Modeling the signaling overhead in Host Identity Protocol-based secure mobile architectures

Zoltán Faigl; Miklós Telek

doi:10.3934/jimo.2015.11.887

Article Contents

2015, Volume 11, Issue 3: 887-920. Doi: 10.3934/jimo.2015.11.887

This issue Previous Article Performance analysis of backup-task scheduling with deadline time in cloud computing Next Article Clustering based polyhedral conic functions algorithm in classification

Modeling the signaling overhead in Host Identity Protocol-based secure mobile architectures

Zoltán Faigl^1, and
Miklós Telek^2,

1.
Mobile Innovation Centre, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Műegyetem rkp. 3, Budapest, 1111
2.
MTA-BME Information systems research group and Department of Networked Systems and Services, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Műegyetem rkp. 3, Budapest, 1111

Received: October 31, 2013

Revised: July 31, 2014

Published: June 2015

Abstract Related Papers Cited by

Abstract

One of the key issues in recent mobile telecommunication is to increase the scalability of current packet data networks. This comes along with the requirement of reducing the load of signaling related to establishment and handover procedures. This paper establishes an analytical model to analyze the signaling overhead of two different secure mobile architectures. Both are based on the Host Identity Protocol for secure signaling and use IPsec for secure data transport. The paper presents the cumulative distribution function and moments of security association periods and calculates the rate of different signaling procedures in a synthetic network model assuming M/G/$\infty$ process for session establishments between end-nodes. Using the model, it is shown that the Ultra Flat Architecture has significant performance gains over the traditional End-to-End HIP protocol in large-scale mobile environment in the access networks and toward the rendezvous service, but performs worse in the core transport network between the GWs.

Keywords:

Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary: 68M20, 68M11; Secondary: 68M10, 60K20.

Citation:

Related Papers

Cited by

References

[1]	Cisco visual networking index: Global mobile data traffic forecast update, 2013-2018,, White Paper, (2014),11.
[2]	L. Bokor, Z. Faigl and S. Imre, Survey and evaluation of advanced mobility management schemes in the host identity layer, International Journal of Wireless Networks and Broadband Technologies (IJWNBT), 3 (2014), 34-59.doi: 10.4018/ijwnbt.2014010103.
[3]	L. Bokor, Z. Faigl and S. Imre, A Delegation-based HIP Signaling Scheme for the Ultra Flat Architecture, Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Security and Communication Networks (IWSCN'10), Karlstad, Sweden, (2010), 1-8.doi: 10.1109/IWSCN.2010.5498001.
[4]	D. J. Daley, The Busy Period of the M/GI/$\infty$ Queue, Queueing Syst. Theory Appl., 38 (2001), 195-204.doi: 10.1023/A:1010958415137.
[5]	K. Daoud, P. Herbelin and N. Crespi, UFA: Ultra Flat Architecture for high bitrate services in mobile networks, Proceedings of the IEEE 19th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC 2008), Cannes, France, (2008), 1-6.doi: 10.1109/PIMRC.2008.4699577.
[6]	Z. Faigl, Performance Analysis of Signalling Overhead in Host Identity Protocol-based Secure Mobile Networks: Ultra Flat Architecture or End-to-End Signalling?, Wireless Networks, 10.1007/s11276-014-0797-8 (2014), 1-25.doi: 10.1007/s11276-014-0797-8.
[7]	Z. Faigl, L. Bokor, P. Neves, K. Daoud and P. Herbelin, Evaluation of Two Integrated Signalling Schemes for the Ultra Flat Architecture using SIP, IEEE 802.21, and HIP/PMIP Protocols, Computer Networks, 55 (2011), 1560-1575.doi: 10.1016/j.comnet.2011.02.005.
[8]	A. Gurtov, M. Komu and R. Moskowitz., Host Identity Protocol (HIP): Identifier/Locator Split for Host Mobility and Multihoming, Internet Protocol Journal, 12 (2009), 27-32.
[9]	T. Heer and S. Varjonen, Host Identity Protocol Certificates, RFC 6253, IETF, May 2011. Available from: http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6253.txt.
[10]	P. Jokela, R. Moskowitz and P. Nikander, Using the Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) Transport Format with the Host Identity Protocol (HIP), RFC 5202, IETF, April 2008. Available from: http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5202.txt.
[11]	T. Kivinen and M. Kojo, More Modular Exponential (MODP) Diffie-Hellman groups for Internet Key Exchange (IKE), RFC 3526, IETF, May 2003. Available from: http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3526.txt.
[12]	V. G. Kulkarni, Modeling and Analysis of Stochastic Systems, 2nd edition, Chapman & Hall, Ltd., London, UK, 2009.
[13]	J. Laganier, T. Koponen and L. Eggert, Host Identity Protocol (HIP) Registration Extension, RFC 5203, IETF, April 2008. Available from: http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5203.txt.
[14]	R. Moskowitz et al, Host Identity Protocol, RFC 5201, IETF, April 2008. Available from: http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5201.txt.
[15]	P. Nikander and J. Arkko, Delegation of Signalling Rights, in Security Protocols, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (eds. Bruce Christianson, Bruno Crispo, James A. Malcolm, and Michael Roe), 2845 (2004), 203-214.doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-39871-4_17.
[16]	P. Nikander, T. Henderson, C. Vogt and J. Arkko, End-Host Mobility and Multihoming with the Host Identity Protocol, RFC 5206, IETF, April 2008. Available from: http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5206.txt.
[17]	E. Rescorla, Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Method, RFC 2631, IETF, June 1999. Available from: http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2631.txt.