**2.1.1 Simulation scenario**

4 Mobile Networks

Currently, there is competition for the dominant 4G standard. Advanced LTE has a higher market share than advanced WIMAX because it is part of the evolution of GSM and UMTS networks and represents 80% of the worldwide market. However, WIMAX today has a significant market share in the United States. We believe that both LTE and WIMAX meet standard requirements and are compatible with the architectures proposed for an all

This chapter is focusing in the integration of mobility protocol (IPv6 extensions) and the protocol of quality of services (MPLS). The RSVP protocol has been used as signalization protocol. The metrics of quality of services tested are: Delay, jitter, throughput, the send and received packets, these metrics were chosen because they are the most sensitives in a handover. The integrations tested in this chapter were: HMIPv6/MPLS, FHM IPv6/MPLS, FHAMIPv6/AODV and FHAMIPv6/MPLS. In order to achieve these integration was necessary modify the source codes and adapt the simulator versions (NS-2). In order to

In response to the demands of multimedia services on existing mobile systems, cellular areas will have a smaller radius in order to support higher throughput, ensuring acceptable error rates. Having small cells means that the MN can cross borders more frequently and signalling capacity will increase rapidly. In this section, we will integrate HMIPv6 and MPLS. The architecture used is the proposal by Robert Hsieh. We use us the scenario base (R. Hsieh) and then increasing the number nodes and flow of traffic in order to analyse the scalability of this integration. We analyse the relationship between the different metrics and the number nodes, the main idea is that in an handover the metrics of quality of service will be optimized or by default it's were not degraded. The metrics used were: delay, jitter, send and received packets and throughput. This metrics were chosen because they are most sensitive in a handover.

In other work, was evaluating the HMIPv6/MPLS integration, this works were tested in different scenarios [2,],[8],[9],[10] the integrations were HMIPv6/MPLS/RSVP and the

IPv6/MPLS approach both in access networks as the core of the network.

integrated protocols performance as a new protocol.

Fig. 2. LTE to IP/MPLS and EPC

**2. HMIPv6/MPLS integration** 

The scenario simulated is shown (R. Hsieh) in figure 3. The MN is in the area of HA. The traffic used was CBR because is most sensitive in audio/video application. The Bandwidth configuration and delay of each link go as follows:


Table 1. Simulation scenarios

The traffic used was CBR, since it allows audio and video simulation in real time. These applications have a high demand of QoS.

The figure 3 shows the topology of the simulated network. MPLS is the core of the network and is constituted by the following nodes: 1 (MAP), 2 (LSR1), 3 (LSR2), 4 (LSR3), 7 (LER1 for MPLS and PAR for HMIPv6) and 8 (LER2 for MPLS and NAR for HMIPv6); the tag distribution protocol used by MPLS is RSVP. Finally number 6 is the MN.

Every link shows two of their characteristics: bandwidth (in megabits or kilobits) and delay (in milliseconds).

The figure 3 shows the topology of the simulated network. MPLS is the core of the network and is constituted by the following nodes: 1 (MAP), 2 (LSR1), 3 (LSR2), 4 (LSR3), 7 (LER1 for MPLS and PAR for HMIPv6) and 8 (LER2 for MPLS and NAR for HMIPv6); the tag distribution protocol used by MPLS is RSVP. Finally number 6 is the MN.

Every link shows two of their characteristics: bandwidth (in megabits or kilobits) and delay (in milliseconds).

A few seconds later MN moves toward area PAR/LER as the figure 4 illustrate, finally the MN moves to area NAR/LER as the figure 5 illustrates.

Mechamisms to Provide Quality of Service on 4G New Generation Networks 7

Initially, the MN is located in the area of the HA. 2 seconds after the start of the simulation, the HA moves towards the area of the PAR at 100 m/s, arriving at t=3.5 s approximately. At t=5 s, the CN begins sending CBR traffic to the MN following the route CN→LSR1→HA→LSR1→MAP→LSR2→PAR-MN as shown in figure 3. Then, at t=10 s, the MN starts moving to the area of the NAR at 10 m/s. At the same time, the handover takes places at around t=13.12 s and the MN receives one of the first packets from the NAR. Afterwards, the MN places in the area of the NAR at around t=17 s. Finally, at t=19 s, the

**2.1.2 Description of simulation** 

**Simulation scenarios** 

CN stops sending traffic flow towards the MN.

Fig. 6. Scenario with 9 nodes Figure

Fig. 7. Scenario with 15

Fig. 3. Scenario of HMIPv6/MPLS simulation

Fig. 4. MN moves the area PAR/LER

Fig. 5. MN moves the area NAR/LER

Finally, the MN moves to area NAR/LER as the figure 5 illustrates.
