Route Optimization for Network Mobility Based Aeronautical Network Using Correspondent Router

Ruoshan Kong, Jing Feng, Huaibei Zhou

.

DOI: 10.4236/ijcns.2011.410082                

Abstract

The future aeronautical network will be based on IPv6 and the services over the aeronautical network will be classified into 3 domains: Air Traffic Services (ATS), Airline Operational Services (AOS) and Passenger Information and Entertainment Services (PIES), among which the ATS and AOS domains are important for aircraft safety and airline business operation. Some schemes have been proposed to provide IP mobility support for aeronautical network, and Network Mobility (NEMO) scheme is the most promising one. However, using NEMO technology will lead to sub-optimal routing, so route optimization technology is highly desired for NEMO. A route optimization scheme is proposed for the ATS and AOS domains, which introduces the Correspondent Routers to realize the optimal routing and employs an improved procedure to reduce the handoff delay. The route optimization for the PIES domain is also discussed to provide better performance for some special scenarios.

Keywords

Aeronautical Network, Network Mobility, Route Optimization, Correspondent Router

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	International Civil Aviation Organization, “Manual for the ATN Using IPS Standards and Protocols (Doc 9896),” 1st Edition, Unedited Advance version, February 2009.
[2]	W. Eddy, W. Ivancic and T. Davis, “Network Mobility Route Optimization Requirements for Operational Use in Aeronautics and Space Exploration Mobile Networks,” RFC 5522, October 2009.
[3]	Christian Bauer and Martina Zitterbart, “A Survey of Protocols to Support IP Mobility in Aeronautical Communications,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, Vol. PP, No. 99, 2010, pp. 1-16. doi:10.1109/SURV.2011.111510.00016
[4]	D. Johnson, C. Perkins and J. Arkko, “Mobility Support in IPv6,” RFC 3775, June 2004.
[5]	V. Devarapalli, R. Wakikawa, A. Petrescu and P. Thubert, “Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol,” RFC 3963, January 2005.
[6]	R. Wakikawa, V. Devarapalli, G. Tsirtsis, T. Ernst and K. Nagami, “Multiple Care-of Addresses Registration,” RFC 5648, October 2009.
[7]	R. Wakikawa, S. Koshiba, K. Uehara and J. Murai, “ORC Optimized Route Cache Management Protocol for Network Mobility,” 10th International Conference on Telecommunications (ICT 2003), French Polynesia, Vol. 2, 23 February - 1 March 2003, pp. 1194-1200. doi:10.1109/ICTEL.2003.1191606
[8]	K. Lee, J. Park and H. Kim, “Route Optimization for Mobile Nodes in Mobile Network Based on Prefix Delegation,” IEEE 58th Vehicular Technology Conference, Orlando, 4-7 October 2003, pp. 2035-2038. doi:10.1109/VETECF.2003.1285382
[9]	M. Calderon, C. J. Bernardos, M. Bagnulo, I. Soto and A. de la Oliva, “Design and Experimental Evaluation of a Route Optimization Solution for NEMO,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, Vol. 24, No. 9, September 2006, pp. 1702-1716. doi:10.1109/JSAC.2006.875109
[10]	F. Hoffmann, D. Medina and A. Wolisz, “Protocol Architecture Analysis for Internet Connectivity in Aeronautical Ad Hoc Networks,” 2010 IEEE/AIAA 29th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), Salt Lake City, 3-7 October 2010, pp. (3.C.4-1)-(3.C.4-12). doi:10.1109/DASC.2010.5655370
[11]	R. Hinden and S. Deering, “Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Addressing Architecture,” RFC 3513, April 2003.
[12]	C. Ng and J. Hirano, “Extending Return Routability Procedure for Network Prefix (RRNP),” Internet-Draft (work in progress) draft-ng-Nemo-rrnp-00, October 2004.
[13]	Ruoshan Kong, Jing Feng and Huaibei Zhou, “A New Route Optimization Scheme for Network Mobility: Combining ORC Protocol with RRH Header Based on Quota Mechanism,” Journal of Communications and Networks, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2012. (in press)
[14]	S. Deering and R. Hinden, “Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification,” RFC 2460, December 1998.