Browsing by Author "Chitedze, Zimani"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    FHMIPv6-based handover for wireless mesh networks
    (Telkom, 2012) Chitedze, Zimani; Tucker, William David
    This paper shows that mobility management protocols for infrastructure Internet may be used in a wireless mesh network environment. Mesh topology tends to be an unplanned graph and routes change dynamically and in this research Mobile IPv6 and Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 are successfully implemented in a wireless mesh network environment. Horizontal handover simulation with ns2 involved Mobile IPv6 and Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 applied to wireless mesh networks. Mobile IPv6 was used as a baseline to compare the performance of the two protocols. The results show that in mesh networks, Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6‘s performance is superior to Mobile IPv6. Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 generates more throughput and less delay than Mobile IPv6. Furthermore, Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 drops fewer data packets than Mobile IPv6. Even though MIPv6 and its extensions are for infrastructure networks, they can be used effectively in mesh networks.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Mobile vertical handover between infrastructure and ad hoc Wi-Fi networks
    (Telkom, 2011) Chitedze, Zimani; Tucker, William David
    This paper addresses mobility management issues in an environment with both wireless LAN and wireless mesh networks. We first examine wireless mesh network client side transparency within mesh mobility management protocols and then look at standard mobility management protocols. The client side transparency scheme enables mobile nodes to support mobility in heterogeneous and homogeneous networks. However, they are not necessarily compatible with mobile IP protocols. Although a typical mesh topology tends to be an unplanned graph and routes change dynamically, standard mobility management protocols such as MIPv6, HMIPv6, and FMIPv6 may be used for mobility management in wireless mesh networks. To learn how MIPv6 operates, we used the OPNET 16.0 MIPv6 model to simulate a heterogeneous wireless environment comprising both WLAN and WMN. The simulation results show that MIPv6 is able to manage vertical handover between WLAN and WMN. However, in our opinion, its performance with both route optimization and tunneled traffic mechanisms is not effective enough. MIPv6 suffers from handover latency and packet loss which can combine to compromise delaysensitive applications such as video conferencing.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Mobility management for Wi-Fi infrastructure and mesh networks
    (University of the Western Cape, 2012) Chitedze, Zimani; Tucker, William; Dept. of Computer Science
    This thesis shows that mobility management protocols for infrastructure Internet may be used in a wireless mesh network environment. In this research Mobile IPv6 and Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 are successfully implemented in a wireless mesh network environment. Two experiments were carried out: vertical and horizontal handover simulations. Vertical handover simulation involved a heterogeneous wireless environment comprising both wireless local area and wireless mesh networks. An OPNET Mobile IPv6 model was used to simulate the vertical handover experiment. Horizontal handover simulation involved Mobile IPv6 and Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 applied in ns2 wireless mesh network. The vertical handover results show that MIPv6 is able to manage vertical handover between wireless local area and wireless mesh network. The horizontal handover results illustrate that in mesh networks, Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6's performance is superior to Mobile IPv6. Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 generates more throughput and less delay than Mobile IPv6. Furthermore, Fast Handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 drops less data packets than Mobile IPv6. The simulations indicate that even though there are multi-hop communications in wireless mesh networks, the performance of the multi-hop routing may not play a big role in the handover performance. This is so because the mesh routers are mostly static and the multi-hop routes are readily available. Thus, the total handover delay is not affected too much by the WMN hops in the paths for signaling message transmission.