Cost Effective Location Management Scheme Based on Hierarchical Mobile IPv6

  • DaeKyu Choi
  • Hyunseung Choo
  • Jong-Koo Park
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2668)


Recently MIP becomes more important for the macro mobility support in the emergence of the global system such as IMT-2000. However this protocol suffers from many weaknesses on the location management. MIPv4 regional registration is presented for the local registration of MNs. MIPv6 can benefit from the reduced mobility signaling with external networks by employing a local MAP, that is called HMIPv6. The total signaling cost of HMIPv6 is rapidly increased by the number of CNs of an MN when the MN moves around between MAPs. In this paper, we propose a new location management scheme in MIPv6 that reduces the total signaling cost in the location update based on HMIPv6. Here the MN does not send the BU to CNs and HA when it moves around between MAPs. Instead it informs the current location by transferring the modified BU to the previous MAP. According to the results of the performance analysis, we determine the upper bound for the number of forwarding links allowed among adjacent MAPs without the BU information.


Home Agent Foreign Agent Home Network Transmission Cost Location Update 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    C. E. Perkins, “IP mobility support,” Request for Comments(RFC) 2002–2006.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Reinbold and O. Bonaventure, “A Comparison of IP Mobility Protocol,” Tech. Rep. Infonet-TR-2001-07, University of Namur, Infonet Group, June 2001.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. Gustafsson, A. Jonsson, and C. E. Perkins, “Mobile IPv4 regional registration,” Internet Draft, IETF, draft-ietf-mobileip-reg-tunnel-06.txt, work in progress, March 2002.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. Soliman, C. Castelluccia, K. El-Malki, and L. Bellier, “Hierarchical MIPv6 mobility management(HMIPv6),” Internet Draft, IETF, draft-ietf-mobileip-hmipv6-06.txt, work in progress, July 2002.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Xie and I. F. Akyildiz, “An optimal location management scheme for minimizing signaling cost in Mobile IP,” IEEE ICC, vol. 5, pp.3313–3317, 2002.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Xie and I. F. Akyildiz, “A distributed dynamic regional location management scheme for mobile IP,” IEEE INFOCOM, vol.2 pp.1069–1078, 2002.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Y. Wang, W. Chen, and J. Ho, “Performance Analysis of Mobile IP Extended with Routing Agents,” Technical Report 97-CSE-13, SMU, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    C. Perkins, “Mobile IP,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol.40, pp.66–82, 2002.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • DaeKyu Choi
    • 1
  • Hyunseung Choo
    • 1
  • Jong-Koo Park
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Information and Communication EngineeringSungkyunkwan UniversitySuwonKOREA

Personalised recommendations