An Analysis of Mobile IPv6 Signaling Load in Next Generation Mobile Networks

  • Sandro Grech
  • Javier Poncela
  • Pedro Serna
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 162)


To date, mobile communication has been dominated by voice services. This is likely to be valid also for the foreseeable future, but at the same time a multitude of data services are also emerging. This trend in mobile communication has fueled the introduction of packet-switched mobile networks, thus introducing the IP suite into the field of mobile communications. This technological shift can be already observed in today’s 2.5 and 3G networks. In the first phases, however, mobile devices have an IP point of attachment which seldom changes throughout the lifetime of a communication session. Mobility management is handled below this point of attachment by means of access-specific mechanisms. A unified mobility management mechanism at the IP layer may enable streamlined network architectures, for example as complementary access technologies emerge in next generation mobile networks. Mobile IPv6 represents a key candidate mechanism to fulfill this vision of unified IP-based mobile communication networks. This paper analyses and quantifies the signaling overheads in a mobile communication network that uses Mobile IPv6 for mobility management.

Key words

IP signaling Mobile IPv6 signaling load analysis localized mobility management 


  1. 1.
    D. B. Johnson, C. E. Perkins, “Mobility support in IPv6”, RFC 3775.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Arkko, V. Devarapalli, F. Dupont, “Using IPsec to Protect Mobile IPv6 Signaling between Mobile Nodes and Home Agents”, RFC 3776.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Kent, R. Atkinson, “IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)” RFC 2406, November 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Wakikawa, “The Design and Implementation of Mobile IPv6 with multiple network interface support”, Master’s Thesis, Keijo University-Japan, June 2000.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C. Bormann, et al., “Robust Header Compression (ROHC)”, RFC 3095.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Soliman, C. Castelluccia, K. El-Malki, L. Bellier, “Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Mobility Management (HMIPv6)”, draft-ietf-mipshop-hmipv6-02.txt, June, 2004.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Campbell, J. Gomez, S. Kim, A. Valko and C.Y. Wan, “Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Cellular IP”, IEEE Personal Communications, pp. 42–49, August 2000.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. Koodli, et al., “Fast Handovers for Mobile IPv6”, draft-ietf-mipshop-fast-mipv6-01.txt, January, 2004.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sandro Grech
    • 1
  • Javier Poncela
    • 2
  • Pedro Serna
    • 1
  1. 1.Nokia GroupNokia NetworksFinland
  2. 2.Department of Ingeniería de ComunicacionesUniversidad de MálagaMálagaSpain

Personalised recommendations