International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.

4, August 2014


DOI:10.5121/ijitcs.2014.4401 1

A NOVEL SECURE HANDOVER MECHANISM IN
PMIPV6NETWORKS

K.Mayuri and K.S.Ranjith

Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
SreeVidyanikethan Engg.College, Tirupati, India

ABSTRACT

The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) proposed proxy mobile ipv6 (PMIPv6) is a very promising
network based mobility management protocol. There are three entities LMA MAG and AAA server required
for the proper functioning of PMIPv6.. In PMIPv6 Networks having many disadvantages like signaling
overhead , handover latency ,packet loss problem and long authentication latency problems during
handoff. So we propose a new mechanism called SPAM which performs efficient authentication procedure
globally with low computational cost. It also supports global access technique using ticket based
algorithm. Which allows users mobile terminals to use only one ticket to communicate with their neighbor
Access Points? This algorithm not only reduces the mobile terminals computational cost but also provides
user ID protection to protect user privacy. Through this technique, it can implement handover
authentication protocol, which in turn results in less computation cost and communication delay when
compared with other existing methods.

KEYWORDS

Authentication, handover, Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6).

1. INTRODUCTION

In future Networks wants to allow seamless and secure roaming of mobile devices across wireless
networks through heterogeneous access technologies. PMIPv6 network reduces the handover
latency compared to MIPv6, but it still suffers from packet loss and out-of-sequence problems,
inefficient authentication procedures. Most of the wireless networks use EAP-TLS protocol to
provide mutual authentication mechanism, but PMIPv6 networks do not support this protocol.
The reasons are

1) Mobile node and Authentication server needs to transfer more number of authenticated
messages between them.
2) This protocol uses mostly in large distance between the MN and the CN , it produces the long
handover latency.

So PMIPv6 protocol calls for an efficient handover mechanismsuch as secure
password authentication mechanism(SPAM) for protecting the legal user from various attacks in
PMIPv6 networks. This networks are having some feasible solutions for solving the flaws of the
authentication and handover procedures of PMIPv6.

1) Our scheme performs a bi-casting scheme for avoiding the packet loss problem.
2) It proposes the global authentication mechanismfor reducing the authentication latency.
3) It uses the piggyback technique to reduce the signaling overhead.

International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


2
These techniques are combined with SPAM which produces the global access technique, and it
produces the low computational cost, low handover latency in proxy mobile IPv6 networks. In
this paper, we propose a novel integrated mechanism in PMIPv6 Networks , It provides global
accessibility for communicating the mobile devices in case of roaming situations.

2. NETWORK ARCHITECTURE

Fig. 1 shows the network architecture of PMIPv6, which contains three network entities:
the mobile access gateway (MAG), the local mobility anchor (LMA), and the authentication,
authorization and accounting (AAA) server.



Fig 1: Network Architecture

The MAG is responsible for detecting the movements of an MN and performs mobility-
related signaling with the LMA in place of the MN. The LMA acts in a similar way to the home
agent in MIPv6, and it maintains the binding cache entries for currently registered MNs. The
AAA server is responsible for authenticating the MN.

3. RELATED WORK

Several approaches have been proposed to focus signaling cost, packets loss, computation cost. In
[3] and [4], the authors used AAA Server infrastructure for MN authentication in PMIPv6. The
limitations in their approach are the packets loss and inefficient authentication. The approaches in
[5]-[6] are tried to enhance the handover performance in Proxy Mobile IPv6 Networks , but the
packet loss problemis still there because of the wrong prediction of MNs movement [7]. Packet
lossless PMIPv6 (PL-PMIPv6) is proposed in [8], to prevent the issue of packet loss using buffer
technique.

In wireless networks are assumed to fully integrate different wireless access technologies, in order
to enable their users to exploit the advantages of the various technologies, depending on the
momentary requirements and circumstances. Such access technologies are e.g., the 3GPP Long
TermEvolution (LTE) for wide area coverage at moderate data rates and (future) members of the
IEEE 802.11 family of Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs)[9,10,11] for high data rates at
hotspots. Our contribution extends PMIPv6 with ideas fromFast Handovers for Mobile IPv6
(FMIPv6) Networks . It will be referred to fromnow on as FPMIPv6 Networks. Our addition
PMIPv6 aims to allow the network to manage handovers with support fromthe mobile, while at
the same time considerably reducing handover delays, computational cost.
International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


3
4. EXISTING SYSTEM

Previously the wireless technologies adopt on authentication protocol with the transport layers
security service in order to attain a mutual authentication. There arise some drawbacks for the
authentication protocol. Finally a lot of authentication message should be handled by both the
mobile node and the AAA server. Secondly the AAA server validates in mobile node every time
when it get attached to the different MAG. But the authentication latency should be considered
very high, if the distance between becomes larger. Because of these Disadvantages, the extensible
authentication protocol has a very high signaling overhead and haring a longer latency for
authentation. SPAM performs local authentication procedure. It should not be able to handle the
handover problem. More over the secure password authentication mechanism does not use any of
the buffer mechanismwhich leads to packet loss problem , it does not supports the global access
technique and do not provide any secure group communication.

5. PROPOSED MECHANISM:

In Proposed system, we have to introduce a bi-casting scheme to avoid the packet
loss and out-of-sequence problems and piggyback technique is used to reduce the signaling
overhead. PMIPv6 Networks suffer frommore number of attacks that can be avoided from by
using a secure password authentication mechanism (SPAM). SPAM provides high security
properties, including anonymity, locality privacy, correlated authentication, faking attack
resistance, speed error detection, no clock synchronization problem, scarf-verified attack
resistance, alteration attack resistance, replay attack resistance, and session key agreements .

In this paper, we have to proposed a new algorithm called ticket based algorithmit performs fast
re-authentication method for supporting the global access technique. This ticket based scheme
integrates with the SPAM technique, which reduces the mobile nodes computational cost. It
allows mobile terminal to use single ticket for fast re-authentication to their neighbor Mobile
Access Gateway (MAG). The mobile node (MN) receives the handover ticket as a proof of
authorization in authentication server and gives this corresponding ticket while associating with
new MAG.

The proposed algorithmalso reduces the handover delay during the re-authentication
phase to delay of 2-way handshake between an Mabile Access Gateway and Mobile Node.
Comparing with other algorithms , this gives fewer burdens while satisfying PMIPv6 security
requirements that results in the reduction of mobile terminals computation cost and
authentication steps. It also provides an efficient key management scheme for secure group
communications in PMIPv6 networks. The Systemarchitecture can be shown in Fig 2.














International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


4

























Fig 2: SystemArchitecture

A. Assumptions

The main assumption of this paper is that the MAG, LMA and AAA have the
protection links by using Internet Key Exchange Protocol version 2. Therefore, they can use pre-
shared symmetric key to support the authentication procedure.

B. Bi-casting technique

The Bi-casting technique helps to avoid some problems such as packet loss and out-
of-sequence problems. The authentication procedure performing at the AAA server results in
increased handover latency and also the workload increased within many of the mobile node
change to the efficient MAG location frequently. By the integration of secure password
authentication mechanismin handover procedure. The handover latency would be reducing.

In addition to this bi-casting technique help to prevent the loss of packet during sending and
receiving. The bi-casting procedure commences when the sever MAG sends an initial handover
proxy message to the target MAG which was encrypted by a symmetric key. The target MAG
decrypts the message and starts to buffer the packet to in order to avoid the packed loss. The
target MAG sends an encrypted message to the LMA at that the verification process can be done.
If it is success then the LMA replies with the encrypted message to the target MAG. If it is not
MN
SPAM
Handover
procedure with
SPAM and
Password
Change
Procedure
Initial
Registration
Procedure
Authentication
Procedure
Ticket based
authentication
scheme
International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


5
success then the process cant be run further. The extra signaling message was not transmitted
from the LMA to the target MAG because it piggybacks the data packets.

The LMA was verified by the target MAG for the mutual authentication and it replies
with an acknowledgment message to the server MAG. The mobile node sends a message to the
target MAG that piggybacks all the information that are authentication after which a global
authentication was performed by the target MAG. The target MAG encrypted the message with
the help of the session key and sends it to LMA which replay with the PBA message to the target
MAG. The encrypted message was finally send the mobile node after verification.

C. Piggyback mechanism

The piggyback mechanismhelps to reduce the signaling overhead. When the mobile node send
the RS message to the target MAG. the piggyback mechanismpiggyback the message that are
authenticated. The target MAG after the successful verification of the encrypted PBA message
send the RA message to the mobile node which piggybacks the authentication result.

D. Ticket based Algorithm:

The proposed algorithmis composed of two parts that are initial registration procedure and
authentication procedure.

1. Notations: The notations used throughout this paper are listed in Table I.


Table 1: Notations

2. Initial Registration Procedure

Before an MN joins in a localized mobility domain, it needs to perform the
initial registration procedure with the AAA server via a secure channel. The steps of the
procedure are described as follows:
Symbol Description
PW
MN
Password of MN
ID
MN
Public Identification of MN
MN
mac
MNs MAC address
E
k
MAGs and AAA pre-shared group key
T A Validity time for the handover ticket
HT
MN
A Handover ticket for MN to use for handover to their neighbor MAGs
r
MN
A randomnumber generated by MN
MIC
MN
A Message Integrity Code for MN and MAG to authenticate each other
PTK A Session key uses between MN and MAG
PRF Pseudo RandomFunctions
ID
MAG
Public Identification of MAG
Sk
i-j
Session key between entity i and j
E
ski-j
(M) Message M is encrypted Using Session key Sk
i-j
with symmetric Cryptography
h() Collision free one way hash function
N
i
Nonce or randomnumber i
PSK Secure pre shared symmetric Key among legal MAGs and the LMA
XOR operator
|| Combination of Strings
PMK Pair wise Master Key
International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


6
1. First MN sends the ID and Password to the AAA server.
2. The AAA server stores this information and generates the handover ticket.
3. The AAA server sends both information includes ID
MN
and ticket send to the MN and at the
MN side it stores the information in the smartcard.


(1) ID
MN
,PW
MN

(2) Store MN information
(3) Generate ticket

(MN
mac
,(MN
mac
,PMK)E
k
,T,(ESK
AAA
(PMK))
(4) ID
MN
, (MN
mac
,(MN
mac
,PMK)E
k
,T,(ESK
AAA
(PMK))

Fig 3: Initial registration procedure

3. Authentication Procedure

This section contains two parts. In Part 1, the mutual authentication between
the MN and the MAG. This authentication process is executed between the MN and MAG by
using the ticket. Fig 4.shows the authentication process of the Part I.


(1) Send (HT
MN
,r
MN
,MIC
MN
) (2) Check HT
MN
(3) Decrypt (MN
mac
,PMK)E
k

(4) Decrypt (ESK
AAA
(PMK))
(5) Compare MIC with MIC
MN

(6) Compute MIC
MAG
and session key (PTK)
(7) (r
MN
,MIC
MAG
)
(8) Compare MIC
MN
with MIC
MAG

Fig 4: Part 1- Mutual Authentication between the MN and the MAG

Whenever the user wants to access the services, she or he inserts the smart card to the
card reader and enters the ID and password of MN. The smart card checks whether it is valid or
not if it is valid then MN sends re-authentication request to MAG include (HT
MN
,r
MN
,MIC
MN
).

After receiving the authentication request by MAG then it first checks HT
MN
,T is in
a validity time or not, if it is valid then uses the MAG and AAA pre-shared group key to decrypt(
MN
MAC
(PMK))to get PMK ,after that compare PMK is identical or not ,if it is identical its
indicates handover ticket is issued fromAAA server.
MN
AAA
Smart card
MN AAA
International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


7
Afterwards compare MIC with MIC
MN
,if they are identical it indicates MN is a
legitimate MN, then computes MIC
MAG
and session key (PTK),after that sends re-authentication
response(r
MN
,MIC
MAG
)to the mobile node. After MN receives (r
MN
,MIC
MAG
) comparing MIC
MAG
with MIC
MN
, MAG, if they are identical it indicates that MAG is a legitimate MAG, MN
computes PTK for communicating with MAG.



1. Store ticket generated in AAA
2. Generate N
3

3. Compute h(ID
MAG
||N
3
)
4. ID
MAG
,E
PSK
(N
3
||h(ID
MAG
||N
3
))
5. Use PSK to retrieve N
3
and
h(ID
MAG
||N
3
)
6. Check h(ID
MAG
||N
3
)
7. Generate N
4

8. Compute h(ID
MAG
||N
4
)
9. SK
LMA-MAG
=h(N
3
||N
4
)
10.ID
LMA,
E
PSK
(N
3
+1||N
4
|| h(ID
MAG
||N
4
))
11. Check N
3
+1
12. Obtain N
4

13. SK
LMA-MAG
= h(N
3
||N
4
)
14. ESK
LMA-MAG
(N
4
+1)
15. Check N
4
+1
Fig 5: Part 2 Mutual Authentication between the MAG and the LMA

In Part 2 the mutual authentication between the MAG and LMA it shows in Fig 5. The
MAG generates the nonce and computes the hash function. This encrypted message send to the
LMA, then the LMA is decrypted this message and compared it. This two messages are equal
means it generates the nonce otherwise it drops the message. Again LMA replies to the MN it
contains ID of LMA, and the encrypted message. After receives the message then MN decrypts
the encrypted message send by the mobile node, if the result is same MN calculates the session
key then the MN using that session key and generates the encrypted message to the LMA. The
LMA uses the same symmetric key to decrypt the message and provides the nonce value to avoid
unacceptable MAG executing replay attack.



MAG LMA
International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


8
4. Handover Procedure by using Ticket Based Algorithm and Bicasting Scheme

The following procedure explains the handover process by using the ticket based scheme in
PMIPv6 networks. Here the purpose of this algorithmis to provide global access instead of using
local authentication and the bi-casting scheme is used to avoid the packet loss and out-of-
sequence problems.



Fig 6: Handover process with Ticket based and Bicasting scheme

HI Handover Initiation
PBU Proxy Binding Update
PBA Proxy Binding Acknowledgement
HACK Handover Acknowledgement
RS Router Solicitation
RA Router Acknowledgement
Fig6. Describes the handover procedure is as follows:
Firstly MAG was detecting the MN range whenever the MN to leave the range of the serving
MAG ( i.e. MAG1).


International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


9
Step 1: MAG1 (serving MAG) sends a proxy HI message to the MAG2(target MAG) , this
message includes the ID of MN, and pre-shared symmetric key.
Step 2: MAG2 decrypts the message which can be received from the MAG1 and starts the
buffering to avoid the packet loss.
Step 3: MAG2 sends the encrypted message i.e. (E
PSK
(B-PBU||N
3
||h (N
3
||ID
MAG
))) to the LMA.
Step 4: LMA verifies MAG2 (in part 2 of Fig 5) and generates the session key and also stores the
binding table entry of the mobile node. Afterwards the LMA builds the bicasting tunnel between
the LMA and the MAG2. The LMA starts to transmit the packet to both MAG1 and MAG2.
Step 5: LMA sends the encrypted message (E
PSK
(B-PBA||N
3
+1||N
4
||h(N
4
||ID
LMA
))) to the MAG2.
The B-PBA message is used to avoid the signaling overhead messages fromLMA to MAG2.
Step 6: The MAG2 verifies the LMA (in part2 of fig 5) for the mutual authentication, and MAG2
Calculates the session key SK
LMA-MAG.

Step 7: MAG2 replies the MAG1 (Proxy HACK) encrypted message by the pre-symmetric key.
Step 8: MN sends the RS message which includes the (AID
MN
, E
C4
(R
S
||AUTH
MN
||N
1
)to the
MAG2 and it is attached to the MN.
Step 9: MAG2 performs the global authentication procedure and the detailed process explained in
Part 1 of Fig 4.
Step 10: MAG2 sends the BPU encrypted message by using session key SK
LMA-MAG
to the LMA.
Step 11: LMA decrypts the BPU message and stops the bicasting also refreshes the binding entry
of MN.
Step 12: Again the LMA replies an encrypted PBA message to the MAG2.
Step 13: The MAG2 verifies the PBA message and send the RA message to the MN.
Step 14: On receipt of RA message, the MN authenticates the MAG for achieving the mutual
authentication. Detailed processes are described in part 1 of Fig 4. If the MN is same in Localized
Mobility Domain (LMD) it retains the original address, otherwise MN configures the global IPv6
address from the Host Network Prefix (HNP) auto configuration procedures. Then MN generates
the session key SK
MN-MAG
for secure communication.
Step 15: MN communicates with the MAG2 with low handover latency, low computational cot
and avoids the packet loss problem.

E. key Management

Key management has set of techniques and other procedure support for establishing a strong and
secure relationship between the authorized parties. The key management is provided with the
security policy that defined the threats of the systemeither explicates or implicit.

The security policy may affect the cryptographic requirements of the system based on
the environment of the susceptibility. The security policy specific some procedures to be carried
out for the technical aspect of the key management which involves the security of each parity
involved. The digital signature which provides the authentication of data is valid if and only if the
private key of the user is maintained security.

6. ANALYSIS

The following results are obtained by using a tool called ns2 ( Network Simulator Tool).

1) Handover latency

The handover latency refers to the time during which the MN is unable to transmit and
receive packets when the handover is performed. The total handover latency is composed of delay
that occurs while performing deregistration, authentication, registration, and RS/RA processes.
The latency for these processes is represented as:
International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


10
HL
SPAM
=t
L2
+t
P
+t
R
+t
RS/RA

=t
L2
+t
P
+2t
MN-MAG
+
2t
LMA-MAG
+t
MAG-AAA
In above equation, we supposed that

t
L2
=handover latency of layer 2.
t
p
=authentication procedure processing latency.
t
R
=registration latency.
t
RS/RA
=latency for RS and RA messages.
t
MN-MAG
=wireless propagation delay between MN and MAG.
t
LMA-MAG
=propagation delay between LMA and MAG.
t
MAG-AAA
=propagation delay between MAG and AAA server.

The values of t
P
, t
MAG-MAG
and t
LMA-MAG
are set as 10, 5 and 30ms respectively. The parameters
t
MN-MAG
and t
MAG-AAA
are variables.



Fig 7. Handover latency versus t
MN-MAG
latency.



Fig 8. Handover latency versus t
MAG-AAA
latency

Fig.7 shows the handover latency versus latency between MN and MAG. The results demonstrate
that if latency is increased between MN and MAG, the SPAM has lower handover latency than
existing schemes. In Fig. 8 shows the variation of velocity between MAG and AAA servers has
greatly affected the handover latency of existing schemes.

International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


11
Whereas, due to exclusion of AAA server, the velocity increases between MAG and AAA servers
has no affect on SPAM. Thus, in terms of handover latency SPAM performance is more efficient
than other schemes.

2) Signaling cost

The signaling costs mean the total amount of cost for authentication and handover signaling when
the MN performs handover. The handover process includes different phases such as
deregistration, authentication and registration. Here, the performance of signaling costs regarding
user mobility is evaluated through fluid flow (FF) mobility model. The FF mobility model is
adopted to distribute the movement direction of MN uniformly in the range of (0, 2 ). The
crossing rate for subnets (MAG and LMA) is computed as follows:

SC
SPAM
=2 C
r
n {[( D
MAGMAG
) +( D
MAGLMA)]+[(
D
MNMAG
) +( D
MAGLMA
)]}

In the above equation, represents unit of transmission cost for wired link, represents unit of
transmission cost for wireless link, n represents total number of MAGs in a domain, the other
network parameters such as n, D
MAG-MAG
, and etc.are considered as variables.

The values for different parameters are set as: d=.00314(MNs/m2), l =100m, =1, =2, D
MN-
MAG
=1 hop, D
MAG-MAG
=1 hop and D
MAG-LMA=
1 hop.

Fig 9: shows the signaling cost of other scheme such as pre-PMIPv6 and re-PMIPv6 is reduced
by decreasing number of hops. We can observe that our proposed scheme performed efficiently in
all the three situations in terms of signaling cost because the authentication and mobility is
handled globally and AAA server is excluded.



Fig 9. Signaling cost versus velocity of MN (D
MAG-AAA
=1 hop).

3) Packet loss

In Fig. 10 and Fig. 11, our proposed scheme outperforms the existing schemes
regarding packet losses. The packets loss rate in PMIPv6 is high because of having no buffer
systemduring handover. In PL-PMIPv6, the packets loss occurred before the bi-directional tunnel
process between LMA and new MAG. The rate of packets loss in Re-PMIPv6 is increased due to
wrong handover action by increasing the number of target MAGs. The SPAM uses buffer and
local mutual authentication without the inclusion of AAA server, which helps in avoiding the
issue of packets lost completely.

International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


12


Fig 10. Packet loss versus number of handovers (#of target MAG =1).



Fig 11. Packet loss versus number of handovers (#of target MAG =5).

4) Computational Cost

Earlier days we have to use some public key schemes to reduce the
computational cost that can be araised as a part of communication between the mobile devices .
But Now a days these schemes such as asymmetric cryptosystem and RSA algorithmare not
suitable to be implemented in mobile devices. Because they cannot afford high computational
load due to limited resources of energy and computing capabilities. So our proposed scheme uses
symmetric cryptographic and hash operations to make it cost effective and simple for
implementation in mobile devices. The existing schemes are used AAA server to authenticate the
entities such as MN, MAG and LMA, which brings an extra computation cost and
communication overhead over the network. We presented a simple and strong procedure in our
scheme to mutually authenticate the entities without the inclusion of any extra computational and
communication cost through any entity. Moreover, the proposed scheme is very efficient
regarding bandwidth saving because it can detect the validity very quickly.

7. CONCLUSION

This paper proposed a secure handover mechanismIn PMIPv6 Networks that
Combined with Group Key Ticket based fast re-authentication protocol which helps to reduce the
mobile terminal computational cost and also authentication steps. It allows mobile terminal to use
International J ournal of Information Technology Convergence and Services (IJ ITCS) Vol.4, No.4, August 2014


13
one ticket without storing lots of tickets that results in fast re-authentication to the neighbor
MAGs and free fromPMK different problem. Thus the proposed scheme makes MN and MAG
authenticating each other that become more facilitate and flexible. SPAM should be able to meet
the security requirements for the network. In addition to that the key management should be able
to provide the secure data communication fromthe source to destination. The work should be
further proceeded to handle the security issue of in mobility management over some complex
environment and using of cryptanalysis technique for providing the robust security system in that
network.

REFERENCES

1. Ming-Chin Chuang, Jeng-Farn Lee, Meng-Chang Chen SPAM: A Secure Password Authentication
Mechanismfor Proxy Mobile IPv6 networks, Vol.7, NO.1, MARCH 2013.
2. W.K.Chiang, H.J.Dai, and C.Luo, Cross-layer handover for SIP applications based on media-
independent pre-authentication with redirect tunneling, in Proc. Second International Conference on
Digital Information and Communication Technology and its Applications, 2012, pp. 348-353.
3. K.S.Kong, W.Lee, Y.H. Han, M.K.Shin and H.You, Mobility management for all-IP mobile
networks: Mobile IPv6 versus proxy mobile IPv6, IEEE Wireless Communications. vol.15, no.2,
pp.3645, April 2008.
4. K.S. Kong, W. Lee, Y. H. Han, and M. K. Shin, Handover latency analysis of a network-based
localized mobility management protocol, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun.,2008, pp. 5838 5843.
5. F.Xia and B.Sarikaya, Mobile node agnostic fast handovers for proxy mobile IPv6, IETF Draft,
Nov 2007.
6. H.Zhou, H. Zhang, and Y. Qin, An authentication method for proxy mobile IPv6 and performance
analysis,Security and Communication Networks, vol. 2, no.5, pp.445454, Sep 2009.
7. M.C. Chuang and J. F.Lee, A lightweight mutual authentication mechanismfor network mobility in
IEEE 802.16e wireless networks, Compute. Net., vol.55, no.16, pp.37963809, Nov 2011.
8. S.Ryu, G.Y.Kim, B. Kim, and Y. Mun,A scheme to reduce packet loss during PMIPv6 handover
considering authentication, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Compute. Sci. Its Applica. 2008, pp. 47 51.
9. J.Lei and X.Fu, Evaluating the benefits of introducing PMIPv6 for localized mobility management,
in Proc., IEEE Int. Wireless Comm. Mobile Compute. Conf.,Aug.2008pp.7480.
10 .J.Guan, H.Zhou, W. Xiao, Z.Yan, Y.Qin and H.Zhang, Implementation and analysis of network-
based mobility management protocol in WLAN environments, in Proc. ACM Mobility Conf. Mobile
World Workshop, Sep. 2008,pp.19.
11. F.Xia and B.Surabaya, Mobile Node Agnostic Fast Handovers for Proxy Mobile IPv6, IETF Draft,
Draft-xianetlmm- fmip-mnagno-02, Nov. 2007.

AUTHORS

K. Mayuri received the B.Tech degree in Computer Science and Engineering fromthe
Department of CSE, Narayana Engineering College affiliated to JNTUA, Guduru , Andhra
Pradesh, in 2012. She is currently doing M.Tech degree in Computer Science fromthe
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Sree Vidyanikethan Engineering
College, Tirupati , Andhra Pradesh, during 2012-2014.Her current research interests include
network security, mobility management and cloud computing.

K.S. Ranjith received the M.E degree in Computer Science from the Department of
Computer Science and Engineering, Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science,
Hindustan University, Chennai, 2012. He is currently Working as an Assistant Professor in
CSE Department at Sree Vidyanikethan Engineering College, Tirupati , Andhra Pradesh.
His current research interests include Software testing, network security and mobility
management.