A Technique to Improve Horizontal & Vertical Handoff

Avijit Bose 1 Dr. Sulata Mitra2

Asst. Professor, Head, Department of MCA, MCKVIE, Howrah
Asst. Professor, Department of CST, BESU, Howrah

Abstract: - The mobile network is will be able to solve the requisite

extensively growing. There is a huge gap problem.
between the application demand and the
network performance. Horizontal and
Vertical Hand off problem has not yet MR gets
been touched. The MR (Mobile Router) filled up
will be consisting of more than one so denies
sources and thereby will be filled up. So new hosts
here with a scheduling algorithm and
Fig-1 how MR Table faces problem
decision parameters horizontal and
vertical handoff problem can be solved
The rest of the paper is organized as
up to a certain extent.
follows; Section II deals with related
works. Section-III analyzes various
Keywords: - Scheduling, Horizontal
network interfaces and QoS requirement
Handoff, Vertical Handoff,
and the problem both MSP and user or
I. Introduction
mobile node faces. Section-IV proposes
In most of the situation today application
an intelligent technique to forward data
demand is high and the network
packet. Section-V is the simulation and
performance is low which leads to no
Section-VI focuses on conclusion.
QoS. In some situation application
demand is low and the network
II. Previous Work
performance is high which leads to
wastage of resource. When each MR
In the previous papers mobile router
(mobile router) generally gets
(MR) is the major overhead that has
overloaded with incoming requests from
been considered. Load balancing and re-
hosts it results into a real problem in
connection in a primary connection loss
horizontal o vertical handoff. When a
is a major concern in[1]. Mobile routers
customer moves continuously in the
with multiple network interfaces such as
same area or in different area , the
IEEE802.11x, WiMaX, and GPRS etc
mobile router in 3G spectrum area can
allocation of data flow should take place
have different interfaces like GPRS,
based on the application demand and the
IEEE802.11X , WiMaX etc. but due to
network performance [2].With UMTS,
lack of proper scheduling algorithm
CDMA2000, GPRS mobile node can be
which is used to improve QoS mobile
connected with the Internet [5] which is
router will often face the problem of
practically not possible unless a proper
scarce bandwidth , frequent link failure
scheduling algorithm is there.
etc. so here different parameters for
Multihomed mobile network depends on
handoff as well as scheduling algorithm
multiple network interfaces in mobile
router but it is not application
specific[6].Moreover data flow based on
packet type does not solve the problem
of horizontal or vertical
handoff[7].Mobile node cannot choose
any router based on router
advertisement. Due to the above flaw
one thing is clear that in order to avoid
the problem of congestion in mobile
router table a proper scheduling
algorithm should be there which will be
able to give an optimized solution.
III Analysis
A mobile router has three network
interfaces GPRS, IEEE802.11x, WiMaX
etc. Maximum data rate for WiMaX is
70-75 Mbps, data rate for IEEE is 54
Mbps [16] and GPRS is 172.2 Kbps
[17]. However the actual throughput is
given by
Throughput= ½ * [Actual data rate]
So by the above calculation we get the
throughput for WiMaX is 40 Mbps,
IEEE is 27Mbps and GPRS is 86.1
Kbps. The above interfaces plays a key
role as depending upon the type of
packet, the application demand may be
determined and applications may or may
not be delay sensitive. Based on the
delay sensitiveness the packets will be
assigned the interfaces as WiMaX, IEEE
or GPRS. But unfortunately the problem
of horizontal or vertical handoff area is
not touched by the high speedy
interfaces. So here LRU scheduling
along with proper parametric function
will be able to solve the problem of
horizontal or vertical handoff.
a. QoS at the Network Layer
Though there are different factors which
determine QoS mainly scheduling,
traffic shaping, admission control and
resource reservation, we deal with only
scheduling in this paper. Differentiated
service plays a key role in improving the
QoS of a system. Basically three types of
scheduling have been touched by all the
network majors.
(i) FIFO: - In FIFO queuing packets will
wait in a buffer until the node (router) is
ready to process them. If the arrival rate
is higher then the queue will be filled up
and new packets will be discarded.
(ii) Priority Queuing: - In priority
queuing the packets with highest priority
queue are processes first. System does
not stop serving a queue until it is
empty. However the flaw with this
scheme is that the packets in the lower
priority queue will never be processed.
(iii) Weighted Fair Queuing:- In the
weighted fair queuing packets are
assigned to different classes based on
priority say 3,2,1 then 3 packets from
weighted class 3 ,2 packets from
weighted class 2 and 1 packet from class
1 will be processed solving the problem
of priority queue up to a certain extent.
(iv) Differentiated Service: It plays a key
role in improving the QoS. The router
routes the packet based on the class of
service defined in the packet. In IPv6
there is a class field which determines
the packet’s class.
b. Application of LRU in this scheme
According to this concept the mobile
host which is remaining idle for
maximum period of time will be going
away from RMR (Regional Mobile
Router) database and in that place new
mobile host (MH) will enter and will be
allocated the interface based on class and
delay requirement. The whole scheme
will be pictorially represented as:-
 Now with an incoming packet the
identity is matched and say after 10
cycle it has been found that 427 has
asked about a packet two times, 365
has asked for it three times, 315 has
not asked for any packet, 668 has
asked for 5 times and 778 has asked
for it 6 times so we get the total
matrix after 10 cycle as:-
2 3 0 5 6 so we get that maximum
time 315 is remaining idle so it is
Fig-3 Implementation of Scheme (LRU) thrown out of the router table and in
that place new user will be entering
into the router table. The whole
IV Proposal figure can be diagrammatically
Series of mobile hosts will both with represented as follows:-
number or IP will be entering the mobile
router table and will be asking for a
specific application. Now there are
basically eight applications:
1. Telephony
2. Audio(download/Upload)
3. Video(download/Upload)
4. Video Conference
5. Remote Log in
6. Web Access
7. File Transfer
8. E-mail Fig-4 Implementation of Scheme (LRU)
We apply once again from [7] the delay As seen from the above figure router
parameter required for all the above table will be deal located and router
mentioned applications. Based on that table will be free so new incoming hosts
mobile hosts will ask for service and can come in and the horizontal/vertical
based on the type of packet will be put handoff can be solved.
on a particular interface and the mobile
hosts which will remain idle for a long b. Flow Chart
period will go out of the router
table/interface and will return back after
sometime. So an important concept of
thrashing [17] is used in this scheme.

a. An Example scenario
Suppose the router table is consisting
of the following numbers
A= {427,365,315,668,778…}
 User B is put into GPRS or
IEEE so that telephony can be
maintained and if IEEE or
GPRS is filled up put in waiting
Enter new user A queue

DiffServ Checks Follow the weighted fair

for the Class queuing method Vehicular is
with IPV6 processed first followed by 3
others WiMaX, 3 from IEEE, 2
from GPRS and 1 from waiting
queue in TDM.

Class –A put WiMaX Job of user A

Class –B put IEEE over
Class –C put GPRS

Check for signal quality User B is put

Mean= (Su + Sd)/2 into WiMax
Where Su = up signal
And Sd = down signal

Repeat

Check for c. Some Discussion

distance d of
MS from MR The above problem can be portrayed
with a real life scenario. Let’s look at
the following diagram

AIRTEL AIRTEL
d<= 35km &&mean
> 500MHZ && error W.B ORISSA
rate < 10-4 TRANS1 TRANS2

Cell diminishes USER A ASKING FOR WIMAX

logical & physical
channel established, FROM BOTH TRANS
check for LRU
Fig- 5. Real life scenario
Suppose a user A who is a privileged
user now moves from Bengal to Orissa.
User A enters WiMaX He is asking for WiMaX in both the
user B preexisted now goes
(based on LRU)
cases. TRANS1 WiMaX channel gets
If no one idle randomly decremented because one user has gone
also B goes .
away. TRANS2 faces problem. If it finds
its WiMaX channel all filled up with no
idle time for its existing hosts then it
randomly selects one host from its
existing WiMaX queue and puts it back
in the waiting queue. Once the vehicular
host moves away then host that has gone
to the waiting queue will be reverted
back to the original queue.
d. Problem & Solution
In the above mentioned scheme
searching for a queue of length 50 user
A has to wait maximum for 120s i.e. 2
minutes but user B which was pre-
existing in WiMaX channel if it does not
find IEEE or GPRS free then it has to
wait for a long time:-
Here vehicular host is assigned a priority
value of 1 and ordinary host priority
value of 0. Now suppose vehicular host
is travelling at 60km/h then one
TRANS2 with a range coverage of 35km
it gets connection for 35/60 = 0.58 hr i.e.
almost 40 minutes and for these 40
minutes B has to remain idle. So what
happens next is though B is remaining
idle in the waiting queue searching for
IEEE or GPRS and even WiMaX
continues and even if one channel is deal
located B is now put onto that. So that
even if it does not get fast internet but at
least it gets the connection bit slow. Here
weighted fair queuing can be applied
where Vehicular host with highest
priority will be processed along with 3
other WiMaX Host, 3 from IEEE and 2
from GPRS will be processed and 1
from waiting queue will be processed.
However TDM (Time division
multiplexing) has to be applied else
other hosts will not get chance.
Other Parameter: Other parameters that
have been taken into consideration is
a) distance of the host from
Transceiver (<35km)
b) error rate < 10-4
c) mean signal 500 MHZ
Queue length:- Queue length for
implementing LRU has been done with
5,10,20,50 and waiting time for the LRU
search comes out to be
Queue length time
5 25s
6 70s
10 142s
20 220s
50 450s
However this can be done in
multithreading approach and waiting
time for vehicular network can be
reduced.
Value of ø = the question arises here
that in a queue how long if a host
remains idle should be removed? As
seen from the above scenario this is
something known as the threshold value
and this threshold value is directly
proportional to the queue length i.e. for
length of 50 it should be around 420s.
IV. Simulation
The simulation basically will consist of
two phases. One of the major portions is
the simulation of LRU scheme and the
other part is the total delay and the total
waiting time that needs to be calculated.
The total diagrammatic representation
will perhaps show the exact scenario.
Fig-5 Practical simulation scenario
The total waiting time for Host A = Tc +
Td
Where Tc is the time taken to implement
LRU scheme and Td is the delay for Host
B or the handover delay. Similarly we
have to calculate the waiting time for
Host B which is 90ms. Now the total
statistical analysis needs to be taken. Tc
73s and Td is 60ms
VI. Conclusion & Future Work
However LRU scheme faces some
problem. What if more than one mobile
host has equal idle time? At that time
some priority needs to be set and that
priority will depend upon the region
based statistical analysis and the type of
customer that are existing i.e. whether
privileged customer or ordinary
customer. Future implementation with
OPNET and NS-2 is what our plan of
action.
Fig-5 OPNET Scenario for Mobile Node
Fig-6 LRU scheme implementation
For 6 cycles taking 73s to complete.
References
[1] B. McCarthy, et al, the Integration of Ad-hoc
(MANET) and Mobile Networking (NEMO): Principles
to Support Rescue Team Communication, ICMU 2006,
UK pp284-289
[2] Manabu Tsukada, et al,” Simultaneous Usage of
NEMO and MANET for Vehicular Communication”,
Tridentcom, March 2008, Austria
[3] Andrew T. Campbell “Quos –aware Middleware for
Mobile Multimedia Communications”, kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1998, pp 67-68
[4] Nicolas Montavont, et al, “Multihoming in Nested
Mobile Networking”, Proceedings of the 2004
International Symposium on Applications and the
Internet Workshops (SAINTW’04), IEEE CS
[5] Manabu Tsukada, et al,” Dynamic Management of
Multiple Mobile Routers”, Proceedings of the IEEE
Malaysia International Conference on Networks,
November 2005.
[6] C.Ng et al “Analysis of Multihoming in Network
Mobility Support”, July 18, 2005.IETF work in progress.
[7] P. Calduwel Newton et al “An Intelligent Technique to
Improve QoS in Multihomed Mobile Networks” IJAST
Volume1, June 2009 pg 11-17
[8] Rafidah Md Noor et al, “A Dynamic QoS Provisioning
Model for Network Mobility”U.K.
[9] N. Montavont et al Problem statement of Multihomed
Mobile Node work in progress, IETF
[10] http://www.wide.ad.jsp
[11] http://www.nautilus6.org
[12]Calduwel Newton P, “ A Contemporary Technique to
Guarantee QoS for Heterogeneous data traffic”
Proceedings of International Conference on Information
Security, IEEE CS 2008 pp210-213
[13] Calduwel Newton P ” Reliability Analysis for
General Packet Radio Service with QoS” International
Journal of Wireless Communication May 2009 pp79-83
[14] Calduwel Newton P “A Quality of Service Prediction
Technique to overcome Reliability Problem in General
Packet Radio Service”, Proceedings of National
Conference on Advanced Computing pp63-67,
March2009
[15] R.Draves et al Default Router Preference, More
specific Routes and Load Sharing. IETF June 2002
[16] Tom Carpenter, Wireless# Certification Official
Guide, TMH 2006 pp70, 190
[17] Asoke. K. Talukdar, et al Mobile Computing TMH,
2005, pp221
[18] A.S. Tanenbaum “Computer Network” fourth
edition 2005, pp 397
[19] Peterson et al, Operating System Addison Weasley
1996 pp 320.