Comparison of IPv6 mobility management schemes: a focus on network mobility

Abstract- In this paper, we compare IPv6 mobility management schemes that support network mobility. A few schemes have been proposed to support network mobility considering the mobility of an entire network as a single unit. The mobile network includes one or more mobile routers (MRs), which connect it to the global Internet. NEMO basic support protocol (NBSP) is based on mobile IPv6 with prefix registration. Hierarchical mobile IPv6 (HMIPv6) introduces the mobility anchor point (MAP) that handles intra-domain handoffs locally. HMIPv6 can be extended to support network mobility by collocating mobility anchor point (MAP) and MR. Location independent network for IPv6 (LIN6) solves the triangular routing problem by introducing the concept of “mapping agent (MA), ” which manages the current location of the mobile network. NBSP and HMIPv6 basically follow mobile IPv6 protocol and therefore the data packets from correspondent hosts are forwarded to the mobile node (MN) via its home agent. LIN6 forwards the data packets directly to the MN without visiting the home agent at the cost of signaling for location resolution. We carry out analysis to compare the above three schemes in terms of packet transfer delay, signaling cost, and response time 1