Furthermore, the paper proposes and gives an in-depth analysis of PMIPv6 optimized with a handover coordinator (HC), which is a network-based entity, to further improve handover performance in terms of handover delay and packet loss while maintaining minimal signaling overhead in the air interface among converged heterogeneous wireless networks.
Previously proposed handover solutions, either host-based or network-based, that enhance mobility management protocols introduce new functional elements either at the source access or target access or both source and target accesses to optimize handover performance in terms of handover delay and packet losses.
Having discussed an IEEE 802.21-assisted PMIPv6 scheme, which reduces handover delay and packet loss while trading-off signaling overhead during handover, we introduce a novel mechanism that enhances handover performance in terms of further reducing handover delay and packet loss while maintaining minimal signaling overhead.
Besides, the handover compensation in terms of bandwidth may be combined to the handover compensation in terms of delay in order to minimize the handover impact on the QoS sensitive flows and increase the probability of finding a suitable new route that fulfills the new QoS constraints.
Second, we provide an optimized mobility management that evaluates the handover disturbance in terms of delay.
Theoretical analysis and simulation results illustrate that our proposed mechanism performs better than the original SIP and MIH combined handover mechanism in terms of service interruption time and packet loss.
We will use DCE methodology in this study to directly compare the relative strength of preferences for different aspects of bedside handover in quantitative terms, which cannot be undertaken with qualitative analysis.
Moreover, the handover disturbance compensation in terms of delay or jitter may also be achieved through augmenting the value of the minimum required rate since providing more bandwidth to a flow results in accelerating that flow.
The proposed scheme was simulated using Omnet++ tool, and the performance is analyzed in terms of handover latency, handover failure probability and communication interruption probability.
Figure 10 below compares the corresponding handover performance of PMIPv6 and PMIPv6-HC in terms of handover delay and packet loss as.
