976 tcp 1000 [a2 3 1 800] ------- [0:0 4194305:2 28 4194305] [6316 0] 1 0
s 68.423209029 _6_ AGT --- 12996 ack 40 [0 0 0 0] ------- [4194305:2 0:0 32 0] [6316 0] 0 0
r 68.423346 4 2 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6313 12989
+ 68.423346 2 1 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6313 12989
- 68.423346 2 1 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6313 12989
r 68.424037 0 1 tcp 1000 ------- 2 0.0.0.0 1.0.1.2 6322 12988
+ 68.424037 1 3 tcp 1000 ------- 2 0.0.0.0 1.0.1.2 6322 12988
- 68.424037 1 3 tcp 1000 ------- 2 0.0.0.0 1.0.1.2 6322 12988
+ 68.424559 4 2 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6314 12990
- 68.424559 4 2 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6314 12990
r 68.425271 2 1 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6311 12984
+ 68.425271 1 0 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6311 12984
- 68.425271 1 0 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6311 12984
+ 68.425611 4 2 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6315 12992
- 68.425611 4 2 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6315 12992
r 68.426802 2 1 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6312 12986
+ 68.426802 1 0 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6312 12986
- 68.426802 1 0 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6312 12986
+ 68.427576 4 2 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6316 12996
- 68.427576 4 2 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6316 12996
r 68.428204 1 0 ack 60 ------- 2 1.0.1.2 0.0.0.0 6307 12977
+ 68.428204 0 1 tcp 1000 ------- 2 0.0.0.0 1.0.1.2 6327 12997
Network Setup (NS-2)
TCP Source
HA
FA1
MN
FA2
Test Bed Setup Flow
while (!all tcl files run )
Mobile IP Scenario File written in TCL
Language
The trace file generated by ns2.
A program written in AWK language
grab only TCP information out of the
ns2 Trace File. Save the information
into another file named tcp_info.tr
Another AWK program examines every
line of the tcp_info.tr file and generates
latency behavior.
A Program in C++ (delay_avg2.cpp),
further normalizes the results
Finally a program (final_avg.sh) takes
the averages.
Another program automatically email the
results to me.
A Program
(create.sh) control
the whole process
of calculating
delay out of a raw
trace file format of
ns2 simulator
Results NS-2
BW
MB
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Link
Delay
ms
2
2
2
5
5
5
10
10
10
Queue
Length
50
100
150
50
100
150
50
100
150
Complete
Avg.
Delay
ms
63.459
63.413
63.109
85.967
66.331
66.368
67.529
67.431
67.513
Avg.
Avg.
Delay
Delay
HA-FA1 FA1-FA2
ms
ms
65.856
61.282
64.507
31.222
64.299
30.39
60.021
56.399
60.021
50.848
59.473
50.316
55.957
36.857
53.642
36.857
55.111
36.921
Tunnel
Overhead
Ms
43.459
53.353
52.849
59.967
53.331
53.368
49.529
49.431
49.513
Result NS-2 (cont.)
BW
MB
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
Link
Delay
ms
2
2
2
5
5
5
10
10
10
Queue
Length
50
100
150
50
100
150
50
100
150
Complete
Avg. Delay
ms
29.29
29.619
29.619
32.909
32.459
32.459
37.458
37.458
36.998
Avg.
Avg.
Delay
Delay
HA-FA1 FA1-FA2
ms
ms
29.322
30.685
29.322
30.685
29.322
30.685
32.036
34.016
32.049
34.016
32.036
34.76
36.998
38.093
36.998
38.093
38.09
36.998
Tunnel
Overhead
ms
9.381
9.718
9.718
10.45
9.559
9.559
21.004
21.004
20.544
Result NS-2 (Contd.)
BW
MB
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
Link
Delay
ms
2
2
2
5
5
5
10
10
10
Queue
Length
50
100
150
50
100
150
50
100
150
Complete
Avg. Delay
Ms
23.076
23.076
23.011
26.027
26.027
26.198
30.984
30.984
30.83
Avg.
Avg.
Delay
Delay
Tunnel
HA-FA1 FA1-FA2 Overhead
Ms
ms
ms
22.78
24.406
2.954
22.77
24.321
2.954
22.67
24.136
2.889
25.737 27.629
5.3
25.739 27.631
5.573
25.322 27.823
5.93
30.597 31.879
13.418
30.688 24.548
14.184
30.597 31.879
11.103
Lab Setup
Server
12.x
R2
13.x
11.x
16.x
FA1
HA
FA2
17.x
15.x
10.x
Client
Lab Results
Queue
Bandwidth Link Delay Length
MB
ms
1
2
50
1
2
100
1
2
150
1
5
50
1
5
100
1
5
150
1
10
50
1
10
100
1
10
150
Complete
Average
Delay
ms
55.023
64.991
65.87
56.112
65.735
54.427
66.172
66.807
53.948
Average Average
Delay
Delay
Tunnel
HA-FA1 FA1-FA2 Overhead
ms
ms
ms
50.715
59.156
24.903
61.795
69.488
34.371
62.552
69.45
35.75
50.551
59.767
25.422
61.93
62.553
35.615
50.717
58.577
24.287
61.541
56.612
35.552
61.913
61.448
36.117
60.723
64.608
23.828
Lab Results (Cont.)
Queue
Bandwidth Link Delay Length
MB
ms
5.5
2
50
5.5
2
100
5.5
2
150
5.5
5
50
5.5
5
100
5.5
5
150
5.5
10
50
5.5
10
100
5.5
10
150
Complete
Average
Delay
ms
42.705
44.99
44.112
47.631
45.309
43.124
42.35
46.522
35.262
Average
Delay
HA-FA1
ms
29.398
31.164
31.125
42.736
31.37
31.124
31.062
31.18
31.017
Average
Delay
Tunnel
FA1-FA2 Overhead
ms
ms
51.518
26.575
44.207
28.37
51.868
27.432
51.92
31.511
38.141
29.159
52.303
27.004
52.196
25.39
51.949
30.402
38.554
19.142
Lab Results (Contd.)
Bandwidth Link Delay
MB
ms
11
2
11
2
11
2
11
5
11
5
11
5
11
10
11
10
11
10
Queue
Length
50
100
150
50
100
150
50
100
150
Complete
Average
Delay
ms
35.86
34.892
35.02
37.24
34.964
35.891
33.103
37.313
34.187
Average
Delay
HA-FA1
ms
39.131
28.824
28.704
39.145
39.257
39.13
39.454
39.068
28.657
Average
Delay
Tunnel
FA1-FA2 Overhead
ms
ms
43.389
21.718
48.749
20.767
37.538
20.895
45.621
23.115
52.762
20.839
54.185
21.765
54.328
18.939
48.525
23.151
52.792
20.062
1MB Bandwidth
100
80
Complete Average
Delay LAB ms
60
Complete Avg.
Delay Sim ms
40
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
5.5 MB Bandwidth
60
50
Complete Average
Delay LAB ms
40
30
Complete Avg.
Delay Sim ms
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11 MB Bandwidth
40
30
Complete Average
Delay LAB ms
20
Complete Avg. Delay
Sim ms
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1 MB Bandwidth
70
60
50
Tunnel Overhead Lab ms
40
Tunnel Overhead Sim
ms
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
5.5 MB Bandwidth
35
30
25
20
Tunnel Overhead LAB
ms
15
Tunnel Overhead Sim
ms
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11 MB Bandwidth
25
20
Tunnel Overhead
LAB ms
15
Tunnel Overhead
Sim ms
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Conclusion
Overall comparison shows that results are
almost same so we can rely on simulator to
predict mobile IP wireless networks
In lowest bandwidths, tunnel overhead is
more than 50% of the overall network
latency
During roaming packets are lost and
retransmitted
Conclusion (cont.)
Latencies values in lab setup are higher
than collected from NS-2 setup
In lab handoff was achieved between
networks by changing SSID of mobile node
In NS-2 handoff is based on received signal
power strength
Network performance improved when high
bandwidths are used
Conclusion
 Strict separation between layer 2 and layer 3
results in increased network latencies
 Mobile node may only communicate with a
directly connected FA
 MN may only begin registration process after
layer 2 handoff to a new FA is completed
 The registration process takes some time to
complete. During this time MN is not able to send
or receive IP packets
Future Work
In this research the correspondent node
was stationary. A study can be done where
CN is also mobile
Study can be done to determine and
validate performance with more number of
mobile nodes
Real time traffic using RTP protocol may be
realized
Thank you very much for attending the
presentation
Questions?