1

WP2.5 - Multi-level Mobility Support in IP-based HAP Networks

Roman Novak

Jozef Stefan Institute

2

Introduction

alternative communication scenarios

all-IP approach

mobility architecture

support for multi-level mobility

route optimization issues

conclusion

3

Communication Scenarios

alternativesstand-alone vs. integrated network

transparent payload vs. switching payload

four network architecturesstandalone platform scenario

scenario with the network of platforms connected via ground stations (GSs)

scenario with platform interconnection via interplatform links (IPLs)

scenario with platform to satellite links (PSLs)

4

Network Architecture

IP

Groundstation

IPLIPL

PSL

Switch /Gateway

bac

khau

l lin

k

use

r lin

k

HAP

HAP

HAP

PDA

PDA

WLAN

WLAN

5

All-IP Approach

IP in the native mode, not only for transport purposes

the architecture can be build from the scratch

why IP:

prevalent fixed networking standard

simple and stateless

complexity pushed to the edge

6

Mobility Architecture

mobility of vehicles and passengers

wireless links within the network

Micro mobility

Macro mobility

Access mobility

7

Access-level Mobility

within single HAP coverage area

loose coupling with IP-mobility

exploits specifics of link layer

access control to a link

8

Macro-mobility

Mobile-IP, SIP, Multicast

two-level Mobile IP

route optimization is well-defined for top-level Mobile IP, multi-level mobility poses difficulties

inefficient inter- and intra-platform communications

9

Routing in Two-level MIP

MNHA

CN

MN

MRHA

HAP

MRHAP - High Altitude PlatformMN - Mobile NodeMR - Mobile RouterHA - Home AgentCN - Correspondent Node

a) HAP-to-Internet b) HAP-to-HAP

MN1

HA

MN2

HA

MN1

MN2

MR2

HA

MR2

HAP2

MR1

HA

HAP1

MR1

10

MIP Route Optimization

CN

MN

MRHA

HAP

MR

a) HAP-to-Internet b) HAP-to-HAP

MN1

MN2

MR2

HA

MR2

HAP2

MR1

HA

HAP1

MR1

11

Micro-mobility

movement detection and registration latency of MIP

tree-like hierarchy of local routersCellular IP, Hawaii, TeleMIP

tunnel-based schemesHierarchical MIP (HMIP)

route optimality issue: anchor node is included in most communications

alternative: platform vs. ground based anchor node

12

HMIP-based Route Optimization

MN

MRMAP - Mobility Anchor Point

a) HAP-to-Internet

MAP

HAP

b) HAP-to-HAP

MN1

MN2

MAP

HAP1

MR1

MR2

HAP2

CN

13

Conclusion

HAPs can be deployed within different architectures

adequate mobility architecture need to be defined

multi-level mobility solutions are under development

intra-domain route optimization issue for HMIP-based multi-level mobility