Performance of mobile IPv6 with different route optimization scheme

Abstract

Mobile Internet Protocol version 4, in which the main problem is triangle routing. Mobile node deliver packets to a corresponding node directly but when corresponding node sends packet to the mobile node packet comes to foreign agent via home agent then it comes to mobile node. This asymmetry is called triangle routing. It leads to many problems, like load on the network and delay in delivering packets. The next generation IPv6 is designed to overcome this kind of problem (triangle routing). MIPv6 support host moves from one access point to another access point. To solve the triangle routing problem different route optimization schemes are used which exclude the inefficient routing paths by creating the shortest routing path. These are Liebsch’s Route optimization scheme, Light Weight Route optimization scheme & enhanced light weight route optimization scheme. In this paper I have consider only Light Weight Route optimization scheme & enhanced light weight route optimization scheme. I have taken Throughput and Packet delivery fraction, end to end delay & round trip time .Performance metrics to compare these two schemes by using NS-2 simulations. Throughput is the rate of communications per unit time. Packet delivery fraction (PDF) is the ratio of the data packets delivered to the destinations to those generated by the CBR sources. End to end delay includes all possible delays caused by buffering, re transmission delay & propagation & transfer times of data packets. Round-trip time is the time required for a signal pulse or packet to travel from a specific source to a specific destination and back again. By using these parameters I have found that enhanced light weight route optimization scheme performance is better than Light Weight Route optimization scheme.