Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Frontiers of Information Technology
The study of mobile network protocols with virtual machines
Proceedings of the 4th International ICST Conference on Simulation Tools and Techniques
Solving pinball routing, race condition and loop formation issues in nested mobile networks
Computer Networks: The International Journal of Computer and Telecommunications Networking
An optimized QoS scheme for IMS-NEMO in heterogeneous networks
International Journal of Communication Systems
Review: Evaluation of MANEMO route optimization schemes
Journal of Network and Computer Applications
Floating ground architecture: overcoming the one-hop boundary of current mobile internet
Proceedings of the eighth ACM/IEEE symposium on Architectures for networking and communications systems
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Mobile IP is the basic solution to providing host mobility, whereas NEtwork MObility (NEMO) refers to the concept of the collective mobility of a set of nodes. The NEMO basic support protocol has been proposed in IETF as a first solution to the problem of network mobility. The main limitation of this basic solution is that it forces triangular routing, i.e., packets are always forwarded through the Home Agent (HA), following a suboptimal path. This is because each sub-NEMO obtains a Care of Address (CoA) that belongs to the home prefix of its parent mobile router. Such a CoA is not topologically meaningful in the current location, since the parent mobile router could also be away from home, and hence, packets addressed to the CoA are forwarded through the HA of the parent NEMO. To solve this problem, various extended proposals, with differing approaches and goals, exist for Route Optimization (RO) in NEMO applications. Their influences on the RO performance have been evaluated by classifying the detailed operations performed within the nested NEMO network, and then each category is analyzed in detail. The modeling of the detailed RO operation is intended to quantify the tradeoffs between the different approaches in order to provide a basis for the selection decision. In particular, the proposed grouping of the different proposals, based on their address configuration strategy, clarifies their similarities and differences, and provides some useful insights into the various methods that have been developed. In conclusion, it is suggested that, when choosing a solution for deploying NEMO, the designer has to balance his choices between the different pros and cons, and the different cases of application that are derived in this paper.