iot standards laboratory · distributed mapping management 567 fig. 1 mapping management operations...

1 23

Wireless Personal CommunicationsAn International Journal ISSN 0929-6212Volume 72Number 1 Wireless Pers Commun (2013)72:565-579DOI 10.1007/s11277-013-1030-2

Distributed Mapping Management ofIdentifiers and Locators in LISP-basedMobile Networks

Moneeb Gohar & Seok Joo Koh

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and all

rights are held exclusively by Springer Science

+Business Media New York. This e-offprint is

for personal use only and shall not be self-

archived in electronic repositories. If you wish

to self-archive your article, please use the

accepted manuscript version for posting on

your own website. You may further deposit

the accepted manuscript version in any

repository, provided it is only made publicly

available 12 months after official publication

or later and provided acknowledgement is

given to the original source of publication

and a link is inserted to the published article

on Springer's website. The link must be

accompanied by the following text: "The final

publication is available at link.springer.com”.

Wireless Pers Commun (2013) 72:565–579DOI 10.1007/s11277-013-1030-2

Distributed Mapping Management of Identifiersand Locators in LISP-based Mobile Networks

Moneeb Gohar · Seok Joo Koh

Published online: 5 February 2013© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Abstract The Locator Identifier Separation Protocol (LISP) has been proposed as anidentifier-locator separation scheme for scalable Internet routing. However, LISP was orig-inally designed in the fixed network environment rather than in the mobile network envi-ronment. In particular, the existing LISP mobility schemes are based on a centralized mapserver that is used as an anchor point for mobile nodes, and thus intrinsically subject tosome limitations in mobile environment. In this paper, we propose a distributed mappingmanagement of Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs) and Locators (LOCs) in mobile LISP networks.We use Routing LOC (RLOC) and Local LOC (LLOC) as locators for mobile hosts. RLOCrepresents the IP address of the domain gateway, and LLOC is the IP address of the accessrouter that a host is currently attached to. For EID-LOC mapping management, each networkdomain has a Distributed Map Server (DMS) over its gateway. Each DMS keeps track ofthe EID-LOC mapping information for mobile hosts in the distributed way. The proposedscheme is also a network-based approach, in which each access router, instead of a host,performs the mapping management operations. From the performance analysis, we can seethat the proposed distributed scheme can give better performance than the existing schemesin terms of the signaling delays required for EID-LOC mapping update and query operations.

Keywords LISP · Mobile networks · EID-LOC mapping · Distributed management ·Analysis

1 Introduction

With the advent of smart phones and various wireless access networks, the number of mobileInternet users has been rapidly increasing. It is reported that the number of mobile Internet

M. Gohar · S. J. Koh (B)School of Computer Science and Engineering, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Koreae-mail: [email protected]

M. Gohare-mail: [email protected]

123

Author's personal copy

566 M. Gohar, S. J. Koh

users will exceed the number of desktop users [1–4]. This mobile trend has caused a rapidgrowth of the routing table, which induces the routing scalability problem [5]. To solve thisproblem, the Locator Identifier Separation Protocol (LISP) [6] has been made, in which theIP address space is split into Endpoint Identifier (EID) and Routing Locator (RLOC).

To address the LISP mobility issue, a host-based mobility scheme was proposed in [7], inwhich each mobile host implements the LISP Tunnel Router (TR) functionality. This mobilityscheme is denoted by ‘LISP-MS’ in this paper, since it uses a centralized Map Server (MS)[8] for EID-RLOC mapping management. However, such a centralized scheme has somelimitations in terms of scalability and performance. As the number of mobile hosts increases,the control overhead of Map Server will get larger. Moreover, the centralized scheme issubject to increased operational costs and service degradation by a single point of failure [9].

To enhance the centralized LISP-MS scheme, a hierarchical mapping scheme was pro-posed in [10], in which a Local MS (LMS) is additionally used with the central MS. Thisscheme is denoted by ‘LISP-LMS’ in this paper. In this scheme, Routing LOC represents anIP address of domain gateway, and Local LOC is an IP address of the host. In the LISP-LMSscheme, the Local MS is located over a domain gateway and performs mapping managementwithin the domain by using Local LOCs. The central MS will be used for mapping manage-ment between different domains by using Routing LOCs. This hierarchical approach mayimprove scalability and performance over the centralized scheme. However, this scheme stilldepends on the central MS for inter-domain mapping management, and thus it is still subjectto the scalability and performance problems.

In this paper, we propose a distributed mapping management scheme in mobile LISPnetworks, which is denoted by ‘LISP-DMS’. In the proposed scheme, we assume that eachhost has a unique EID which contains the information of its home domain. By this, an EIDcan be used to identify the home domain for a mobile host. We use Routing LOC (RLOC)and Local LOC (LLOC) for mobile hosts. RLOC represents the IP address of the domaingateway, as done in the LISP-LMS scheme. In the meantime, as LLOC, we use the IP addressof the access router that a host is currently attached to. This is different from the LISP-LMSscheme, in which LLOC represents the IP address of a host. For mapping management, eachnetwork domain has a Distributed Map Server (DMS), instead of Local MS and central MS.For non-roaming case, in which a host is in its home domain, DMS keeps track of the LLOCfor the host. In the roaming case, in which a host moves into the other visited domain, theRLOC of the visited domain will be registered with the home DMS of the mobile host. Theproposed LISP-DMS scheme can reduce the signaling delays required for EID-LOC mappingupdate and query, compared to the existing centralized and hierarchical schemes.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2, we review the existing LISPmobility schemes for EID-LOC mapping management. In Sect. 3, we describe the proposeddistributed mapping management scheme. Section 4 compares the existing and proposedschemes in terms of the mapping update and query delays. Section 5 concludes this paper.

2 Related Works

In the existing LISP-MS scheme [7], a mobile host is required to implement the light-weighttunnel router (TR) functionality, and the Map Server (MS) is used as an anchor point formobile hosts. Accordingly, a mobile host will directly communicate with the central MSwithout using any intermediate gateway in the mapping management operation. That is,each time a mobile host moves into a new network region, it will update its RLOC with thecentral MS.

123


Distributed Mapping Management 567

Fig. 1 Mapping management operations in LISP-MS

The mapping update and query operations of LISP-MS are illustrated in Fig. 1. When amobile node (MN) is attached to an access router (AR), it configures its IP address as RLOC.Then MN will send a Map Register message to the central MS for EID-RLOC mappingupdate (Step 1). This MS will respond with a Map Notify message to MN (Step 2). Formapping query, a correspondent node (CN) sends a data packet to MN. CN will first send aMap Request to MS (Step 3). After the lookup of EID-RLOC database, MS forwards the MapRequest to the associated MN (Step 4). MN will then respond with a Map Reply messagedirectly to CN (Step 5). Now, CN can send the data packets directly to MN.

It is noted that this LISP-MS scheme depends on a central MS for EID-RLOC mappingmanagement, which may incur significant overhead of control messages at the central MSin the global scale. To deal with such problem, the LISP-LMS scheme [10] was proposed toenhance the LISP-MS scheme.

The LISP-LMS scheme is based on the hierarchical mapping architecture, in which LocalMS (LMS) is additionally used with the central MS, and Local LOC (LLOC) is used withRLOC. LLOC represents an IP address of the host. LMS is located over a domain gatewayand performs the mapping management within a domain by using LLOCs. The central MSwill be used for mapping management between different domains by using RLOCs.

The mapping management operations of LISP-LMS are described in Fig. 2. LMS maypossibly be located with the gateway (GW) of a mobile domain. Each GW has an RLOC,and each mobile node (MN) uses its IP address as LLOC. For mapping update, MN will firstconfigure its LLOC, and send a Map Register message to LMS (Step 1). LMS responds witha Map Notify message to MN (Step 2). In addition, LMS will also exchange the Map Registerand Map Notify messages with the central MS, so as to register the mapping between EID ofMN and RLOC of LMS (Step 3, 4). In the mapping query operation, a correspondent node(CN) sends a data packet to MN. CN will first send a Map Request message to LMS so as to findthe LLOC of MN (Step 5). Then, LMS sends a Map Request message to MS to find the RLOCof MN (Step 6). The MS will forward the Map Request message to LMS of MN (Step 7).Then, LMS of MN will directly respond to LMS of CN with a Map Reply message afterlookup of its database (Step 8). In turn, LMS will respond to CN with a Map Reply message(Step 9). Now, CN can send the data packet directly to MN.

Until now, we have reviewed the existing EID-LOC mapping management schemes: LISP-MS and LISP-LMS. However, all of these schemes depend on a central MS. This induces

123



Global Domain

AR AR

MN(EID) CN

(EID)

LMS/GW (RLOC)LMS/GW

(RLOC)

MS

1)M

ap Regist

er

3) Map Register

4) Map Notify

2)M

apNot

ify

TR(LLOC)

TR(LLOC)

5) Map Request

6) Map Request

8) Map Reply

Data

Data

Data

7) Map Request

9) Map Reply

Fig. 2 Mapping management operations in LISP-LMS

some limitations in the mobile network environment in terms of scalability and performance.As the number of mobile hosts increases, the control overhead of the central MS will getlarger. Moreover, the centralized scheme is subject to increased operational costs and servicedegradation by a single point of failure. In this paper, we propose a new scheme for distributedEID-LOC mapping management so as to provide a scalable and efficient EID-LOC mappingmanagement in mobile networks.

3 Proposed Scheme

In this section, we describe a distributed EID-LOC mapping management scheme in theLISP-based mobile networks, denoted by LISP-DMS.

3.1 Overview

In the proposed scheme, we assume that each host has a unique EID which contains theinformation of its home domain, such as 2-byte Autonomous System number of a domain.Note that this hierarchical EID structure was also discussed in [11]. With this type of EID,we can easily identify the home domain for a mobile host, which is helpful in the mappingmanagement operations.

We use RLOC and LLOC as locators for mobile hosts. RLOC represents the IP address ofthe domain gateway, and LLOC is the IP address of the access router that a host is currentlyattached to. For EID-LOC mapping management, each network domain has a DistributedMap Server (DMS) over its gateway. It is noted that the central MS and Local MS are not beused. Instead, DMS will perform the mapping management functions in the distributed way.

The network model for the proposed LISP-DMS scheme is shown in Fig. 3. Each accessrouter (AR) implements the LISP tunnel router (TR) functionality and uses its IP address as aLLOC. Each AR will maintain a list of EIDs for mobile nodes that are currently attached to.The mapping update operation is performed between AR of MN and DMS and then betweenDMSs, and the mapping query operation is done between AR of CN and DMS and thenbetween DMSs. The detailed mapping operations will be described in the next sections.

123



Mobile Domain

Global Domain

Mobile DomainAR /TR(LLOC )

AR /TR(LLOC )

MN(EID )

CN(EID )

DMS /GWRLOC )

DMS /GW(RLOC

Mapping Update operation Mapping Update operation Mapping Query operation

Mapping Query operation

Fig. 3 Network model for LISP-DMS

Table 1 Comparison of the existing and proposed mapping management schemes

Schemes TR location LOC Mapping architecture Mapping server

LISP-MS Host RLOC Centralized MS

LISP-LMS Host LLOC, RLOC Hierarchal Local MS, MS

LISP-DMS Access Router LLOC, RLOC Distributed Distributed MS

In the proposed scheme, each gateway of the domain has a DMS for EID-LOC mappingmanagement. Depending on the non-roaming or roaming status of a mobile node, a DMScan function as Home DMS (H-DMS) or Visited DMS (V-DMS). When MN is in its homedomain, the associated DMS will act as H-DMS for the host. If MN moves into anotherdomain by roaming, the DMS of the visited domain functions as V-DMS for the roaminghost. In the roaming case, V-DMS will inform H-DMS about the current location of MN.

Before going into the detailed description of the proposed scheme, let us compare theexisting and proposed mapping management schemes in the architectural perspective, asdescribed in Table 1.

In the LISP-MS and LISP-LMS schemes, a host implements the LISP tunnel router (TR)functionality and performs the mapping management operations, which can be regarded asa host-based approach. In LISP-DMS, however, the TR functionality is implemented at anaccess router that performs the mapping management operations, which is a network-basedapproach.

As for locators, the LISP-MS scheme uses only the RLOC, which is the IP address of thehost. In the meantime, the LISP-LMS and LISP-DMS schemes use both RLOC and LLOC.The IP address of domain gateway is used as RLOC. In LISP-LMS, the IP address of host isused as LLOC, whereas the IP address of access router is employed as LLOC in the proposedLISP-DMS scheme.

In the viewpoint of mapping architecture, LISP-MS is a centralized approach, in which acentral MS is used as an anchor point of the mobile host. LISP-LMS has a two-level hierarchy:LMS and MS. LMS is responsible for intra-domain mappings and MS performs the inter-domain mappings. The proposed LISP-DMS scheme is a distributed approach, in which anycentral MS is not employed and the DMS will perform both intra-domain (non-roaming) andinter-domain (roaming) mapping management operations.

123



Fig. 4 EID-LOC mapping update operation in the non-roaming case

Fig. 5 EID-LOC mapping update operation in the roaming case

3.2 Mapping Update Operation

When a host is attached to the network, the EID-LOC mapping information shall be registeredin the mapping update operation. The mapping update operation is classified into the non-roaming case and the roaming case.

Figure 4 shows the EID-LOC mapping update operation in the non-roaming case, in whicha host is in its home domain. First, a mobile node is connected with AR (Step 1). AR willcheck whether the EID belongs to its domain (non-roaming case) or not (roaming case). Notethat AR can determine this by referring to the EID, since an EID contains the information ofhome domain. In the non-roaming case, AR sends a Map Register message to Home DMS(Step 2), and the Home DMS (H-DMS) will respond with a Map Notify message to AR(Step 3).

Figure 5 describes the mapping update operation in the roaming case. In the figure, a host isconnected with AR (Step 1). Then, AR will send a Map Register message to the Visited DMS(V-DMS) in the domain (Step 2). This message shall contain the EID and LLOC (IP addressof access router) for the mobile node. On reception of the message, the V-DMS sends a MapRegister message to the H-DMS that is in the home domain of the roaming host (Step 3).This message shall contain the EID and RLOC (IP address of the domain gateway) for themobile node. After that, the H-DMS responds with a Map Notify message to the V-DMS,which will further be delivered to AR (Step 4, 5).

3.3 Mapping Query Operation for Data Delivery

After the mapping update operation for a mobile node (MN), a correspondent node (CN) maysend data packets to the MN. For data delivery to MN, the LOC of MN will be determinedin the mapping query operation. Let us consider the mapping query operations for the non-roaming case and the roaming case, respectively.

123



Fig. 6 Mapping query operation in the non-roaming case

Fig. 7 Mapping query operation in the roaming case

Figure 6 shows the EID-LOC mapping query operation in the non-roaming case, in whichthe two hosts, CN and MN, are all in the same domain. When CN sends a data packet towardMN, the access router (AR) of CN will send a Map Request message to the H-DMS of thedomain (Step 1). This message contains the EID of MN. On reception of a Map Requestmessage, H-DMS responds with a Map Reply message to AR of CN (Step 2). This messageshall contain the EID and LLOC of MN. Now, AR of CN can send the data packet to AR ofMN, and further to MN.

Figure 7 shows the EID-LOC mapping query operation in the roaming case. In this case,MN is roaming into another domain, and CN sends data packets to the roaming MN.

As shown in the figure, the data packets transmitted by CN will first arrive at AR. Then,AR will send a Map Request to its H-DMS (Step 1). H-DMS will forward the Map Requestto the V-DMS, by referring to its EID-RLOC mapping database (Step 2). The V-DMS willconfirm that MN is now within its domain, and then respond with a Map Reply message toH-DMS (Step 3). In turn, H-DMS sends a Map Reply to AR of CN (Step 4). Now, AR of CNcan deliver the data packet to MN via V-DMS and AR of MN.

4 Performance Analysis

To evaluate the performance of the proposed scheme, we analyze the total signaling delayrequired for mapping update and mapping query. By numerical analysis, we will compare thetotal signaling delays for the existing LISP-MS and LISP-LMS schemes and the proposedLISP-DMS scheme.

123



Mobile Domain

Global Domain

Mobile DomainAR AR

GW (LMS or DMS) GW (LMS or DMS)

MN CN

MS

TAR-GW

TGW-MS

TGW-GW

TGW-MS

TAR-GW

TA

R-M

N TA

R-C

N

AR AR

MN

TA

R-M

N

Roaming

Fig. 8 Network model for numerical analysis

Table 2 Parameters used forperformance analysis

Parameters Description

S Size of control packets (bytes)

Bw Wired bandwidth (Mbps)

Bwl Wireless bandwidth (Mbps)

Lw Wired link delay (ms)

Lwl Wireless link delay (ms)

Ha-b Hop count between node a and b in the network

TAC Address configuration delay (ms)

4.1 Analysis Model

Figure 8 shows a network model for analysis, in which a mobile node (MN) moves into adifferent domain. The domain gateway (GW) has LMS or DMS. Our analysis is given toonly the roaming case, since the roaming case includes a complicated movement scenario,whereas the non-roaming case is relatively simple and trivial.

For performance analysis, we define the parameters related to network environment, assummarizes in Table 2. It is noted that all of these parameters can give the impact on theperformance of the mapping management operations.

In addition, let Tx−y denote the transmission delay of a control message of size S sent fromnode ‘x’ to node ‘y’. For the ‘wireless’ link, Tx–y can be expressed as Tx−y = [(S/Bwl) + Lwl].Let Hx−y denotes the number of link hops between node x and node y in the wired network.Then, for the ‘wired’ network region, Tx−y can be expressed as Tx−y = Hx–y×[(S/Bw)+Lw].4.2 Signaling Delay Analysis

In the analysis scenario, MN and AR will perform the mapping update operation, when MNis attached to the new network domain. After that, the correspondent node (CN) sends datapackets to MN, and the EID-LOC mapping query operation will be done. Based on this

123



scenario, we will analyze the signaling delays for mapping update and query operations forthe three candidate schemes: LISP-MS, LISP-LMS, and LISP-DMS.

The Total Signaling Delay (TSD) for mapping management is defined as the sum ofMapping Update Delay (MUD) and Mapping Query Delay (MQD). That is, TSD = MUD+ MQD.

1) LISP-MS

In LISP-MS, the mapping update operations are performed as follows. When MN movesinto a new AR region, it shall configure its RLOC, which takes TAC. After that, MN willperform the map register operation with MS by exchanging the Map Register and Notifymessages. This operation takes 2 × (TMN-AR + TAR-GW + TGW-MS).

Accordingly, the mapping update delay of LISP-MS can be represented as follows:

MUDLISP-MS = TAC + 2 × (TMN-AR + TAR-GW + TGW-MS)

= TAC + 2 × {[(S/Bwl) + Lwl] + HAR-GW × [(S/Bw) + Lw]+ HGW-MS × [(S/Bw) + Lw]}

In LISP-MS, the mapping query delay from CN to MN can be calculated as follows. First,CN will send a Map Request message to MS so as to find the RLOC of MN. Then, MS willforward the Map Request message to MN. After that, MN will respond directly to CN witha Map Reply message. This operation takes 2TCN-AR + 2TMN-AR + TGW-GW + 4TAR-GW +2TGW-MS.

Thus, the mapping query delay of LISP-MS can be represented as follows:

MQDLISP-MS = 2TCN-AR + 2TMN-AR + TGW-GW + 4TAR-GW + 2TGW-MS

= 2 × {(S/Bwl)+Lwl}+2 × {(S/Bwl)+Lwl}+HGW-GW×[(S/Bw)+Lw]+ 4×{HAR-GW × [(S/Bw) + Lw]} + 2 × {HGW-MS × [(S/Bw) + Lw]}

So, we obtain the total signaling delay as TSDLISP-MS = MUDLISP-MS + MQDLISP-MS.

2) LISP–LMS

In LISP-LMS, the mapping update operations are performed as follows. When MN entersa new AR region, it configures LLOC, which takes TAC. After that, MN will perform theMap Register operation with LMS by exchanging the Map Register and Notify messages. Thisoperation takes 2 × (TMN-AR + TAR-GW). After that, LMS will perform the Map Registeroperation with MS by exchanging Map Register and Map Notify messages. This operationtakes 2 × TGW-MS.

Accordingly, the mapping update delay of LISP-LMS can be represented as follows,

MUDLISP-LMS = TAC + 2 × (TMN-AR + TAR-GW) + 2 × TGW-MS

= TAC + 2 × {[(S/Bwl) + Lwl] + HAR-GW × [(S/Bw) + Lw]+ HGW−MS × [(S/Bw) + Lw]}

In LISP-LMS, the mapping query delay from CN to MN can be calculated as follows.First, CN will send a Map Request message to LMS to find the LLOC of MN. Then, LMSwill look for the LLOC of MN in its database. If there is no information, then LMS willforward the Map Request to MS. The MS will look for the RLOC of MN from its database.Then, MS will forward Map Request message to LMS of MN. After that, LMS of MN willrespond with Map Reply message to CN via LMS of CN and AR. This operation takes2TCN-AR + TGW-GW + 2TAR-GW + 2TGW-MS.

123



Thus, the mapping query delay of LISP-LMS can be represented as follows.

MQDLISP-LMS = 2TCN-AR + TGW-GW + 2TAR-GW + 2TGW-MS

= 2×{(S/Bwl)+Lwl}+HGW-GW × [(S/Bw)+Lw] + 2 × {HAR-GW × [(S/Bw) + Lw]}+2 × {HGW-MS × [(S/Bw) + Lw]}

So, we obtain the total signaling delay as TSDLISP-LMS = MUDLISP-LMS+MQDLISP-LMS.

3) LISP-DMS

In the proposed LISP-DMS scheme, the mapping update operation is performed as follows.When a host is attached to the network, the AR will be performed the Map Register operationby exchanging the Map Register and Map Notify messages with the V-DMS. The V-DMS willalso exchange the Map Register and Map Notify messages with the H-DMS. This operationtakes 2 × (TAR-GW + TGW-GW).

Accordingly, the mapping update delay of LISP-DMS can be represented as follows.

MUDLISP-DMS = 2 × (TAR-GW + TGW-GW)

= 2 × {HAR-GW × [(S/Bw) + Lw]} + 2 × {HGW-GW × [(S/Bw) + Lw]}In the proposed LISP-DMS scheme, the mapping query delay can be calculated as follows.

First, a data packet of CN is delivered to AR of CN. Then, AR of CN sends a Map Request toH-DMS to find the LLOC of MN. After that, H-DMS of CN will forward the Map Requestto V-DMS of MN. After lookup of its mapping database, the V-DMS responds to AR of CNvia H-DMS with a Map Reply message.

Accordingly, the mapping query delay of LISP-DMS can be represented as follows.

MQDLISP-DMS = 2 × TAR-GW + 2 × TGW-GW

= 2 × {HAR-GW × [(S/Bw) + Lw]} + 2 × {HGW-GW × [(S/Bw) + Lw]}So, we obtain the total signaling delay as TSDLISP-DMS =MUDLISP-DMS+MQDLISP-DMS.

4.3 Numerical Results

Based on the signaling delay analysis given in the previous section, we compare the numer-ical results. For numerical analysis, we configure the default parameter values, as thosedescribed in Table 3, by referring to the existing works [12,13]. Among those parame-ters, we note that Lwl and TAC are affected by the wireless network region, whereasLw, HAR-GW, HGW-MS, HGW-GW may depend on the wired network environment. We willcompare the performance of the candidate schemes by varying those parameter values.

Figure 9 shows the impact of wireless link delay (Lwl) on total signaling delay. From thefigure, we can see that the total signaling delay linearly increases, as Lwl gets larger for allthe existing schemes, because the existing schemes are the host-based schemes and use thewireless link for mapping update and mapping query. It is shown that the proposed LISP-DMS scheme does not give any significant impact on total signaling delay. This is becauseLISP-DMS is a network-based scheme, which does not use the wireless link for mappingupdate and query operation and also MN does not need the IP address configuration delay forLOC configuration. LISP-LMS gives better performance than LISP-MS, because LISP-LMSuses Local MS for intra-domain mapping management, which is helpful to reduce the controloverhead of the central Map Server. Overall, the proposed LISP-DMS scheme provides thebest performance among the candidate schemes.

123



Table 3 Default parametervalues

Parameter Default Minimum Maximum

Lwl 10 1 55

Lw 2 1 55

HAR-GW 2 1 10

HGW-GW 6 1 10

HGW-MS 6 1 10

TAC 50 10 500

S 96 bytes

Bwl 11 Mbps

Bw 100 Mbps

Fig. 9 Impact of Lwl on totalsignaling delay

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 3 6 10 15 21 28 36 45 55

Tot

al S

igna

ling

Del

ay (

ms)

Lwl

LISP-MSLISP-LMSLISP-DMS

Figure 10 describes the performance impact of wired link delay (Lw) on total signalingdelay. From the figure, we can see that the total signaling delay linearly increases, as Lw

gets larger for all the candidate schemes. It is noted that the proposed LISP-DMS schemegives better performance than the existing schemes. This is because the distributed schemecan reduce the control overhead of central Map Server in the wired network, compared tothe centralized and hierarchical schemes. In the existing schemes, LISP-LMS gives betterperformance than LISP-MS, because LISP-LMS uses Local MS for the mapping queryoperation.

Figure 11 compares the total signaling delays for different hop counts between AR andGW (HAR-GW). In the figure, we can see that the total signaling delay linearly increases forall the candidate schemes, but the proposed LISP-DMS scheme gives the best performanceamong the candidate schemes. This is because, LISP-DMS is network-based scheme in whichthe MN does not performed the mapping update and query operation with AR and the MNdoes not need LLOC configuration because MN uses the IP address of AR as LLOC.

In Fig. 12, it is shown that the different hop counts between GW and MS (HGW-MS) doesnot give any significant impact on total signaling delay of the proposed LISP-DMS scheme.This is because the proposed LISP-DMS scheme is a distributed approach, and thus the centralMS is not employed for mapping update and query operation. In the figure, we can see that

123



Fig. 10 Impact of Lw on totalsignaling delay

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1 3 6 10 15 21 28 36 45 55T

otal

Sig

nalin

g D

elay

(m

s)

LW

LISP-MS

LISP-LMS

LISP-DMS

Fig. 11 Impact of HAR-GW ontotal signaling delay

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Tot

al S

igna

ling

Del

ay (

ms)

HAR-GW

LISP-MS

LISP-LMS

LISP-DMS

HGW-MS gives significant impacts on total signaling delay for all of the existing schemes.This is because all of the control messages for signaling should be delivered between GWand the central MS.

Figure 13 shows the impact of different hop counts between GW and GW (HGW-GW) ontotal signaling delays. It is shown in the figure that the LISP-DMS scheme gives much moreimpact from the existing schemes, as HGW-GW increases. This is because LISP-DMS schemeuses the network links between GWs for mapping update and query operation. Nevertheless,it is noted that the proposed LISP-DMS scheme gives the best performance among thecandidate schemes.

Figure 14 compares the candidate schemes in terms of the IP address configuration delay(TAC). In the figure, we can see that TAC gives a significant impact on the total signalingdelay for the existing schemes, since all of them are based on a host-based LOC and thusMN should configure its LOC in the network. On the other hand, the proposed LISP-DMSscheme is not affected by TAC, since it uses a network-based LOC (i. e., IP address of AR)and thus MN does not need any LOC configuration.

123



Fig. 12 Impact of HGW-MS ontotal signaling delay

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Tot

al S

igna

ling

Del

ay (

ms)

HGW-MS

LISP-MS

LISP-LMS

LISP-DMS

Fig. 13 Impact of HGW-GW ontotal signaling delay

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Tot

al S

igna

ling

Del

ay (

ms)

HGW-GW

LISP-MS

LISP-LMS

LISP-DMS

Fig. 14 Impact of TAC on totalsignaling delay

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

10 20 30 40 50 100 200 300 400 500

Tot

al S

igna

ling

Del

ay (

ms)

TAC

LISP-MS

LISP-LMS

LISP-DMS

123



5 Conclusions

In this paper, we proposed a distributed mapping management scheme of EIDs and LOCs inLISP-based mobile networks. In the proposed scheme, the distributed map servers locatedthe gateway of a domain performs the EID-LOC mapping management operations, not usinga central map server. This is helpful to reduce the control overhead of the central map server.Moreover, the proposed scheme is a network-based approach, in which the IP address ofaccess router is used as Local LOC and each access routers performs the mapping manage-ment. In the meantime, the existing schemes use the IP address of a host as Local LOC andeach host performs the mapping management operations.

By numerical analysis, the proposed LISP-DMS scheme was compared with the existingcentralized and hierarchical schemes in terms of the mapping update and mapping querydelay. From the numerical results, we can see that the proposed scheme gives the best per-formance among all the candidate schemes. The performance gains of the proposed schemecome from the distributed approach, by which the control overhead of the central map servercan be reduced, and by the network-based mapping management, in which we can minimizethe mapping management operation of a host over wireless networks.

Acknowledgments This research was supported by the ITRC support program of NIPA (NIPA-H0301-12-2004), the Basic Science Research Program of NRF (2010-0020926) and the ICT Standardization program ofMKE (Ministry of Knowledge Economy).

References

1. Morgan Stanley Report (2010). Internet trends. http://www.morganstanley.com/.2. Vizireanu, D. N., et al. (2012). Analytical formula for three points sinusoidal signals amplitude estimation

errors. International Journal of Electronics, 99(1), 149–151.3. Vizireanu, D. N., et al. (2012). Simple, fast and accurate eight points amplitude estimation method of

sinusoidal signals for DSP based instrumentation. Journal of Instrumentation, 7(4), 1–10.4. Vizireanu, D. N. (2012). A fast, simple and accurate time-varying frequency estimation method for

single-phase electric power systems. Measurement, 45(5), 1331–1333.5. Meyer, D., et al. (2007). Report from the IAB workshop on routing and addressing. IETF RFC 4984.6. Farinacci, D., et al. (2012). Locator/ID separation protocol (LISP). IETF Internet Draft, draft-ietf-lisp-23.7. Farinacci, D., et al. (2012). LISP mobile node. IETF Internet Draft, draft-meyer-lisp-mn-07.8. Fuller, V., et al. (2012). LISP map server interface. IETF Internet Draft, draft-ietf-lisp-ms-16.9. Chan, H., et al. (2012). Requirements of distributed mobility management. IETF Internet Draft, draft-

chan-dmm-requirements-00.10. Menth, M., et al. (2010). Improvements to LISP Mobile Node. Conference of international teletraffic

congress (ITC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.11. Li, T., et al. (2011). Recommendation for a Routing Architecture. IETF RFC 6115.12. Makaya, C., & Pierre, S. (2008). An analytical framework for performance evaluation of IPv6-based

mobility management protocols. IEEE Wireless Communication, 7(3), 972–983.13. Lee, J. H., et al. (2009). A comparative performance analysis on hierarchical mobile IPv6 and proxy

mobile IPv6. Telecommunication System, 41(4), 279–292.

123


http://www.morganstanley.com/


Author Biographies

Moneeb Gohar received B. S. degree in Computer Science from Uni-versity of Peshawar, Pakistan, and M. S. degree in Technology Man-agement from Institute of Management Sciences, Pakistan, in 2006 and2009, respectively. He received Ph. D. degree from the school of Com-puter Science and Engineering in the Kyungpook National University,Korea, in 2012. He is now with the Kyungpook National University,as a postdoctoral researcher. His current research interests include Net-work Layer Protocols, Wireless Communication, Mobile Multicastingand Internet Mobility. E-mail: [email protected]

Seok Joo Koh received the B. S. and M.S. degrees in ManagementScience from KAIST in 1992 and 1994, respectively. He also receivedPh.D. degree in Industrial Engineering from KAIST in 1998. FromAugust 1998 to February 2004, he worked for Protocol EngineeringCenter in ETRI. He has been as a professor with the school of Com-puter Science and Engineering in the Kyungpook National Universitysince March 2004. His current research interests include mobility man-agement in the future Internet, IP mobility, multicasting, and SCTP. Hehas so far participated in the international standardization as an editorin ITU-T SG13 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6.

123


iot standards laboratory · distributed mapping management 567 fig. 1 mapping management operations...

Documents