An Enhanced Method to Improve Proxy Mobile IPv6 Efficiency

through Software-Defined Network

INDUMATHI LAKSHMI KRISHNAN

Department of Computer Science and Engineering,

Matrusri Engineering College,

Saidabad, Hyderabad,

INDIA

Abstract: - This suggested method, called the Software Defined Open-Flow Mechanism of PMIPv6 (SD-

PMIPv6), modifies the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol to match the Augmented Open-Flow architecture. The

flexibility aspects of the PMIPv6 components, including the Mobile Access Gateway (MAG) and Local

Mobility Anchor (LMA), are broken apart and rebuilt to make use of the Open-Flow strategy. The LMA

components, which serve as the network's Open-Flow controller for the switches, maintain the mobile node's

(MN) location. The contact access entities that are capable of managing MAG signals interact with the MN.

The recommended approach has two primary objectives: (a) separating the control and data planes; and (b)

shortening the handover delay.

Key-Words: - Software Defined Network, Control Plane, Data Plane, Local Mobility Anchor (LMA), Mobile

Access Gateway (MAG), Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6), Open-Flow (OF), Software Defined

PMIPv6 (SD-PMIPv6).

Received: August 18, 2023. Revised: July 6, 2024. Accepted: August 11, 2024. Published: September 5, 2024.

1 Introduction

Based on their geographic location, Internet

Protocol (IP) addresses are used to identify nodes on

the Internet, [1]. Networks need to be re-designated

since IPv4's limited address space makes it difficult

to deal with impending demands. mostly as a result

of the daily increase in the total amount of users.

The switch from Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4

32 bits) to Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6 128

bits) was also required due to the end of the lifespan

of IPv4 addresses, [2]. The Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6)

technology was developed to facilitate portability

based on IPv6, [3]. MIPv6 is executed in the Linux

environment using the Unified Mobile Internet

Protocol (UMIP), [4].

The ground-breaking technology known as

Software-Defined Networking (SDN) provides

active, controlled, valuable, and adaptable options.

This makes the environment ideal for the high-

bandwidth and dynamic nature of today's activities.

Utilizing the Open-Flow protocol is necessary while

developing SDN solutions, [5]. The Open-Flow

Technique (OFT) is a novel technology that

improves network finding routes using the Open-

Flow technique in PMIPv6. The division of network

device responsibilities—access points utilize control

and data operations about forward packets—is the

fundamental component of the Open-Flow concept.

Although software-defined networking has been

effectively applied in data hubs and campus links,

[6], solution for the telecom industry still requires

minimal influence on static landline and mobile

telecom areas. Future PMIPv6 positioning strategy

by Devarapalli, [7], involves dividing plane control

and data endpoints meant for the MAG. The device

that encapsulates and decapsulates internet traffic to

and from the mobile node, as well as the one that

transduces Proxy Mobile IPv6 signaling packets, are

both assigned distinct IP addresses. The IP address,

commonly referred to as the Proxy Care-of Address

(PCoA), is contained in the proxy binding cache

element in the LMA, according to [8] and [9].

Consequently, the LMA uses the same IP

address as the MAG for data transfer as well as

signaling messages. A Unification Plane (UP)

through a system organization based on PMIPv6

was described in [10]. According to [11], there are

several techniques in the field for mobility

management in IP networks that give mobile nodes

spanning heterogeneous wireless networks session

continuation. A method for OpenFlow-based

PMIPv6 in SDN in flexible networks was proposed

by [12]. The goal of Proxy Mobile IPv6 is to replace

locally directed network mobility with the IP tunnel

idea. However, this strategy is limited because the

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on COMMUNICATIONS

DOI: 10.37394/23204.2024.23.4

Indumathi Lakshmi Krishnan

E-ISSN: 2224-2864

Volume 23, 2024

data and control planes use the same channel and

tunneling above it.

2 Layout of SD-PMIPv6

PMIPv6 signaling can be eliminated owing to the

co-location of the LMA and MAG activities in the

Augmented Controller, as shown in Figure 1.

Fig. 1: Control plane Configuration in SD-PMIPv6

As shown in Figure 1, the proposed SD-PMIPv6

design isolates the control plane from the data and

control planes and co-locates the LMA and MAG

functions in the Augmented-Controller. The flow

tables and switches are configured, and packet

forwarding based on policies is supported, thanks to

the enhanced information of Open-Flow. By

examining the link layer status data, the PMIPv6

with the MAG detects the MN connection and

disconnection. The device's MAG function receives

the link layer status with SD-PMIPv6, and it can

identify the establishment of the link layer

relationship just like it can with PMIPv6.

2.1 Data Plane Topology in SD-PMIPv6

According to Open-Flow PMIPv6, the data route in

SD-PMIPv6 has the LMA and MAG actuators

situated in the Augmented Controller as depicted in

Figure 2. Once the migration of the MN is detected,

the LMA and MAG controllers update the flow

tables of the transitional devices on the network

between the entry point and the portal to reflect the

change. Technology allows bandwidth balancing

depending on network status without requiring an IP

tunnel.

Fig. 2: Data-plane Packet Forwarding in SD-

PMIPv6

Here is one mobility control entity, two gateway

routers, and three access routers in this network

architecture. The intermediate switches link the

interface routers to the gateway routers. The mobile

node's mobility is managed by the mobility

administration entity, which is also in charge of

updating the flow tables in the intermediate switches

as necessary. The mobility management entity

controls the mobile node's link as it roams between

several accessibility networks.

The successful implementation of the suggested

SD-PMIPv6 procedures were evaluated using a

variety of parameters, including handover delay,

packet loss rate, and end-to-end suspension, all of

which are quantified and correlated with the

parameters for PMIPv6 and OPMIPv6. The network

switching of the MN is directed by the handover

latency. The dropped packet quantity is represented

by the packet loss measurement throughout the

handover. The total handover latency of the packet

is calculated by the time from MN host to

destination.

Fig. 3: SD-PMIPv6 Topology

Evaluating the handover time and packet loss

rate of PMIPv6, OPMIPv6, and SD-PMIPv6 is the

main Comparing the handover time and packet loss

rate of PMIPv6, OPMIPv6, and SD-PMIPv6 is the

main approach used to assess the recommended

strategy. The amount of time that passes among an

MN starts to migrate to a new get entry to the

network and whilst it connects to the brand-new

network and resumes data transmission is called the

handover put-off. The range of packets misplaced all

through the handover manner divided by using the

entire amount of packets transferred is known as the

packet loss charge.

To assess the effectiveness of the 3 strategies, a

simulation is administered with the usage of distinct

values for s and HDLMA-CN. The effect of the session

delivery fee and the hop distance among the LMA

and CN at the handover put-off are ascertained by

comparing and analyzing the consequences of the

simulation. The simulation's findings suggest that

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on COMMUNICATIONS

DOI: 10.37394/23204.2024.23.4

Indumathi Lakshmi Krishnan

E-ISSN: 2224-2864

Volume 23, 2024

SD-PMIPv6 operates better inside the regions of

packet loss rate and handover delay than each

PMIPv6 and OPMIPv6, indicating the efficacy of

the suggested strategy in improving cell network

performance.The above said concept is represented

in Figure 3.

3 Handover Analysis of Proposed

Work

This segment clarifies different PMIPv6 handover

mechanisms and their concerned recreation

analysis.

3.1 Investigation of Different PMIPv6 Hand-

over mchanisms

The taking after segment clarifies the handover

analysis of the proposed work with other

existing work

3.1.1 Investigation of PMIPv6 Handover

Mechanism

The Router soliciting delay (tRS) and the Router

Advertisement Delay (tRA) are characterized,

consequently. The Data Transfer Time (TTD)

between MN and CN during the handover procedure

is represented by this data.

HPMIPV6 = Layer 2 connection + (tPBA + tPBU) +

tRS+tRA+(tAAAreq+tAAAres)+TTDData (1)

In this instance, the Layer 2 link shows how

much time has passed between AP-MAG and MN-

AP. The suspension of the control signal is indicated

by (tPBU + tPBA), and the confirmation signal

interruption is denoted by equation (tAAAreq + tAAAres)

3.1.2 Analysis of OPMIPv6 Handover

Mechanism

Both Open-Flow and PMIPv6 signals are used by

O-PMIPv6. It is anticipated that even before AS

receives the PBA message, the ISs will be finished

via Open-Flow signaling. It happens because the AS

is situated at the farthest distance and Open-Flow

signaling is effectively carried out across a secure

channel. OPMIPv6's handover latency is therefore

equivalent to PMIPv6's. However, HOPMIPv6 is

different from HPMIPv6 in that data packets are

transmitted through OPMIPv6 without the need for

an IP tunnel. Thus, it can be expressed as follows.

PMIPv6-like handover procedures are used. The

difference is in the signaling and control messages.

The suspension of control signals is signified as

(tPBU + tPBA) and authentication suspension is

signified as tAAAreq + tAAAres. The delay of the control

messages is considered in the following equation.

HOPMIPV6 = Layer 2 connection + (tPBA + tPBU) + tRA+

(tAAAreq + tAAAres) + TTD Data (2)

3.1.3 Analysis of SD-PMIPv6 Handover

Mechanism

Compared to PMIPv6 and OPMIPv6, the handover

procedure in SD-PMIPv6 is distinct. The LMA and

MAG controller are built inside the router, and the

MN is linked to the Open-Flow switch. The

following equation is the design for the control

message latency.

HSD-PMIPV6 = Layer 2 connection + tPBU + (tAAAreq +

tAAAres) + TTD Data (3)

SD-PMIPv6 has a lower handover latency than

PMIPv6 and OPMIPv6, as authentication and

control messages are transmitted immediately to the

gateway, with the Open-Flow switch updating the

flow table solely in response to the route's input

3.2 Simulation Analysis of Various PMIPv6

Handover Mechanisms

Next, an analysis is conducted to compare the

performance of OPMIPv6, PMIPv6, and AU-

PMIPv6. The efficiency metric used in this

assessment is handover latency.

Scalability: The system's capacity to manage a high

volume of MNs and handovers, [13].

In comparison to PMIPv6 and OPMIPv6, the

simulation's outcomes should show that SD-PMIPv6

can more effectively minimize handover latency and

offer superior scalability.

It is crucial to remember that the simulation

findings might not accurately reflect real-world

situations and could have been inflated by several

factors, including hardware constraints, network

issues, and execution specifics, [14]. To properly

assess SD-PMIPv6's efficacy, more evaluation and

verification in a real-world setting are required.

According to the simulation structure, the initial

standards of the system values are set for the SD-

PMIPv6 cost analysis. The simulation lasts for thirty

seconds. The mobility session is moving at 100

Mbps. Furthermore, the several interfaces in the

simulation reflect in different amounts of seconds.

According to the available research, [8], the

simulation's, [15], settings are configured.

3.2.1 Analysis of PMIPv6 Simulation

The WLAN is the current interface that the MN uses

to start the simulation. In the simulation, Wi-Max

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on COMMUNICATIONS

DOI: 10.37394/23204.2024.23.4

Indumathi Lakshmi Krishnan

E-ISSN: 2224-2864

Volume 23, 2024

connects at second 11, but the MN sends a signal to

Wi-Max in second 13.9. The simulation indicates

that the MN transmits its signal to 3G at 28 seconds,

whereas 3G begins to function at 24.5 seconds.

Figure 4 shows the PMIPv6 handover graph.

Fig. 4: Simulation Handover Result of PMIPv6

3.2.2 Analysis of OPMIPv6 Simulation

In the simulation, the MN starts off using its original

interface, which is WLAN, and at the eleventh

second, it switches to Wi-Max. However, the MN

connects to Wi-MAX at the thirteenth and twenty-

sixth seconds, respectively, before transitioning to

3G (Figure 5). The findings of the O-PMIPv6

handover simulation are displayed graphically.

Fig. 5: Simulation Handover Result of OPMIPv6

3.2.3 Analysis of SD-PMIPv6 Simulation

In this case, the MN first utilizes WLAN and then,

at the eleventh second, switches to Wi-Max. But in

the thirteenth second, the MN enters Wi-MAX, and

at the twenty-sixth second, it transitions to 3G. The

OPMIPv6 changeover simulation result is displayed

in Figure 6, although at the 25th second, the MN

switches to 3G. The outcomes of the SD-PMIPv6

handover scenario are also shown in Figure 6.

Fig. 6: Simulation Handover Result of SD-PMIPv6

3.2.4 Comparison of Handover Latency of SD-

PMIPv6

Handover latencies can be compared between AU-

PMIPv6, PMIPv6, O-PMIPv6, and SD-PMIPv6 to

observe how they differ. The outcomes are

displayed in Figure 7. Compared to other methods,

PMIPv6 has a longer hand-over latency since it

doesn't fully utilize Open-Flow signalling.

Compared to SD-PMIPv6, O-PMIPv6 appears to

have a longer hand-over latency because it has

separate Open-Flow devices for LMA and MAG.

This analysis clearly shows that the SD-PMIPv6 has

a lower hand-over delay than the methods currently

in use.

Fig. 7: Comparative Analysis of Simulation

Handover Result of Various PMIPv6 protocols

4 Conclusion

SD-PMIPv6 is a version of PMIPv6 for the open-

flow architecture. To enable flexibility in the OF

design, portable activities are placed in the control

units and switches and detached from the PMIPv6

parts. Furthermore, because of its augmented

controller, its proposed technique provides an even

more flexible formation architecture that may

increase management volume and endure letdown.

The results of the effectiveness assessment indicate

that SD-PMIPv6 is superior to PMIPv6.

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on COMMUNICATIONS

DOI: 10.37394/23204.2024.23.4

Indumathi Lakshmi Krishnan

E-ISSN: 2224-2864

Volume 23, 2024

References:

[1] C.Perkins, IP mobility Support for IPv4, IETF

RFC 3344, August 2002

[2] Zimu, Li, Peng Wei, and Liu Yujun. "An

innovative Ipv4-ipv6 transition way for

internet service provider." In 2012 IEEE

symposium on robotics and applications

(ISRA), pp. 672-675. IEEE, 2012.

[3] D. Johnson, C. Perkins, J. Arkko, “Mobility

Support in IPv6”, IETF RFC 3775, June 2004.

[4] Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V.,

Chowdhury, K., and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile

IPv6", IETF RFC 5213, August 2008

[5] Dawadi, Babu Ram, Danda Bahadur Rawat,

and Shashidhar R. Joshi. "Software defined

ipv6 network: A new paradigm for future

networking." Journal of the Institute of

Engineering 15.2 (2019): 1-13.

[6] Ja’afreh, Mohammed Al, Hikmat Adhami,

Alaa Eddin Alchalabi, Mohamed Hoda, and

Abdulmotaleb El Saddik. "Toward integrating

software defined networks with the Internet of

Things: a review." Cluster Computing (2022):

1-18.

[7] Kim, Seong-Mun, Hyon-Young Choi, Pill-

Won Park, Sung-Gi Min, and Youn-Hee Han.

"OpenFlow-based Proxy mobile IPv6 over

software defined network (SDN)." In 2014

IEEE 11th Consumer Communications and

Networking Conference (CCNC), pp. 119-

125. IEEE, 2014.

[8] Gundavelli, S. (2020). Proxy Mobile IPv6. In:

Shen, X.(Lin, X., Zhang, K. (eds)

Encyclopedia of Wireless Networks. Springer,

Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-

78262-1_14.

[9] Dutta, N., & Sarma, H. K. D. Efficient

mobility management in IP networks through

three layered MIPv6. Journal of Ambient

Intelligence and Humanized Computing,

(2022). 1-19.

[10] Wakikawa,R,Pazhyannur,R,Gundavelli,S&Pe

rkins, C 2014,‘Separation of Control and User

Plane for Proxy Mobile IPv6 (No. RFC7389)’.

[11] Rabet, I., Selvaraju, S. P., Fotouhi, H., Alves,

M., Vahabi, M., Balador, A., & Björkman, M.

(2022). Sdmob: Sdn-based mobility

management for iot networks. Journal of

Sensor and Actuator Networks, 11(1), 8.

[12] Krishnan, I. L., & Davidson, S. P. (2016). A

novel approach to reduce handover latency in

proxy mobile IPv6 based on multi-

homing. Circuits and Systems, 7(09)

[13] Hossain, M. S., & Atiquzzaman, M. (2013).

Cost analysis of mobility

protocols. Telecommunication Systems, 52(4),

2271-2285.

[14] Wong, V. S., & Leung, V. C. (2000). Location

management for next-generation personal

communications networks. IEEE

network, 14(5), 18-24.

[15] Specification-Version, Open-FlowSwitch.

"1.4. 0." (2013), [Online].

https://opennetworking.org/wp-

content/uploads/2014/10/openflow-spec-

v1.4.0.pdf (Accessed Date: April 2, 2024).

Contribution of Individual Authors to the

Creation of a Scientific Article (Ghostwriting

Policy)

The author contributed in the present research, at all

stages from the formulation of the problem to the

final findings and solution.

Sources of Funding for Research Presented in a

Scientific Article or Scientific Article Itself

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0

(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)

This article is published under the terms of the

Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en

_US

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on COMMUNICATIONS

DOI: 10.37394/23204.2024.23.4

Indumathi Lakshmi Krishnan

E-ISSN: 2224-2864

Volume 23, 2024