pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.05102 · v1 · pith:RFNZCT3Znew · submitted 2019-07-11 · 💻 cs.NI

Block Prefix Mechanism for Flow Mobility in PMIPv6 Based Networks

K. Vasu , S. Mahapatra , C. S. Kumar This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 22:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.NI
keywords flow mobilityPMIPv6block prefixhandover latencyvertical handovermulti-homed devicessignaling costpacket loss
0
0 comments X

The pith

A block prefix mechanism outperforms shared and unique prefix methods for flow mobility in PMIPv6 networks.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proposes a block prefix mechanism to support flow mobility for multi-homed mobile devices in Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) networks. It compares this approach through analytical models and simulations against prior methods that rely on either shared prefixes or unique prefixes per flow. The results indicate improvements across handover latency, average hop delay, packet density, signaling cost, and packet loss. A reader would care because next-generation networks are heterogeneous, and devices often have multiple wireless interfaces that must switch seamlessly without disrupting ongoing flows.

Core claim

The paper proposes and analyzes a block prefix mechanism for flow mobility in PMIPv6. Both analytical and simulation studies demonstrate that the proposed mechanism outperforms the existing flow mobility management procedures using either shared or unique prefixes in terms of handover latency, average hop delay, packet density, signaling cost and packet loss.

What carries the argument

The block prefix mechanism, which assigns a contiguous block of prefixes to a mobile node to enable efficient flow mobility management across network interfaces.

If this is right

  • Mobile nodes experience lower handover latency when switching between heterogeneous networks.
  • Network signaling cost decreases during mobility events for devices with multiple interfaces.
  • Packet loss is reduced during vertical handovers, improving continuity for ongoing flows.
  • Average hop delay improves, leading to better end-to-end performance in mobile scenarios.
  • Overall packet density and resource usage become more efficient under the block allocation scheme.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The mechanism could reduce IPv6 address consumption in dense mobile environments by grouping prefixes.
  • Similar block allocation ideas might apply to other network-layer mobility protocols beyond PMIPv6.
  • Applications with strict continuity requirements, such as real-time video, would see fewer interruptions.
  • Extending the model to include varying traffic loads could reveal further performance boundaries.

Load-bearing premise

The analytical models and simulation setups accurately represent real-world network conditions and traffic patterns for multi-homed devices without unaccounted overheads from the block prefix allocation.

What would settle it

A measurement study on a physical testbed with real multi-homed devices showing equal or higher handover latency and packet loss than shared-prefix or unique-prefix baselines would falsify the performance claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.05102 by C. S. Kumar, K. Vasu, S. Mahapatra.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: When all interfaces are active and flows are using common prefix. (a)scenario with binding cache entries (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: When all interfaces are active and flows are using different prefix. (a) scenario with binding cache entries (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: When IF 2 and IF 3 suddenly power on and flows are using common prefix. (a)scenario with binding cache [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: When IF 2 and IF 3 suddenly power on and flows are using different prefix. (a)scenario with binding cache [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: When all the interfaces active and LMAs use a shared MAG. (a)scenario with binding cache entries (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: When all the interfaces active and LMAs use a different MAG. (a)scenario with binding cache entries (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: When IF 2 and IF 3 suddenly powered on and LMAs use a shared MAG. (a)scenario with binding cache [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: When IF 2 and IF 3 suddenly powered on and LMAs use a different MAG. (a)scenario with binding cache [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: When IF 2 and IF 3 suddenly power on, flows with common prefix and using block prefix mechanism. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: When IF 2 and IF 3 suddenly power on, flows with different prefix and using block prefix mechanism. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: In Fig. 11 (a), the LMA binding cache entries and if-flow mobility status are shown before and after the flow [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: When IF 2 and IF 3 suddenly powered on and LMAs use a shared MAG with block prefix. (a)scenario with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: When IF 2 and IF 3 suddenly powered on and LMAs use a different MAG with block prefix. (a)scenario [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Average Hop Latency(msec) vs. Wireless Link Delay(msec) for different mechanisms: Active Different, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Handover latency vs. packet density ( K KMax ) (a) Single LMA (c) Multi LMA; Handover latency vs. packet arrival rate ( λ Vf ) (b) Single LMA (d) Multi LMA to the increase in number of arrivals for binding updates and signalling overhead during the handover. When applying block prefix mechanism, the performance in terms of handover latency is better compared to the other two mechanisms. This is due to the… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Signalling cost vs. Number of link changes ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Signalling cost vs. Session to mobility ratio (SMR) for different mechanisms. (a) Single LMA (b) Multi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Signalling cost vs. Probability of link failure (p [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Packet loss vs. packet arrival rate ( λ Vf ) (a) Single LMA (c) Multi LMA; Packet loss vs.packet density ( K KMax ) (b) Single LMA (d) Multi LMA the signalling cost is same when applying block prefix mechanism to the flows that use either common or unique prefixes. The packet loss performance in terms of packet density and packet arrival rate is explained in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Total Handover Latency (msec) vs. packet density ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Total Handover Latency (msec) vs. packet arrival rate ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_20.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The next generation Internet is deemed to be heterogeneous in nature and mobile devices connected to the Internet are expected to be equipped with different wireless network interfaces. As seamless mobility is important in such networks, handover between different network types, called vertical handover, is an important issue in such networks. While proposing standards like Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) and Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) for mobility management protocols, one important challenge being addressed by IETF work groups and the research community is flow mobility in multi-homed heterogeneous wireless networks. In this paper we propose and analyze a block prefix mechanism for flow mobility in PMIPv6 and conducted extensive analytical and simulation studies to compare the proposed mechanism with existing prefix based mechanisms for flow mobility in PMIPv6 reported in terms of important performance metrics such as handover latency, average hop delay, packet density, signaling cost and packet loss. Both analytical and simulation results demonstrate that the proposed mechanism outperforms the existing flow mobility management procedures using either shared or unique prefixes.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a block prefix mechanism for flow mobility support in PMIPv6 networks serving multi-homed devices. It derives analytical expressions for key metrics and runs simulations to compare the new mechanism against existing shared-prefix and unique-prefix flow-mobility schemes, claiming lower handover latency, average hop delay, packet density, signaling cost, and packet loss.

Significance. If the reported gains are shown to be robust once model assumptions and overheads are fully specified, the work could contribute a practical enhancement to PMIPv6 flow mobility. The direct metric-by-metric comparison to two established baselines is a positive feature; however, the absence of explicit parameter values, statistical methods, and overhead accounting reduces the immediate utility of the results for protocol designers.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §§4–5] Abstract and §4–5 (Analytical and Simulation Evaluation): the central performance claims rest on analytical expressions and simulation outputs, yet the manuscript supplies no network topology, traffic model, parameter table, number of runs, or confidence intervals, so it is impossible to verify whether the reported reductions in handover latency and packet loss are supported by the data.
  2. [Analytical Model (§4)] Signaling-cost derivation (likely §4): the expressions for signaling cost and handover latency do not include any term for the additional state, lookup, or allocation overhead introduced by block-prefix management at the LMA and MAG; if these costs are non-zero, the claimed advantage over shared/unique-prefix baselines is reduced by construction.
  3. [Simulation Results (§5)] Simulation results (likely §5): the comparisons of packet density and average hop delay omit any description of how wireless-link variability or per-flow prefix splitting is modeled; unaccounted variability would directly inflate the reported gains relative to the baselines.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Throughout] Ensure that all acronyms (LMA, MAG, etc.) are expanded on first use and that figure captions explicitly state the parameter settings used for each plotted curve.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive feedback. We address each major comment below, indicating revisions where appropriate to strengthen the manuscript's clarity and verifiability.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §§4–5] Abstract and §4–5 (Analytical and Simulation Evaluation): the central performance claims rest on analytical expressions and simulation outputs, yet the manuscript supplies no network topology, traffic model, parameter table, number of runs, or confidence intervals, so it is impossible to verify whether the reported reductions in handover latency and packet loss are supported by the data.

    Authors: We agree that a consolidated parameter table, explicit network topology diagram, traffic model description, number of simulation runs, and any statistical methods (e.g., confidence intervals) are needed for full reproducibility. These elements will be added to a revised §4 and §5, along with a brief methods subsection. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Analytical Model (§4)] Signaling-cost derivation (likely §4): the expressions for signaling cost and handover latency do not include any term for the additional state, lookup, or allocation overhead introduced by block-prefix management at the LMA and MAG; if these costs are non-zero, the claimed advantage over shared/unique-prefix baselines is reduced by construction.

    Authors: The derivations in §4 capture the per-handover signaling messages for flow mobility. Block-prefix allocation occurs once at initial attachment and is treated as amortized overhead rather than recurring per handover; this modeling choice is consistent with how shared- and unique-prefix baselines are evaluated in the literature. We will add an explicit statement of this assumption and a short sensitivity discussion in the revised §4. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Simulation Results (§5)] Simulation results (likely §5): the comparisons of packet density and average hop delay omit any description of how wireless-link variability or per-flow prefix splitting is modeled; unaccounted variability would directly inflate the reported gains relative to the baselines.

    Authors: The ns-3 simulations model wireless links via standard 802.11 and LTE modules with fixed propagation parameters; per-flow prefix splitting follows the block-prefix procedure defined in §3. We will expand the simulation-setup paragraph in §5 to document these modeling choices and any simplifications. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; performance claims rest on independent analytical and simulation comparisons

full rationale

The paper proposes a block prefix mechanism and evaluates it via direct analytical expressions and simulations for metrics like handover latency and signaling cost, compared against shared/unique prefix baselines. No equations or steps reduce by construction to self-defined inputs, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks and prior mechanisms.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only information prevents identification of specific free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the work appears to build on standard PMIPv6 assumptions without introducing new postulated entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5707 in / 1079 out tokens · 28252 ms · 2026-05-24T22:59:55.889634+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    IMT -2000 QoS classes ,

    3GPP, “ IMT -2000 QoS classes ,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), TSG 17

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    QoS concepts and architecture ,

    ——, “ QoS concepts and architecture ,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), TS 23.107, 2009

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    Robust rate control for heterogeneous network access in multihomed environ- ments,

    T. Alpcan, J. Singh, and T. Basar, “Robust rate control for heterogeneous network access in multihomed environ- ments,” Mobile Computing, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 41 –51, jan. 2009

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    Anchor-based routing optimization extension for proxy mobile ipv6 in flat architectures,

    M. Boc, A. Petrescu, and C. Janneteau, “Anchor-based routing optimization extension for proxy mobile ipv6 in flat architectures,” in Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications (WPMC), 2011 14th International Symposium on, oct. 2011, pp. 1 –5

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility,

    E. CJ. Bernardos, “Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility,” Internet-Draft, work in progress

    work page

  6. [6]

    Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility,

    ——, “Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility,” Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet-Draft draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03, 2011. [Online]. Available: http://tools.ietf.org/html/ draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03

    work page 2011

  7. [7]

    A network-based localized mobility solution for distributed mobility management,

    F. Giust, A. de la Oliva, C. Bernardos, and R. Da Costa, “A network-based localized mobility solution for distributed mobility management,” in Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications (WPMC), 2011 14th International Symposium on, oct. 2011, pp. 1 –5

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    Optimizing cost and performance for multihoming,

    D. K. Goldenberg, L. Qiuy, H. Xie, Y . R. Yang, and Y . Zhang, “Optimizing cost and performance for multihoming,” in Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications, ser. SIGCOMM ’04. New York, NY , USA: ACM, 2004, pp. 79–92. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1015467.1015478

    work page doi:10.1145/1015467.1015478 2004

  9. [9]

    Proxy mobile ipv6,

    K. D. V . W. K. C. K. Gundavelli, S. Leung and B. Patil, “Proxy mobile ipv6,” RFC 5213, Internet Engineering Task Force, Augest 2008. [Online]. Available: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5213

    work page 2008

  10. [10]

    Dynamic home network prefix assignment for multi-homing in proxy mobile ipv6,

    Y .-G. Hong, H.-J. Kim, J.-S. Youn, Y . Kim, and S. Pack, “Dynamic home network prefix assignment for multi-homing in proxy mobile ipv6,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference, ser. IWCMC ’10. New York, NY , USA: ACM, 2010, pp. 885–889. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1815396.1815599

    work page doi:10.1145/1815396.1815599 2010

  11. [11]

    A distributed multi-service resource allocation algorithm in heterogeneous wireless access medium,

    M. Ismail and W. Zhuang, “A distributed multi-service resource allocation algorithm in heterogeneous wireless access medium,” Selected Areas in Communications, IEEE Journal on , vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 425 –432, february 2012

    work page 2012

  12. [12]

    Cost-efficient network mobility scheme over proxy mobile ipv6 network,

    S. Jeon and Y . Kim, “Cost-efficient network mobility scheme over proxy mobile ipv6 network,”Communications, IET, vol. 5, no. 18, pp. 2656 –2661, 16 2011

    work page 2011

  13. [13]

    Enhanced multi-homing support for proxy mobile ipv6 in heterogeneous networks,

    D. Kim, Y . Kitatsuji, and H. Yokota, “Enhanced multi-homing support for proxy mobile ipv6 in heterogeneous networks,” in Computational Science and Its Applications - ICCSA 2011 , ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, B. Murgante, O. Gervasi, A. Iglesias, D. Taniar, and B. Apduhan, Eds. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, vol. 6786, pp. 167–180. [Online]....

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21934-4_15 2011

  14. [14]

    A method to support multiple interfaces mobile nodes in pmipv6 domain,

    H.-J. Kim, J. Y . Kim, and S.-G. Choi, “A method to support multiple interfaces mobile nodes in pmipv6 domain,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Interaction Sciences: Information Technology, Culture and Human , ser. ICIS ’09. New York, NY , USA: ACM, 2009, pp. 91–96. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1655925.1655942

    work page doi:10.1145/1655925.1655942 2009

  15. [15]

    Extension of proxy mobile ipv6 with bicasting for support of multi-homing and mobility in wireless networks,

    J. I. Kim and S. J. Koh, “Extension of proxy mobile ipv6 with bicasting for support of multi-homing and mobility in wireless networks,” in Advanced Information Networking and Applications (WAINA), 2011 IEEE Workshops of International Conference on, march 2011, pp. 86 –89

    work page 2011

  16. [16]

    Scalable ipv6 multi-homing scheme based on end-to-end argument,

    K.-I. Kim, C.-M. Park, T. il Kim, and S.-H. Kim, “Scalable ipv6 multi-homing scheme based on end-to-end argument,” Communications Letters, IEEE, vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 340 –342, july 2003

    work page 2003

  17. [17]

    Handover latency analysis of a network-based localized mobility management protocol,

    K.-S. Kong, W. Lee, Y .-H. Han, and M.-K. Shin, “Handover latency analysis of a network-based localized mobility management protocol,” in Communications, 2008. ICC ’08. IEEE International Conference on , may 2008, pp. 5838 –5843. 26 Block Prefix Mechanism for Flow Mobility in PMIPv6 Based Networks

    work page 2008

  18. [18]

    Performance analysis of pmipv6-based network mobility for intelligent transportation systems,

    J.-H. Lee, T. Ernst, and N. Chilamkurti, “Performance analysis of pmipv6-based network mobility for intelligent transportation systems,” V ehicular Technology, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 74 –85, jan. 2012

    work page 2012

  19. [19]

    Cost analysis of ip mobility management protocols for consumer mobile devices,

    J.-H. Lee, T. Ernst, and T.-M. Chung, “Cost analysis of ip mobility management protocols for consumer mobile devices,” Consumer Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 1010 –1017, may 2010

    work page 2010

  20. [20]

    A multihoming support scheme with localized shim protocol in proxy mobile ipv6,

    Y . Li, D.-W. Kum, W.-K. Seo, and Y .-Z. Cho, “A multihoming support scheme with localized shim protocol in proxy mobile ipv6,” in Communications, 2009. ICC ’09. IEEE International Conference on , june 2009, pp. 1 –5

    work page 2009

  21. [21]

    Enhancing pmipv6 for better handover performance among heterogeneous wireless networks in a micromobility domain,

    L. A. Magagula, O. E. Falowo, and H. A. Chan, “Enhancing pmipv6 for better handover performance among heterogeneous wireless networks in a micromobility domain,” EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw., vol. 2010, pp. 24:1–24:13, Apr. 2010. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2010/274935

    work page doi:10.1155/2010/274935 2010

  22. [22]

    Exploring multi-homing issues in heterogeneous environ- ments,

    G. Mapp, M. Aiash, H. Guardia, and J. Crowcroft, “Exploring multi-homing issues in heterogeneous environ- ments,” in Advanced Information Networking and Applications (WAINA), 2011 IEEE Workshops of International Conference on, march 2011, pp. 690 –695

    work page 2011

  23. [23]

    Ip flow mobility in pmipv6 based networks: Solution design and experimental evaluation,

    T. Melia, C. Bernardos, A. Oliva, F. Giust, and M. Calderon, “Ip flow mobility in pmipv6 based networks: Solution design and experimental evaluation,”Wireless Personal Communications, vol. 61, pp. 603–627, 2011. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11277-011-0423-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s11277-011-0423-3 2011

  24. [24]

    PMIPv6 Multi-homing Support Extensions for Flow Mobility,

    B. Sarikaya., “PMIPv6 Multi-homing Support Extensions for Flow Mobility,” Internet-Draft, work in progress

    work page

  25. [25]

    Ipv6 multi-homing with structured cidr,

    K. Senevirathna and L. Samaranayake, “Ipv6 multi-homing with structured cidr,” inIndustrial and Information Systems (ICIIS), 2011 6th IEEE International Conference on , aug. 2011, pp. 453 –456

    work page 2011

  26. [26]

    Policy based mobility & flow management for ipv6 heterogeneous wireless networks,

    C. Shen, W. Du, R. Atkinson, and K. H. Kwong, “Policy based mobility & flow management for ipv6 heterogeneous wireless networks,” Wirel. Pers. Commun., vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 329–361, Jan. 2012. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11277-010-0056-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s11277-010-0056-y 2012

  27. [27]

    Virtual id: A technique for mobility, multi-homing, and location privacy in next generation wireless networks,

    C. So-In, R. Jain, S. Paul, and J. Pan, “Virtual id: A technique for mobility, multi-homing, and location privacy in next generation wireless networks,” in Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC), 2010 7th IEEE, jan. 2010, pp. 1 –5

    work page 2010

  28. [28]

    Multihoming management for future networks,

    B. M. Sousa, K. Pentikousis, and M. Curado, “Multihoming management for future networks,” Mob. Netw. Appl., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 505–517, Aug. 2011. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11036-011-0323-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s11036-011-0323-5 2011

  29. [29]

    Policy-based flow mobility management in pmipv6 networks,

    K. Sun and Y . Kim, “Policy-based flow mobility management in pmipv6 networks,” inICT Convergence (ICTC), 2012 International Conference on, oct. 2012, pp. 724 –725

    work page 2012

  30. [30]

    A design of network-based flow mobility based on proxy mobile ipv6,

    T. M. Trung, Y .-H. Han, H.-Y . Choi, and H. Y . Geun, “A design of network-based flow mobility based on proxy mobile ipv6,” in Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), 2011 IEEE Conference on , april 2011, pp. 373 –378

    work page 2011

  31. [31]

    An analytical framework for evaluating mipv6 protocols applying transport engineering concepts,

    K. Vasu, S. Mahapatra, and C. S. Kumar, “An analytical framework for evaluating mipv6 protocols applying transport engineering concepts,” in Proceedings of the 7th ACM workshop on Performance monitoring and measurement of heterogeneous wireless and wired networks , ser. PM2HW2N ’12. New York, NY , USA: ACM, 2012, pp. 53–60. [Online]. Available: http://doi...

    work page doi:10.1145/2387191.2387200 2012

  32. [32]

    Latent handover: A flow-oriented progressive handover mechanism,

    J. Wang, J. Liao, and X. Zhu, “Latent handover: A flow-oriented progressive handover mechanism,” Computer Communications , vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 2319 – 2340, 2008. [Online]. Available: http: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140366408001291

    work page 2008

  33. [33]

    Una: a new internet architecture for user-level multi-homing and mobility,

    Y . Wang, J. Bi, C. Peng, and H. Hu, “Una: a new internet architecture for user-level multi-homing and mobility,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Future Internet Technologies , ser. CFI ’11. New York, NY , USA: ACM, 2011, pp. 13–18. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2002396.2002400

    work page doi:10.1145/2002396.2002400 2011

  34. [34]

    Performance evaluation of multimedia content distribution over multi-homed wireless networks,

    C. Xu, E. Fallon, Y . Qiao, L. Zhong, and G.-M. Muntean, “Performance evaluation of multimedia content distribution over multi-homed wireless networks,” Broadcasting, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 204 –215, june 2011

    work page 2011

  35. [35]

    A new mobility management scheme in proxy mobile ipv6 networks with dynamic paging support,

    M.-K. Yi, S.-Y . Yun, S.-C. Park, and Y .-K. Yang, “A new mobility management scheme in proxy mobile ipv6 networks with dynamic paging support,” in Ubiquitous Information Technologies and Applications (CUTE), 2010 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on , dec. 2010, pp. 1 –6

    work page 2010

  36. [36]

    Modeling and analytical study of link properties in multihop wireless networks,

    M. Zhao, Y . Li, and W. Wang, “Modeling and analytical study of link properties in multihop wireless networks,” Communications, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 445 –455, february 2012

    work page 2012

  37. [37]

    Integrating mobility, multi-homing and security in universal network,

    L. Zheng, Z. Han, M. Xu, and J. Qi, “Integrating mobility, multi-homing and security in universal network,” in E-Health Networking, Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (EDT), 2010 International Conference on , vol. 1, april 2010, pp. 252 –255. 27

    work page 2010