Next Article in Journal
Resource-Efficient Hardware Implementation of Perspective Transformation Based on Central Projection
Next Article in Special Issue
PABAFT: Channel Prediction Approach Based on Autoregression and Flexible TDD for 5G Systems
Previous Article in Journal
FPGA Implementation for the Sigmoid with Piecewise Linear Fitting Method Based on Curvature Analysis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Mobile Broadband Performance Evaluation: Analysis of National Reports
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:

Mobility Management Issues and Solutions in 5G-and-Beyond Networks: A Comprehensive Review

The School of Electrical, Computer and Telecommunications Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia
Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Bangi 43600, Malaysia
Department of Computer Science, Shifa School of Computing, Shifa Tameer-e-Millat University, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
Department of Computer Science and Communications Engineering, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Waseda University, Tokyo 169-8050, Japan
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Electronics 2022, 11(9), 1366;
Received: 27 March 2022 / Revised: 18 April 2022 / Accepted: 21 April 2022 / Published: 25 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wireless Network Protocols and Performance Evaluation, Volume II)


The fully accomplished standardization of the new mobile generation has led to the deployment of fifth-generation (5G) wireless networks to gratify enormous traffic volume for Internet services. The current centralized mobility system could not be sufficient to manage an explosive increase in data volume and is considered a steadily rising issue in modern wireless communication. A new technique that can affluently handle traffic problems and completely avoid network breakdown chances is indispensable. Recently, distributed mobility management (DMM) was introduced to overcome the inevitable obstacles that destructively impact the existing networks. Specifically, a novel design based on the deployment of distributed mobility anchors, closer to the terminal points, was introduced. Several works have been proposed to build DMM solutions with different focuses for 5G-and-beyond networks (B5G), which are also referred to as sixth-generation solutions (6G). In this paper, we present the potential and benefits of flat network design for efficient and fast routing of traffic and furnish the effectiveness of the scheme toward mobility management in B5G by delineating recent research works. We also present the current limitations, challenges, and future research directions for seamless mobility to achieve the desired objectives in the current 5G and upcoming 6G cellular communications.

1. Introduction

With the globalization of mobile services, the current fifth-generation (5G)-and-beyond mobile networks are predicted to exploit radio resources via several access technologies for diversified services [1]. In parallel, mobile users and intelligent machines accessing data services are increasing in leaps and bounds. The types of applications and services accessed by devices are included but not limited to heavy-bandwidth multimedia sources, immersive media—such as augmented reality (AR) [2,3] and virtual reality (VR) [4]—and traffic handling from a large cluster of sensors, i.e., Internet of Things (IoT) [5,6], interference management [7,8], routing [9], and so on. The 5G-and-beyond (B5G) network and the upcoming 6G network is thus considered to be an extremely heterogeneous ecosystem of various technologies, including the following: ultra-dense networks (UDN) [10], device-to-device (D2D) communication [11,12], mmWave approach [13,14], low-power nodes (LPNs) [15], IoT-based smart cities [16], multitier network architecture [17,18], vehicular networks [19], ad hoc network [20], Internet of Everything (IoE) [21], network routing [22], network slicing [23], multiple-input and multiple-output (MIMO) platforms [24], and aerial platforms [25]. The wide variety of many use cases in the 5G heterogeneous network (HetNet) greatly increases the load on mobility management functions as compared with third-generation (3G) and fourth-generation (4G) long-term evolution (LTE) [26]. Principally, mobility management is the procedure that maintains data information at the location of smart devices and controls their link connections when commuting between coverage areas [27]. The mobility protocols ensure the delivery of useful data and control signals via a radio interface link to the desired user [28]. However, to provide seamless mobility in a multitier HetNet system for all radio-connected smart devices, a uniform network deployment is impractical [29]. Hence, the 5G and forthcoming cellular networks require flexibility in network topology, ultra-reliability in handover mechanism, and modification in management protocols, to guarantee efficient provisioning of anticipated services [30,31].
Under worldwide Internet connectivity requests from the users and their convergence with cellular carriers, cellular access networks have been experiencing abundant new challenges and demanding various extensions in mobility protocols [20]. Thus, the modification of current networks for better handover performance, overhead cost, routing process, and other mobility-related processes is mandatory to meet the requirements of IoT-based smart wireless devices [32]. In mobile Internet, the mounting concern is the deployment of mobility support in the content delivery network (CDN) environment [33]. In the CDN, the content servers are placed closer to the access network to provide a suboptimal path to the mobile nodes (MNs) in close range. The CDN needs an efficient framework for robust mobility management protocols [34].
Witnessing the explosive growth in mobile Internet traffic in NR 5G and mobility support limitations, the current centralized network design raises a major challenge in handover management and performance enhancement [35]. Particularly, mobility management for end-users with frequent roaming and location changes, applications necessities, and preferences are crucial [36]. The centralized architecture is deficient in transparent data path management to the Internet protocol (IP) stack of the MN [37]. In this centralized architecture, all the IP traffic flows of the MN must pass through the same mobility process irrespective of importance. In Figure 1, the end-to-end data path between the communication peers (i.e., Mobile-1 and Mobile-2), is compelled to traverse the packet data network gateway (PGW) of the MNs core network instead of taking the most optimal path provided by local IP routing or direct link. Consequently, it threatens single points of failure, suboptimal routing, unnecessary access to mobility resources, and scalability problems. This design favors simplicity but increases the performance cost and overall latency, completely undesirable for 5G and beyond radio access carriers.
Therefore, it is fundamental to contemplate the momentous technological advancement and accessing products, novel mission-critical cases, and predecessor’s limitations [38]. The future 5G networks demand a new and stringent mobility management mechanism [39]. The rising trend for the mobility process in cellular architecture is to become flattered and include minimum hierarchy levels [40]. The unconventional changes to current mobility protocols ensure reliability, low latency, and ease in network operability [41]. The new distributed mobility management (DMM) technique is essential, and can affluently handle traffic problems, avoid network breakdown chances, and overcome the inevitable obstacles that destructively impact the existing networks [42]. It may integrate the needed extension with local content servers and the flat network architecture to simplify deployment decisions and enhance the overall performance [43].
Most of the currently developed IP mobility solutions are derived from the mobile Internet protocol (MIP) principles. In MIP, a mobility anchor, i.e., a home agent (HA), maintains the MNs’ bindings, and data traffic is then encapsulated between an MN or its respective access point (AP) [44,45]. The MIP-based solutions have been implemented in a centralized design and supported the mobility contexts as well as traffic encapsulation. Such centralized deployment of mobility management gives an opportunity to optimally route data packets to an MN without the consideration of the MN’s location. Additionally, it maintains credible IP session connectivity during the handovers mechanism, i.e., when the MN changes its point of attachment. However, in comparison with the DMM mechanisms, the existing centralized approach possesses several challenges, especially in scalability, cost, and transmission delay [46].
The summary of paper structure and organization is depicted in Figure 2.

2. Motivation and Contribution

In recent years, DMM has emerged as a potential mechanism to minimize the everlasting centralized issues prosperously. It was first presented by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) as a new concept of a flatter system [47]. The DMM-based approaches preserve the current IPv6 mobility management protocols along with control-plane/data-plane split to meet the 5G requirements [48]. For example, mobility management functions and roles can be distributed in the data plane, while the control plane could be either distributed or centralized [49]. It is considered the best alternative to centralized mobility management (CMM) by enabling the anchoring of data traffic closer to the MNs’ point of attachment, conducing flattening mobile network design. The unique DMM approach allows the MN to perform multi-connectivity with distributed mobility anchors, optimizing data packet routing as the MN moves and changes its connected base point [50]. Lately, there are many studies have been performed to realize various aspects of the flat IP architectural concept. For instance, some authors have presented a DMM solution for efficient handling of mobile video traffic [51,52] and other researchers have provided an overview of standards and proceeding on DMM [53,54,55]. Similarly, researchers in [56] extensively discussed the DMM designs, user impacts, and network performance. However, no one from the researcher community has critically presented the flatter network concept from the perspective of DMM consciences and issues for transparent data routing.
Given that mobility management is a challenging task in the multi-scenario radio environment, this paper demonstrates the mobility management issues by considering flat network architecture with DMM arrangements, operations, and recent literature works, as shown in Figure 3. This article presents mobility management problems and proposes optimum solutions from network flattening and the DMM framework.
The details of all the acronyms and their meanings have been explained in Abbreviations.

3. Network Flattening

Network flattening designs enable direct IP connectivity for the users from the closest gateway to co-located base stations (BSs) [57]. In practice, a classic example of such a flat architecture is the wireless fidelity (Wi-Fi) APs with its co-located access gateway, i.e., directly connected to the Internet (without tunneling to the core network) [58]. One of the critical enhancement cases in NR 5G and the forthcoming 6G network remains largely on deploying a complete, flat, IP-based system. In a flatter access design, thousands of multiple, high-definition (HD) application data traffic can be easily offloaded within the local AP area [59]. The new design would be helpful in the massive reduction in signaling cost, data routing end-to-end latencies, operational complexities, and localization [60]. Among all other advantages, the most impactful is effectiveness in mobility and active routing of 1000-fold rise data traffic management [61]. Simultaneously, it helps minimize the probability of packet data loss and traffic congestion at the core network besides enhancing the quality of experience (QoE).

3.1. Background

Mobile operators have been searching for smart and efficient ways to reduce revenue costs and extend their network capacities with data offloading techniques in flatter design [62]. Several engineering firms, Internet service providers, standardization authorities, and research pundits presented many ideas focusing on different aspects of mobility support. In this context, the Third-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) has also presented two IP schemes, i.e., local IP access (LIPA) and selected IP traffic offload (SIPTO) [63]. The basic idea is to enable users to access data from locally accessible peering locations via LPNs, thus freeing up cellular system capacity [64]. The 3GPP suggested solutions are productive to alleviate heavy data volume pressure and simplify mobility management over the conventional mobile architecture. It is mainly because, in the 3GPP 3G/4G hierarchically centralized design, total data traffic volume is routed via a centrally placed mobility anchor, i.e., an IP mobility anchor in an IP-based system [65]. Then, the packet data network gateway (PGW) in a 3GPP evolved packet core (EPC) aggregates traffic from several edge nodes and acts as a link between the operators and external IP networks. Principally, PGW is responsible for assigning IP addresses and trailing the movements of MNs within the IP topology. It also ensures that MNs must always be reachable at their current point of attachment (PoA) by using traffic tunneling.

3.1.1. GPP LTE LIPA/SIPTO Mechanism

The 3GPP-proposed LIPA and SIPTO approaches were introduced in 4G to alleviate the traffic load of the cellular core network [66]. Both mechanisms are briefly discussed below.
SIPTO: The SIPTO technique enables an operator to offload certain types of data traffic at a network node that is optimally closer to the MN point of connection. The operation is conducted by selecting the reliable serving gateway (S-GW) and PGW that are also geographically near the MN’s access point, as shown in Figure 4a [67].
LIPA: The LIPA technique enables an MN connected to the LPN to connect to other local IP networks in proximity avoiding the operator’s core network being crossed by the user plane system, as shown in Figure 4b. In this method, a local gateway (L-GW) is included, directly connected with the femtocell that acts as a PGW (LTE). When the LIPA default bearer (LTE) is configured, the MN data traffic flows are directly rerouted to the L-GW and then move into the local network without channeling through the wireless access or core network. Thereby, the LIPA approach is compatible with any smart device without executing modifications in software design [68].
In the 3GPP standardization Release-10, both LIPA and SIPTO have been implemented, but are provided with minimal support in mobility and offloading issues [69]. The reason for the persistence of the issues is largely due to the bearer’s disappearance whenever the mobile disconnects from the femtocell. In the subsequent Release-11, a working theme on LIPA mobility and SIPTO at the local network (LIMONET) was presented to assist partial mobility support to the proposed approaches. Here, SIPTO mobility has remained unproductive in the case where S-GW and PGW are in the radio access network (RAN) site; additionally, it was not taken into the account within the local network level. Nonetheless, the LIPA mobility technique is applied for handovers between LPN femtocells by using the same L-GW [70].
In view of the proliferation of smart, intelligent equipment, many APs in close range create a dense network environment. It is forecasted that hundreds of different sizes of APs would be in the range of 1 km2 terrestrial area in the next few years and coined the term UDN [71]. The current 5G cellular services sharply respond to the ongoing useful data demand with higher throughput and low latency. Yet, in the near future, especially for 6G cellular systems where every intelligent device or machine will be in contact with each other—such as D2D, aerial platforms, MNs, and vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication [72,73], etc.—trouble will occur in data traffic management. The extreme densification of various smart peripherals in a multitier HetNet design and massive data load could have been the reason for complete chaos in the core network and heavy intrusions [74]. In consideration of traditional CMM design in the HetNet scenario, the probabilities of frequent data corruption, network breakdown, latency, and congestion are extremely high and devastative. For the management of data resources for various applications and new wireless services, plus to avoid the various core network hurdles, a flat architectural system is of the utmost importance.

3.1.2. PMIPv6 Mobility in the 3GPP EPC Design

Proxy Mobile Internet Protocol version 6 (PMIPv6) was deemed by 3GPP to utilize in LTE system architecture to support IP mobility management [75]. In this work, S-GW is used as the mobile access gateway (MAG) and PGW is complemented as the local mobility anchor (LMA) of PMIPv6, whereas the backhaul interfaces S1 and X2 handovers perform the same as the conventional LTE [76]. Another important aspect of PMIPv6 in LTE architecture is that it uses generic routing encapsulation (GRE) tunneling instead of general packet radio service (GPRS) tunneling between S-GW and PGW. It also exchanged proxy-binding update (PBU) and proxy-binding acknowledgment (PBA) messages between S-GW and PGW rather than “modify bearer request” and response messages. The format of PMIPv6 in the 3GPP EPC model is shown in Figure 5.

3.1.3. Advantages of PMIPv6 over MIPv6

The mobility MIPv6 protocols have been implemented in a centralization-based mobility mechanism in mobile access networks. It showed the plausibility of maintaining MN applications and displayed sufficient support for moving terminals. However, with the dramatic changes in traffic dynamics of wireless communication, the abilities of MIPv6 are considered unreliable and PMIPv6 was introduced to overcome the shortcomings of the existing mobility design [77,78]. PMIPv6 exhibited three major advantages over the conventional mechanism that are discussed below.
  • It significantly minimized HO-related signaling overheads by evading tunneling overheads over the air along with remote binding updates either to the correspondent node (CN) or HA.
  • By keeping the MN’s home address unchanged, it reduced the possibility of malicious attacks that could expose the precise position of the MN.
  • Latency in IP HOs limits the performance by keeping the mobility management functions within the PMIPv6 domain. It largely avoided remote service, which is critical in initiating long services.
Table 1 depicts the baseline comparison between two IPv6 schemes, i.e., MIPv6 and PMIPv6, based on numerous protocol criteria.

3.2. Literature Related to Mobility Management in Network Flattering

The recent research work on mobility management in flatter access networks with different categorizations is summarized below.

3.2.1. SDN-Based Mobility Management

Software-defined network (SDN)-based approaches are designed for flexible and dynamic controlling and monitoring of network assignments via software. In cellular networks, an SDN is responsible for maximizing the general routing protocols in networking, helping to update the hardware components used for observation and generating critical analysis reports for managing all networking components. We have discussed some of the SDN-based mobility management methods from the recent literature focused on managing and controlling the networking components.
For example, the authors in [79] focused on handling heavy data traffic in SDN-EPC cellular systems by using cloud computing and functions virtualization approaches. The results achieved reliable routing with low handover (HO) latency, but the technique could be tested for a higher density of the users, whereas a call control flow for the HO case in the current mobile architecture was evaluated [80]. The proposed SDN plus mobile network (S+ MN) solution has managed to significantly reduce signaling and delay problems to the tunnel and routing-based IP mobility management approaches. The authors in [81] have implemented a network based partially on the DMM-SDN solution, considering the growth in maintaining session continuity, performance, and scalability. The results confirmed that the suggested scheme provides fundamental advantages in the HetNet access network. Similarly, a new protocol type, on-demand mobility, was used, focusing on HO and signaling cost issues in [82]. The analytical results validated the sharp reduction in HO latency and up to 50% signaling cost, whereas in [83] an SDN-based fast HO optimum routing in DMM (SDN-FHOR-DMM) scheme was proposed for vehicle communication. It improved current SDN-based mobility management protocols in terms of signaling cost, HO delay, and loss of packets.

3.2.2. Performance in Dense Network

To increase the network reliability and maintain the latency requirement in an ultra-dense user environment in wireless networks, the flat IP design showed high expectations of efficiently managing the available resources, mobility scenarios, and network quality. Because of the need in the current densely deployed radio communication setting to manage arbitrary heavy data applications, the authors in [84] introduced a distributed dynamic mobility management framework for the flat IP system. The outcome of the analysis proved that the proposed solution is effective for flat architectures and significantly avoids specific mobility functions in access gateway or core network nodes. Similarly, imitation issues due to the high density of users and traffic demand in the MIPv6 protocol have been discussed in [85]. Flat access and mobility architecture (FAMA) was presented under the MIPv6 protocol and accomplished better network performance because of the short HO duration and mobility patterns for MNs. Likewise, researchers in [86] presented IP mobility performance issues in a centralized network. It proposed a terminal-centric distribution and orchestration approach by placing the smart intelligence on the MN and achieving higher 5G networks efficiency. Few authors decided to increase mobility suppleness and performance by using a distributed dynamic MIPv6 (DDM) framework [87]. The empirical studies showed that the proposed DDM outperforms MIPv6 in terms of network resources.

3.2.3. Security in Packet Transmission

Security is an essential element in any data transmission network to avoid malicious attacks, loss of confidentiality and privacy, and other harmful attacks. It is a serious concern in wireless access networks, especially when sensor nodes are deployed in the hostile surrounding area. A study was conducted by the researchers in [88] on the false data injection in the flat wireless sensor network (WSN) [89]. An integrated routing and authentication protocol was attempted to achieve multiple goals. The designed technique enabled better routing guidance, the discovery of shared keys between two nodes, and routing paths plus key graphs, updated in an integrated step. A DMM-based, HO-secure and efficient protocol (DMM-SEP) was used, and it commendably minimized the privacy issues and defended against redirection attacks [90].
Since centralized mobility support is undesirable for data contents in 5G-and-beyond cellular wireless systems, it is essential to handle the locations of MNs in a distributed way, but in a highly secure and fault-tolerant environment. An analytical model applying secure and fault-tolerant distributed location management was presented [91]. The evaluated results of the proposed security scheme analyzed the authentication latency time and the number of authentication messages needed for a secure HO. Consequently, the simulation values were excellent and outperformed the popular conventional authentication schemes in a DMM environment. In contrast, the researchers in [92] utilized a blockchain-based DMM approach and tried to remove hierarchical security issues without changing the mobile wireless layout. The contemplated approach created a shield against different sorts of malicious attacks and supported deregistration policies. Moreover, the authors in [93] contributed to secure transmission in fronthaul/backhaul (Xhaul) communication in case of the fast movement of an object. A novel key exchange and authentication protocol was presented, and the achieved results showed prominence over the other subsisting solutions.

3.2.4. PMIPv6 Testbed and Routing Optimization

Initially, MIPv6 was introduced by IETF to handle the IPv6 mobility of wireless data packets in a centralized architecture. This MIPv6 effectively provided multimedia and augmented services for MNs to continue Internet activities without any disturbance. It also allows MN to move and change the attachment point without changing the address, but MIPv6’s abilities have not sufficiently answered the true mobility effects and the triggered HO issues. In response, IETF presented PMIPv6 to balance the shortcomings of the MIPv6 protocol and enhance flexibility in routing traffic in a network. The major difference between the MIPv6 and PMIPv6 is that the latter is a ‘network-based’ approach, while MIPv6 is a ‘host-based’ scheme.
Therefore, the authors of [94] developed a PMIPv6 testbed for real-scenario analysis and used the Kernel version. The Kernel setup enables several features to support the PMIPv6 environment, and the testbed based on PMIPv6 performed successfully without errors. Similarly, another bench test was performed [95] by presenting a flow-based and operator-centric mobility management framework in the EPC architecture. The proposed framework was evaluated in a virtual testbed scenario and the results displayed improved functional flexibility for operators, enhanced user experience, and promptly decreased signaling overheads. In the ongoing 5G-and-beyond wireless system, the multimedia and augmented realities are the main reason for cellular data traffic load. In this context, IP multicast plays a vital role in the delivery of robust multimedia content, yet very limited work on multicast mobility protocols in a DMM situation was established. In [96], the authors have tried to tackle multicast-listener-related issues by presenting different techniques based on the system dynamics in a DMM environment. A partially and fully distributed DMM scheme to deal with the multicast problems was evaluated and the outcome showed the superiority of the method over other available frameworks. Moreover, a flat routing process routes data packets according to a globally unique flat identity, and in [97], a scalable, centralized flat routing technique based on the open-flow network paradigm called centralized flat routing (CFR) was presented. Preliminary prototype results on a small scale proved the feasibility of CFR in the real environment.
Table 2 summarizes all the above-discussed related literature for network flatting.

4. Distributed Mobility Management

The new DMM approaches enable an absolute flat network structure for easy access to IP services and densely fast mobility scenarios. It offers inbuilt support for mobility in multitier HetNet design wireless networks. The DMM paradigm is the prime example of the aforementioned concepts and cases concerning network flattening [98]. In the DMM framework, all IP-based user data packets are transported through the suboptimal paths, taking advantage of multiple anchor points and IP services in the local network closer to the users [99]. Figure 6 portrays the core idea of DMM in multitier HetNet and promises great mobility support across different use cases.

4.1. Background

A smart allocation of IP addresses based on the service demand of MNs gives an edge to the mobile network operators (MNO) in flexibly managing users’ content traffic with additional protocols [100]. For instance, IP traffic flow must be anchored to a centralized node for long sessions and locally for short sessions data exchange. Herein, DMM uses prefix tagging where certain types of prefixes are assigned to the selected services of the users. The users belonging to the particular network group are allowed to access the meta-data related to the assigned prefixes based on the operator’s policy [101]. Thus, researchers corroborated that the DMM framework is an absolute solution for mobility and related management services for gigabytes of data traffic in current 5G and hyper UDN 6G cellular carriers. Assuming several PHY and MAC layer advantages, the most beneficial impact on the distribution of network functionalities could be received by MNOs and service providers. The framework significantly increases the simplicity of controlling and assessing many assorted technologies in a system. Additionally, it can efficiently transfer valuable resources to the wireless backhaul network and increase the performance of network backhaul communication [102].
Classifying various positive aspects of the DMM, the essential characteristics of DMM frameworks are agility in handover management and guidance in optimum data delivery route by avoiding unnecessary routing loops [103]. Subsequently, among many other new technologies, in-band D2D communication is receiving attention in the industry for mobility support and is considered a first choice for the operators. The new addition to the wireless system, i.e., D2D communication, is beneficial for seamless ping–pong handover between large-scale smart devices and cooperative interference management in mobile networks [104]. It enhances spectral efficiency, transmission reliability, and network capacity, yet security remains a threatening issue. Several DMM-activated solutions have been developed under 3GPP and IETF authorities [105,106]. The performed empirical and simulation analysis validated the massive advantages over the conventional mobility support entities. However, the proposed DMM methods that can be applicable and effective in a real environment for static and moving platforms still need more research exploration. Nonetheless, reducing handover losses, signaling cost, and round-trip delay, besides ultra-reliability, is highly desirable in future wireless communication [107].
DMM frameworks are used to develop a flat mobility architecture by accommodating several anchors closer to the MNs. The main families of DMM-based solutions belong to network-based mobility protocols and are described below.

4.1.1. Routing-Based DMM

In a routing-based DMM solution, the border gateway protocol (BGP) is used to conduct mobility functions and transfer data packets to and from mobile devices. All the BGP routers are involved with the DMM gateways in the network domain, eliminating any anchors, and reestablishing the path for the routing mechanism. In the context of the initial attachment, the gateway uses the dynamic host configuration protocol (DHCP). It allocates the IP address while the MN updates its domain name system (DNS) by using the IP address (e.g., prefix 1). The DMM gateway transmits a DNS request to attain the IP address that the MN must acquire [108]. Then, it broadcasts to all the routers in the network that a specific address is reachable through the corresponding DMM gateway. Additionally, when a handover occurs, the new DMM gateway validates that the MN has already been allotted an IP address. Subsequently, by using the BGP protocol, the prefix 1 is advertised in the routing network (BGP routing update), and the IP address remains unchanged during the handover process. Thus, the routing-based DMM extensively relies on BGP updates to announce the new route in a network. Later, the DMM gateway will update the routers in the network so the traffic will be able to reach the new position of the MN [109].

4.1.2. PMIPv6-Based DMM

The concept behind the PMIPv6 solution is to utilize one of the elements in the network as a proxy for the MN and the care-of-address (CoA) option would not be allocated to the MN, instead of being assigned with the proxy of the MN [110]. The proxy protocol design showed the existence of new entities compared with the conventional MIPv6. Indeed, the correspondence node (CN) is responsible for transmitting the data to the MN which is connected to the access router point. The LMA is similar in function to the HA in MIPv6 and the MAG keeps track of the MN. In a network, the domain where PMIPv6 is applied is termed as PMIP domain or localized mobility domain (LMD) [111]. The positive aspect of the PMIPv6 mobility solution is that the MN can change the access router without requesting a new IP address. Additionally, the MN can attach to the new access router without changing the standard protocol stack (i.e., any modification in software/hardware). Meanwhile, the MN is on the common network that is capable of accommodating various wireless access technologies, such as LTE [112], wireless local area network (WLAN) [113], and worldwide interoperability for microwave access (WiMAX), etc.) [114].
Combined with the DMM, the centralized entity is detached and resides in the access node. So, the IP sessions have the gateway in the access network and provide ease in data packets transmission by avoiding the packet core network [115]. In this regard, the architecture showcases the mobility access router DMM gateway, the same as the MAG, which is used to forward the user useful data back and forth to the Internet. It also supports managing MN seamless mobility while hopping from one MAG to another. Additionally, in traffic redirection coordination, a node referred to as the control mobility database (CMD) is used, which stores users’ mobility sessions. This CMD node is never crossed by the user data traffic link, as shown in Figure 7. The traffic follows the channel through the DMM gateway and the CMD node does not participate [116].
The DMM gateway transmits signaling messages, proxy binding acknowledge (PBA) messages, to the control and process unit, and it returns the information with IP metrics in proxy binding updates (PBUs) that must be forwarded to the MN to connect to the network. At this stage, the MN could communicate with any other node in the network, and data packets move through the gateway, and then from the gateway to the Internet.

4.2. Literature-Related Mobility Management in DMM Networks

4.2.1. Stabilizing Latency and Signaling Cost

All IP-based mobility support and IP-based networks are the de facto solutions for the growing population of mobile Internet users since it offers seamless mobility and high reliability to the users between the HetNet access paradigms without interrupting the service. Various mobility management solutions based on DMM schemes have been proposed so far. The authors in [117] have implemented a hybrid DMM (HDMM) method, where the mobility operation is also distributed at the access routers (ARs), except in the areas of high latency and routing costs. Simulation results confirmed the worthiness of time-sensitive, over-the-top services. In article [118], the authors initiated PMIPv6 and the IEEE 802.21-media-independent HO (MIH) protocols to preserve seamless HO in the HetNet environment. The proposed solution helped stabilize signaling costs and packet loss frequency during the transmission; however, more advanced algorithms are needed for real-time mobile user communication.
Network mobility (NEMO) is a technology deployed in public transportation and personal network to enable Internet services. Different NEMO-based DMM schemes have been presented [119,120] to mitigate issues such as central core entity, HO latency, signaling operation, and decreased packet delivery cost. Likewise, the authors in [121] designed a preemptive HO scheme (PHS) to remove the signal point failure and traffic bottleneck issues, and the simulation test outperformed the rest of the methods. In [122], a hybrid centralized–DMM in the NEMO context (called H-NEMO) provided better performance, based on packet delivery cost, HO latency (and disruption time), signaling cost, and end-to-end delay.

4.2.2. Deployment of MIPv6/PMIPv6 Protocols

In future cellular Internet, MIP/PMIP will be the elementary mobility management protocol that can support multimedia and other services. To effectively address the scalability hurdles caused by the escalating number of MNs and traffic volume generated would be critical to endorse IP-based mobile Internet. For the DMM extension, three basic categories have been created to address some of the drawbacks and shortcomings of MIPv6 and PMIPv6: (1) client-based, (2) routing-based, and (3) network-based techniques. Although the solutions based on the classification of DMM extension are still being standardized, there is a mounting interest to address some issues for the new services (e.g., distribution caching for multimedia content).
In order to address some problems of the existing Internet, caused by the underlying location-based communication design, and make it stringent for future applications, a new theme, named data networking (NDN), has emerged as one of the most robust techniques among various information-centric networking (ICN) proposals. A novel all-IP-based DMM, designed by leveraging an NDN overlay, was discussed in [123]. The unique method enables the DMM requirements to distribute the anchor point and efficiently guide the best packet transmission route in the mobile computing structure. Likewise, a tunnel-free DMM support protocol framework was analyzed and the performance in terms of packet loss, latency in HO, and HO blocking probability by IPv6 protocols was compared [124]. The derived framework successfully reduced HO latency by about 12%, HO blocking probability by 71%, and data packet loss by 82%. Correspondingly, the authors proposed an analytical expression evaluating the HO process of different centralized and distributed protocols [125]. It is used to compare PMIPv6, PFMIPv6, and DMM performances in terms of HO latency, session recovery delay, packet and signaling cost, and HO failure. The results showed that PFMIPv6 is the most well-suited protocol for low–high mobility scenarios.
Moreover, an analytical evaluation of a network-based IP DMM solution in terms of signaling cost, HO timelapse, and signaling cost was performed [126]. The authors concluded that the future network architecture would exhibit hybrid centralized–DMM behavior. In this regard, the mobility management of certain traffic will be kept centralized, while other traffic will be distributed.

4.2.3. MN Mobility across Different IP Addresses and Technologies

The thirst for Internet services and applications continues to escalate, and many wireless standardization authorities envisaged that this trend would gain more momentum in the future. As the desire for MNs connectivity via the Internet expands, it has given birth to more diverse smart wireless nodes and cases to become part of the network. Service disruption for roaming MNs across different IP addresses, domain networks, or technologies in multicell architectures is a huge challenge. Lately, for the seamless mobility of MNs, such as virtual machines or containers, multicell architectures were dispensed, but they cannot guarantee reliable service for objects in motion.
The authors in [127] introduced a live migration (LM) method for uninterrupted mobility support for mobile terminals. The experimental characteristics of LM demonstrated the great potential to provide a reliable connection for MNs hopping across different IP addresses’ domain networks. Identically, a distributed, IP-based mobility management protocol (DIMMP) was evaluated for the free movement of MNs across wireless mesh networks (WMNs) [128]. It contributed by removing the limiting aspects of single-hop and centralized network architectures, as well as improving the HO procedure. Additionally, a fast HO for network-based DMM (FDMM) for PMIPv6 was evaluated to reduce HO latency and data packets corruption during the mobility of MNs [129]. The analytical experiments showed that FDMM comprehensively outclassed DMM, whereas an enhanced fast HO PMIPv6 (ePFMIPv6) was presented to support rapid IP HO in vehicular networks [130]. The simulation test confirmed the excellent performance of the proposed ePFMIPv6 in comparison with PFMIPv6 protocols.

4.2.4. Gap Analysis and DMM Module Assessments

Engineers, researchers, and radio regulatory authorities have been developing NSs of IP mobility management protocols since the advent of the first and most commonly deployed IP protocol, MIPv6. For example, the MobiWAN NS-2 extension was designed for NS-21 to simulate MIPv6, owing to the inherited limitation of NS-2 that supports only IPv4. Therefore, in [131], engineers have developed the DMM module in Network Simulator-2 (NS-2) to implement the DMM protocols’ functionalities, entities, and operations. An analytical study was conducted to ensure the accuracy of the module compared with the theoretical values. Consequently, the obtained values from the simulation showed a high coherence with the assessed theoretical data. In parallel, a network-based full-DMM approach was developed to eliminate any dedicated centralized mobility anchor from the system architecture [132]. The simulation results of the proposed full-DMM approach showed the significance of the traditional CMM model.
Another analytical experiment was performed on the implementation gaps of the DMM models in 3GPP 4G/5G cellular networks [133]. The researchers audibly advised that all DMM designs could be deployed in a 4G EPC, and partial implementation would be possible in NR 5G due to unspecified entities in the core architecture. In [134], the authors characterized recent research works based on the DMM mechanism in D2D communications. After a vigilant thought process, they then identified the most impactful approaches that could be highly suitable for D2D mobility management in current NR 5G-and-beyond mobile networks.
Table 3 summarizes all the above-discussed related literature for DMM.

5. Current Limitations and Future Challenges

Extensive studies have been performed to tackle the mobility issues and operational challenges for current 5G and future wireless networks. Many proposed research methodologies on efficient mobility management assist in simplifying the packet transmission process and increasing system reliability. Hence, a variety of the discussed frameworks largely manage to minimize the signaling costs, packet losses, ping–pong handovers, operational functionalities of the core network, round-trip latency, and the load balancing of the access network, etc. However, the challenges involved are due to the proposed mechanism’s continuous network development and limitations. Apart from the discussed studies, several other works can be combined and explored with the mobility issues that can enhance the performance of the 5G-and-beyond network, for example, energy management [135], interference mitigation [136], machine learning protocols [137], and antenna designing [138]. The following sections will discuss the domains and crucial aspects that need immediate attention, and robust solutions in the effective management of mobility protocols that have been discussed before.

5.1. Network Flattening

The augmentation in the population of Internet-connected things and thousands of wirelessly coupled devices raises critical questions about the current networking protocols. The home-based Internet-connected networks, connected to wireless broadband communication, produce an excessive bulk of data and centralized data routing, and the acquisition of the current system is not capable of combatting the hurdles. Therefore, in [139], the authors presented a mobile matrix protocol that uses an IPv6 address for routing and mobility management without changing the MN IP address. The proposed technique would be helpful in the social and mobile IoT services in future wireless services. Nonetheless, mobile and social IoT communication are in the beginning stage, and a tremendous amount of work is required on the impactful and robust mobility support for the newly introduced services [140]. In [141], researchers presented a distributed core system design for 5G and upcoming 6G networks. A distributed mapping mechanism was applied for the management of fast mobile smart devices and IoT. It minimized the smaller user plane path lengths and control overheads, yet the proposed frameworks could be used for delay and mobility studies in the ORBIT radio testbed.
Contemplating the constructive enhancement in every radio communication domain, standardization authorities, researchers, and various drive tester groups are working to utilize thousands of low earth orbit (LEO) satellite networks. The multi-satellite model is expected to increase the flexibility, consistency, and stringency of reliability, as well as ensure minimum latency in cellular networks. After an in-depth analysis, the groups suggested that it has great potential to answer the forthcoming needs in extremely critical, varied scenarios happening anytime and anywhere. For example, in [142], the authors advised that it is necessary to design a location management framework for several groups of wireless, associated things with different orbital parameters. Those parameters depend on variables such as handover frequency and duration, footprints, and the density of satellites.

5.2. Distributed Mobility Management

Vehicular communication is the most promising addition to 5G and 6G radio networks. Owing to the limited resources of the spectrum, systematic and efficient use of frequency bands is necessary. The current 5G-and-beyond networks are expected to exploit cellular resources for vehicle communication, including aerial platforms. The sharing of resources between cellular-connected and vehicular products could be a serious threat to network disconnection, frequent interruption, interferences, and so on. The high chances of vulnerability would certainly be complex channel modeling for air-to-air and air-to-ground transmission [143], whereas the researchers claimed that there has not been much interest shown in the secure route characterization for DMM logic. Hence, a secure-route model for DMM-based smart home networks is proposed in [144]. The authors suggested that it is viable to extend the model for IoT, mobile IoT, and social IoT networks. After discussing the feasibility of the proposed model, the study further advised that this could apply to standalone and non-standalone 5G architectures. In the future, vehicles with every smart machine communication option can play a big part in taking the wireless digital communication system to the next level. In vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication, sensor-based data updates would also be activated for various domains, such as medical health monitoring, airports’ critical base communication, and data updates in high-mobility scenarios. Consequently, a real-time, practically applicable, DMM-based solution to maintain the system is crucial. Such a developed framework must be capable of avoiding malicious threats, various interference issues, undesired handover problems, and call drop count, while ensuring an increase in security level [145]. Likewise, users and intelligent electronic devices can identify more than one air interface in their proximity, mainly due to the concurrent wireless activities of different access technologies, such as 4G, ISM, WWAN, and WLAN. The appropriate switching and handover mechanism is essential for the continuity of the user’s activities.
The agility of cloud-based computing services demonstrated its potential to answer the ever-growing demand for wireless. It is estimated that development will try to connect everything to the Internet in the next few years, with pedestrians, cars, flying machines, smart appliances, and sensor networks, etc., all connected; the desire for Internet services is increasing tremendously fast. This massive demand and the varying speeds of a large variety of users and smart electronic devices would certainly create a fuss. The available literature on cloud-based computing processes showed multiple issues and could not be any more fruitful with the same functionalities. Some of the issues described in the literature include the unbalanced coordination of small-cell APs, massive congestion, online cancellation performance issues, and frequent packet loss, which reduce the quality and defeat the purpose. However, edge and caching computing are also used to overcome the limitations of the cloud computation process. However, these schemes are not fully efficient and face difficulties in balancing computation resources [146].

6. Conclusions

Current 5G and future wireless networks are expected to simultaneously support billions of smart devices while maintaining extreme reliability and QoS for each smart product, especially those residing on cell edges or in motion. With the rapid increase in intelligent peripheral gadgets and novel intelligent machines in the last few years, the demand for data from smart devices is also rising exponentially and shaping serious challenges for the mobility process, while escalating chaos in the core network. The sudden increase in hefty data requirements is mainly due to the heavy BW applications and immersive media components, in addition to time-sensitive cases. The unprecedented data volume introduces different mobility management protocol complications and adversities in centralized network architectures. A new paradigm of a flat network architecture based on DMM design was conceptualized and considered as an evolutionary step towards a complex and dynamic HetNet radio network. In this article, mobility management techniques for future wireless networks are highlighted and discussed from the perspective of network designs where traffic will be largely offloaded locally at the RAN level, instead of routing all traffic through the core network. This study broadly discussed flat and DMM-based IP mobility management architectures and their types. The review demonstrated state-of-the-art research studies and the potential benefits of robust mobility support in dynamic DMM 5G-and-beyond radio communication environments. Furthermore, this review article comprehensively delineates numerous current and ongoing studies and challenges, while detailing potential future research dimensions regarding flat DMM-based 5G and the upcoming 6G networks. It is believed that this article is a potential source for designing 5G-and-beyond wireless networks.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.Q. and M.N.H.; visualization, M.U.A.S., M.N.H. and M.T.; writing—original draft preparation, F.Q. and M.U.A.S.; writing—review and editing, M.N.H., R.H., M.T. and Q.N.N.; funding acquisition, F.Q and R.H. supervision, R.H. and Q.N.N.; project administration, Q.N.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.


This paper is supported under Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Geran Galakan Penyelidik Muda (GGPM) GGPM-2021-040.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.


The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by the Network and Communication Technology (NCT) Research Groups, FTSM, UKM in providing facilities throughout this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


access pointAP
augmented realityAR
base stationBS
border gateway protocolBGP
centralized mobility managementCMM
content delivery networkCDN
distributed mobility managementDMM
evolved packet coreEPC
fifth generation5G
fourth generation4G
general packet radio serviceGPRS
generic routing encapsulationGRE
heterogeneous networkHetNet
Internet Engineering Task ForceIETF
Internet of ThingsIoT
Internet protocolIP
LIPA mobility and SIPTO at the local networkLIMONET
local gatewayL-GW
local Internet protocol accessLIPA
local mobility anchorLMA
long-term evolutionLTE
low-power nodesLPN
mobile access gatewayMAG
mobile Internet protocolMIP
mobile network operatorMNO
mobile nodeMN
new radioNR
packet data network gatewayPGW
proxy-binding acknowledgementPBA
proxy-binding updatePBU
proxy mobile Internet protocol version 6PMIPv6
quality of experienceQoE
radio access networkRAN
selected Internet protocol traffic offloadSIPTO
serving gatewayS-GW
sixth generation6G
software-defined networkSDN
Third-Generation Partnership Project3GPP
third generation3G
ultra-dense networksUDN
unmanned aerial vehicleUAV
virtual realityVR
wireless fidelityWiFi
wireless sensor networkWSN


  1. Andrews, J.G.; Buzzi, S.; Choi, W.; Hanly, S.V.; Lozano, A.; Soong, A.C.; Zhang, J.C. What will 5G be? IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2014, 32, 1065–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Azuma, R.T. A survey of augmented reality. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 1997, 6, 355–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Carmigniani, J.; Furht, B.; Anisetti, M.; Ceravolo, P.; Damiani, E.; Ivkovic, M. Augmented reality technologies, systems and applications. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2011, 51, 341–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Brooks, F.P. What’s real about virtual reality? IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 1999, 19, 16–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sukjaimuk, R.; Nguyen, Q.N.; Sato, T. A smart congestion control mechanism for the green IoT sensor-enabled information-centric networking. Sensors 2018, 18, 2889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  6. Mohd, Z.I.; Rosilah, H. The implementation of internet of things using test bed in the UKMnet environment. Asia Pac. J. Inf. Technol. Multimed. 2019, 8, 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  7. Hindia, M.N.; Qamar, F.; Abbas, T.; Dimyati, K.; Abu Talip, M.S.; Amiri, I.S. Interference cancelation for high-density fifth-generation relaying network using stochastic geometrical approach. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2019, 15, 1550147719855879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  8. Faizan, Q. Enhancing QOS Performance of the 5G Network by Characterizing Mm-Wave Channel and Optimizing Interference Cancellation Scheme/Faizan Qamar. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  9. Tilwari, V.; Bani-Bakr, A.; Qamar, F.; Hindia, M.N.; Jayakody, D.N.K.; Hassan, R. Mobility and queue length aware routing approach for network stability and load balancing in MANET. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Informatics (ICEEI), Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia, 12–13 October 2021; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  10. Kamel, M.; Hamouda, W.; Youssef, A. Ultra-dense networks: A survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2016, 18, 2522–2545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Asadi, A.; Wang, Q.; Mancuso, V. A survey on device-to-device communication in cellular networks. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2014, 16, 1801–1819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  12. Doppler, K.; Rinne, M.; Wijting, C.; Ribeiro, C.B.; Hugl, K. Device-to-device communication as an underlay to LTE-advanced networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2009, 47, 42–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Qamar, F.; Hindia, M.N.; Abd Rahman, T.; Hassan, R.; Dimyati, K.; Nguyen, Q.N. Propagation characterization and analysis for 5G mmWave through field experiments. Comput. Mater. Contin. 2021, 68, 2249–2264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Qamar, F.; Hindia, M.N.; Ojukwu, H.; Hassan, R.; Dimyati, K. Robust schemes to enhance energy consumption efficiency for millimeter wave-based microcellular network in congested urban environments. Int. J. Electron. Telecommun. 2021, 67, 417–424. [Google Scholar]
  15. Muirhead, D.; Imran, M.A.; Arshad, K. A survey of the challenges, opportunities and use of multiple antennas in current and future 5G small cell base stations. IEEE Access 2016, 4, 2952–2964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Segura-Garcia, J.; Calero, J.M.A.; Pastor-Aparicio, A.; Marco-Alaez, R.; Felici-Castell, S.; Wang, Q. 5G IoT system for real-time psycho-acoustic soundscape monitoring in smart cities with dynamic computational offloading to the edge. IEEE Internet Things J. 2021, 8, 12467–12475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Nguyen, Q.N.; Yu, K.; Sato, T.; Arifuzzaman, M. A game-theoretical green networking approach for information-centric networks. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Conference on Standards for Communications and Networking (CSCN), Helsinki, Finland, 18–20 September 2017; pp. 132–137. [Google Scholar]
  18. Bor-Yaliniz, I.; Yanikomeroglu, H. The new frontier in RAN heterogeneity: Multi-tier drone-cells. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2016, 54, 48–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  19. Alsabaan, M.; Alasmary, W.; Albasir, A.; Naik, K. Vehicular networks for a greener environment: A survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2012, 15, 1372–1388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Abbas, T.; Qamar, F.; Hindia, M.N.; Hassan, R.; Ahmed, I.; Aslam, M.I. Performance analysis of ad hoc on-demand distance vector routing protocol for MANET. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Student Conference on Research and Development (SCOReD), Batu Pahat, Malaysia, 27–29 September 2020; pp. 194–199. [Google Scholar]
  21. Jara, A.J.; Ladid, L.; Gómez-Skarmeta, A.F. The Internet of everything through IPv6: An analysis of challenges, solutions and opportunities. J. Wirel. Mob. Netw. Ubiquitous Comput. Dependable Appl. 2013, 4, 97–118. [Google Scholar]
  22. Amiri, I.; Dong, D.S.; Pokhrel, Y.M.; Gachhadar, A.; Maharjan, R.K.; Qamar, F. Resource tuned optimal random network coding for single hop multicast future 5G networks. Int. J. Electron. Telecommun. 2019, 65, 463–469. [Google Scholar]
  23. Benkacem, I.; Bagaa, M.; Taleb, T.; Nguyen, Q.; Toshitaka, T.; Sato, T. Integrated ICN and CDN slice as a service. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 9–13 December 2018; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  24. Jo, Y.; Lim, J.; Hong, D. Mobility management based on beam-level measurement report in 5G massive MIMO cellular networks. Electronics 2020, 9, 865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Gupta, L.; Jain, R.; Vaszkun, G. Survey of important issues in UAV communication networks. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2015, 18, 1123–1152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  26. Qamar, F.; Siddiqui, M.U.A.; Hindia, M.; Hassan, R.; Nguyen, Q.N. Issues, challenges, and research trends in spectrum management: A comprehensive overview and new vision for designing 6G networks. Electronics 2020, 9, 1416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Matyas, M.; Kamargianni, M. The potential of mobility as a service bundles as a mobility management tool. Transportation 2019, 46, 1951–1968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  28. Akyildiz, I.F.; Xie, J.; Mohanty, S. A survey of mobility management in next-generation all-IP-based wireless systems. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2004, 11, 16–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Damnjanovic, A.; Montojo, J.; Wei, Y.; Ji, T.; Luo, T.; Vajapeyam, M.; Yoo, T.; Song, O.; Malladi, D. A survey on 3GPP heterogeneous networks. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2011, 18, 10–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. An, J.; Yang, K.; Wu, J.; Ye, N.; Guo, S.; Liao, Z. Achieving sustainable ultra-dense heterogeneous networks for 5G. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2017, 55, 84–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Rao, J.; Vrzic, S. Packet duplication for URLLC in 5G: Architectural enhancements and performance analysis. IEEE Netw. 2018, 32, 32–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Malathy, S.; Porkodi, V.; Sampathkumar, A.; Hindia, M.N.; Dimyati, K.; Tilwari, V.; Qamar, F.; Amiri, I.S. An optimal network coding based backpressure routing approach for massive IoT network. Wirel. Netw. 2020, 26, 3657–3674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Paul, S.; Yates, R.; Raychaudhuri, D.; Kurose, J. The cache-and-forward network architecture for efficient mobile content delivery services in the future internet. In Proceedings of the 2008 First ITU-T Kaleidoscope Academic Conference-Innovations in NGN, Geneva, Switzerland, 12–13 May 2008; Future Network and Services: Geneva, Switzerland; pp. 367–374. [Google Scholar]
  34. Taleb, T.; Ksentini, A.; Jantti, R. “Anything as a service” for 5G mobile systems. IEEE Netw. 2016, 30, 84–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  35. Hassan, R.; Qamar, F.; Hasan, M.K.; Aman, A.H.M.; Ahmed, A.S. Internet of things and its applications: A comprehensive survey. Symmetry 2020, 12, 1674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhang, H.; Liu, N.; Chu, X.; Long, K.; Aghvami, A.-H.; Leung, V.C. Network slicing based 5G and future mobile networks: Mobility, resource management, and challenges. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2017, 55, 138–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Bertin, P.; Bonjour, S.; Bonnin, J.-M. Distributed or centralized mobility? In Proceedings of the GLOBECOM 2009–2009 IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, Honolulu, HI, USA, 30 November–4 December 2009; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  38. Muniyandi, R.C.; Qamar, F.; Jasim, A.N. Genetic optimized location aided routing protocol for VANET based on rectangular estimation of position. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Jain, A.; Lopez-Aguilera, E.; Demirkol, I. Are mobility management solutions ready for 5G and beyond? Comput. Commun. 2020, 161, 50–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Xu, F.; Yan, X. Study on flat architecture for mobile network. Telecommun. Sci. 2010, 26, 43. [Google Scholar]
  41. Tsubouchi, K.; Kurebayashi, R.; Khan, A.; Kunito, G.; Iwashina, S. Anchorless routing for URLLC services in 5G network. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 88th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall), Chicago, IL, USA, 27–30 August 2018; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  42. Jang, H.-S.; Baek, J.-H. Mobility management scheme with mobility prediction in wireless communication networks. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Chan, H.; Liu, D.; Seite, P.; Yokota, H.; Korhonen, J. Requirements for distributed mobility management. Requir. Distrib. Mobil. Manag. 2014. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  44. Perkins, C. IP Mobility Support for IPv4, Revised. 2010. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  45. Johnson, D.; Perkins, C.; Arkko, J. Mobility Support in IPv6; RFC 3775; 2004. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  46. Tilwari, V.; Hindia, M.N.; Dimyati, K.; Qamar, F.; Talip, A.; Sofian, M. Contention window and residual battery aware multipath routing schemes in mobile ad-hoc networks. Int. J. Technol. 2019, 10, 1376–1384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  47. Lee, J.-H.; Bonnin, J.-M.; Seite, P.; Chan, H.A. Distributed IP mobility management from the perspective of the IETF: Motivations, requirements, approaches, comparison, and challenges. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2013, 20, 159–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zhang, S. An overview of network slicing for 5G. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2019, 26, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Alfoudi, A.S.D.; Dighriri, M.; Otebolaku, A.; Pereira, R.; Lee, G.M. Mobility management architecture in different RATs based network slicing. In Proceedings of the 2018 32nd International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications Workshops (WAINA), Krakow, Poland, 16–18 May 2018; pp. 270–274. [Google Scholar]
  50. Rony, R.I.; Jain, A.; Lopez-Aguilera, E.; Garcia-Villegas, E.; Demirkol, I. Joint access-backhaul perspective on mobility management in 5G networks. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Conference on Standards for Communications and Networking (CSCN), Helsinki, Finland, 18–20 September 2017; pp. 115–120. [Google Scholar]
  51. Shin, D.-H.; Moses, D.; Venkatachalam, M.; Bagchi, S. Distributed mobility management for efficient video delivery over all-IP mobile networks: Competing approaches. IEEE Netw. 2013, 27, 28–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sharma, V.; You, I.; Kumar, R. Resource-based mobility management for video users in 5G using catalytic computing. Comput. Commun. 2018, 118, 120–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ali-Ahmad, H.; Ouzzif, M.; Bertin, P.; Lagrange, X. Distributed mobility management: Approaches and analysis. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC), Budapest, Hungary, 9–13 June 2013; pp. 1297–1302. [Google Scholar]
  54. Liebsch, M.; Seite, P.; Karagiannis, G. Distributed Mobility Management: Framework & Analysis. 2013. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  55. Premsankar, G.; Ahokas, K.; Luukkainen, S. Design and implementation of a distributed mobility management entity on OpenStack. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 7th International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science (CloudCom), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 30 November–3 December 2015; pp. 487–490. [Google Scholar]
  56. Jeon, S.; Figueiredo, S.; Aguiar, R.L.; Choo, H. Distributed mobility management for the future mobile networks: A comprehensive analysis of key design options. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 11423–11436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Livermore, E.; Skillen, R.P.; Beshai, M.; Wernik, M. Architecture and control of an adaptive high capacity flat network. IEEE Commun. Mag. 1998, 36, 106–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  58. Bosch, P.; Samuel, L.; Mullender, S.; Polakos, P.; Rittenhouse, G. Flat cellular (UMTS) networks. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, Hong Kong, China, 11–15 March 2007; pp. 3861–3866. [Google Scholar]
  59. Kumar, P.; Govindaraj, E. Quality enhancement with fault tolerant embedding in video transmission over wmsns in 802.11e WLAN. Ad Hoc Netw. 2019, 88, 18–31. [Google Scholar]
  60. Nguyen, T.-T.; Bonnet, C. A hybrid centralized-distributed mobility management for supporting highly mobile users. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), London, UK, 8–12 June 2015; pp. 3945–3951. [Google Scholar]
  61. Marsch, P.; Raaf, B.; Szufarska, A.; Mogensen, P.; Guan, H.; Farber, M.; Redana, S.; Pedersen, K.; Kolding, T. Future mobile communication networks: Challenges in the design and operation. IEEE Veh. Technol. Mag. 2012, 7, 16–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Rebecchi, F.; De Amorim, M.D.; Conan, V.; Passarella, A.; Bruno, R.; Conti, M. Data offloading techniques in cellular networks: A survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2014, 17, 580–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  63. Samdanis, K.; Taleb, T.; Schmid, S. Traffic offload enhancements for eUTRAN. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2011, 14, 884–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Mavani, M.; Asawa, K. Privacy enabled disjoint and dynamic address auto-configuration protocol for 6Lowpan. Ad Hoc Netw. 2018, 79, 72–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Jalin, F.; Othman, N.; Hassan, R.; Abd Rahman, A.H.; Sikumbang, D.P.D.; Bakar, K.A.A. An implementation study of DMM PMIPV6 protocol on dual-stack network environment. Asia Pac. J. Inf. Technol. Multimed. 2018, 7, 29–44. [Google Scholar]
  66. Sankaran, C. Data offloading techniques in 3GPP Rel-10 networks: A tutorial. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2012, 50, 46–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Cartmell, J.; McNally, J.; Balazinski, B. Local selected IP Traffic Offload Reducing traffic congestion within the mobile core network. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 10th Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 11–14 January 2013; pp. 809–812. [Google Scholar]
  68. Qiu, P.-C.; Chen, W.-E.; Jiang, J.-R. Traffic offloading with mobility in LTE HeNB Networks. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 21st International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems (ICPADS), Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 14–17 December 2015; pp. 809–814. [Google Scholar]
  69. Gadgil, S.; Ranjan, S.; Karandikar, A. Performance and energy conservation of 3GPP IFOM protocol for dual connectivity in heterogeneous LTE–WLAN network. IETE J. Res. 2020, 66, 841–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  70. Lecompte, D.; Gabin, F. Evolved multimedia broadcast/multicast service (eMBMS) in LTE-advanced: Overview and Rel-11 enhancements. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2012, 50, 68–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Chen, M.; Hao, Y. Task offloading for mobile edge computing in software defined ultra-dense network. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2018, 36, 587–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Chen, Y.; Zhang, G.; Xu, H.; Ren, Y.; Chen, X.; Li, R. Outage constrained design in NOMA-Based D2D offloading systems. Electronics 2022, 11, 256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Yao, Y.; Wu, Y.; Zhu, Z.; Qin, X.; Yue, X. Modeling and performance analysis in UAV-assisted cellular networks with clustered edge users. Electronics 2022, 11, 828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Siddiqui, M.U.A.; Qamar, F.; Ahmed, F.; Nguyen, Q.N.; Hassan, R. Interference management in 5G and beyond network: Requirements, challenges and future directions. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 68932–68965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Laganier, J.; Higuchi, T.; Nishida, K. Mobility management for all-IP core network. NTT Docomo Tech. J. 2009, 11, 34–39. [Google Scholar]
  76. Ahmed, A.S.; Hassan, R.; Qamar, F.; Malik, M. IPv6 cryptographically generated address: Analysis, optimization and protection. CMC Comput. Mater. Contin. 2021, 68, 247–265. [Google Scholar]
  77. Lei, J.; Fu, X. Evaluating the benefits of introducing PMIPv6 for localized mobility management. In Proceedings of the 2008 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference, Crete, Greece, 6–8 August 2008; pp. 74–80. [Google Scholar]
  78. Gohar, M.; Anwar, S.; Ali, M.; Choi, J.-G.; Alquhayz, H.; Koh, S.-J. Partial bicasting with buffering for proxy mobile IPV6 mobility management in CoAP-based IoT networks. Electronics 2020, 9, 598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  79. Kim, Y.-H.; Lim, H.-K.; Kim, K.-H.; Han, Y.-H. A SDN-based distributed mobility management in LTE/EPC network. J. Supercomput. 2017, 73, 2919–2933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Dawood, M.; Fuhrmann, W.; Ghita, B. Assay of IP mobility management in SDN based mobile network architecture. In Proceedings of the 2017 Internet Technologies and Applications (ITA), Wrexham, UK, 12–15 September 2017; pp. 69–74. [Google Scholar]
  81. Cordova, R.T.; Gondim, P.R.; Llerena, Y.P.; Lloret, J. SDN-DMM for intelligent mobility management in heterogeneous mobile IP networks. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2019, 32, e4140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Kim, Y.; Raza, S.M.; Nguyen, D.T.; Jeon, S.; Choo, H. Towards on-demand mobility management in SDN. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication, Langkawi, Malaysia, 5–7 January 2018; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  83. Huang, C.-M.; Dao, D.-T.; Chiang, M.-S. SDN-FHOR-DMM: A software defined network (SDN)-based fast handover with the optimal routing control method for distributed mobility management (DMM). Telecommun. Syst. 2019, 72, 157–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Bertin, P.; Bonjour, S.; Bonnin, J.-M. A distributed dynamic mobility management scheme designed for flat IP architectures. In Proceedings of the 2008 New Technologies, Mobility and Security, Tangier, Morocco, 5–7 November 2008; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  85. Giust, F.; De La Oliva, A.; Bernardos, C.J. Flat access and mobility architecture: An IPv6 distributed client mobility management solution. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), Shanghai, China, 10–15 April 2011; pp. 361–366. [Google Scholar]
  86. Yegin, A.; Park, J.; Kweon, K.; Lee, J. Terminal-centric distribution and orchestration of IP mobility for 5G networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2014, 52, 86–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Ali-Ahmad, H.; Ouzzif, M.; Bertin, P.; Lagrange, X. Distributed dynamic mobile IPv6: Design and evaluation. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), Shanghai, China, 7–10 April 2013; pp. 2166–2171. [Google Scholar]
  88. Saleh, M.; El-Meniawy, N.; Sourour, E. Authentication in flat Wireless Sensor Networks with mobile nodes. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 12th International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control, Taipei, Taiwan, 9–11 April 2015; pp. 208–212. [Google Scholar]
  89. Temene, N.; Sergiou, C.; Georgiou, C.; Vassiliou, V. A survey on mobility in Wireless Sensor Networks. Ad Hoc Netw. 2022, 125, 102726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Kim, J.; Astillo, P.V.; You, I. DMM-SEP: Secure and efficient protocol for distributed mobility management based on 5G networks. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 76028–76042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Munir, K.; Zahoor, E.; Rahim, R.; Lagrange, X.; Lee, J.-H. Secure and fault-tolerant distributed location management for intelligent 5G wireless networks. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 18117–18127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Sharma, V.; You, I.; Palmieri, F.; Jayakody, D.N.K.; Li, J. Secure and energy-efficient handover in fog networks using blockchain-based DMM. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2018, 56, 22–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Sharma, V.; You, I.; Leu, F.-Y.; Atiquzzaman, M. Secure and efficient protocol for fast handover in 5G mobile Xhaul networks. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2018, 102, 38–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Wahab, N.H.A.; Latiff, L.A.; Ariffin, S.H.; Fisal, N. Development of proxy mobile IPv6 using flat domain model test-bed. In Proceedings of the 2012 7th International Conference on Computing and Convergence Technology (ICCCT), Seoul, Korea, 3–5 December 2012; pp. 1088–1091. [Google Scholar]
  95. Leiter, Á.; Bokor, L. A flow-based and operator-centric dynamic mobility management scheme for proxy mobile IPv6. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2019, 2019, 4567317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Nguyen, T.-T.; Bonnet, C. Efficient multicast content delivery over a distributed mobility management environment. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 78th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Fall), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2–5 September 2013; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  97. Zhu, Z.; Li, H.; Pan, K.; Yu, C.; Chen, F.; Li, D. Centralized flat routing. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Computing, Management and Telecommunications (ComManTel), Da Nang, Vietnam, 27–29 April 2014; pp. 52–57. [Google Scholar]
  98. Jeong, H.; Choi, H.; Pack, S. Stable matching-based mobility agent selection in distributed mobility management. In Proceedings of the 2021 Twelfth International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks (ICUFN), Jeju Island, Korea, 17–20 August 2021; pp. 163–166. [Google Scholar]
  99. Giust, F.; Cominardi, L.; Bernardos, C.J. Distributed mobility management for future 5G networks: Overview and analysis of existing approaches. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2015, 53, 142–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  100. Chen, X.; Suh, Y.H.; Kim, S.W.; Youn, H.Y. Reducing connection failure in mobility management for LTE HetNet using MCDM algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE/ACIS 16th International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking and Parallel/Distributed Computing (SNPD), Takamatsu, Japan, 1–3 June 2015; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  101. Cominardi, L.; Giust, F.; Bernardos, C.J.; De La Oliva, A. Distributed mobility management solutions for next mobile network architectures. Comput. Netw. 2017, 121, 124–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  102. Liu, D.; Cao, Z.; Seite, P.; Chan, H. Distributed Mobility Management; Draft-Liu-Distributed-Mobility-02. 2010. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  103. Dao, D.-T.; Huang, C.-M.; Chiang, M.-S.; Nguyen, V.-T. A Load-considered handover control scheme for distributed mobility management (DMM) using software defined network (SDN) in the vehicular environment. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Communications and Electronics (ICCE), Phu Quoc Island, Vietnam, 13–15 January 2021; pp. 70–74. [Google Scholar]
  104. Qamar, F.; Hindia, M.N.; Dimyati, K.; Noordin, K.A.; Amiri, I.S. Interference management issues for the future 5G network: A review. Telecommun. Syst. 2019, 71, 627–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Bernardos, C.J.; Zúnñiga, J.C.; Reznik, A. Towards flat and distributed mobility management: A 3GPP evolved network design. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), Ottawa, ON, Canada, 10–15 June 2012; pp. 6855–6861. [Google Scholar]
  106. Hsieh, F.-S. Trust-based recommendation for shared mobility systems based on a discrete self-adaptive neighborhood search differential evolution algorithm. Electronics 2022, 11, 776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Ko, H.; Jang, I.; Lee, J.; Pack, S.; Lee, G. SDN-based distributed mobility management for 5G. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 8–10 January 2017; pp. 116–117. [Google Scholar]
  108. McCann, P. Authentication and Mobility Management in a Flat Architecture; Draft-Mccann-Dmm-Flatarch-00 (Work in Progress). 2012. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  109. Rekhter, Y.; Li, T.; Hares, S. A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4); ISI, USC Information Sciences Institute, 1994. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  110. Sun, K.; Kim, Y. Flow mobility management in PMIPv6-based DMM (Distributed Mobility Management) networks. J. Wirel. Mob. Netw. Ubiquitous Comput. Dependable Appl. 2014, 5, 120–127. [Google Scholar]
  111. Kempf, J. Goals for Network-Based Localized Mobility Management (NETLMM). RFC 4831. 2007. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  112. Sesia, S.; Toufik, I.; Baker, M. LTE-the UMTS Long Term Evolution: From Theory to Practice; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  113. Crow, B.P.; Widjaja, I.; Kim, J.G.; Sakai, P.T. IEEE 802.11 wireless local area networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 1997, 35, 116–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Bernardos, C.J.; De la Oliva, A.; Giust, F. A PMIPv6-Based Solution for Distributed Mobility Management. 2013. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  115. Figueiredo, S.; Jeon, S.; Aguiar, R. IP Multicast Use Case Analysis for PMIPv6. Based Distributed Mobility Management; Draftsfigueiredo-multimob-use-case-dmm-01. txt (Work in Progress), IETF Draft. 2012. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022).
  116. Murtadha, M.K.; Noordin, N.K.; Ali, B.M.; Hashim, F. Design and evaluation of distributed and dynamic mobility management approach based on PMIPv6 and MIH protocols. Wirel. Netw. 2015, 21, 2747–2763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Chochlidakis, G.; Friderikos, V. Hybrid distributed mobility management for next-generation wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference and Workshop on the Network of the Future (NOF), Paris, France, 3–5 December 2014; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  118. Murtadha, M.K.; Noordin, N.K.; Ali, B.M.; Hashim, F. Fully distributed mobility management scheme for future heterogeneous wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 12th Malaysia International Conference on Communications (MICC), Kuching, Malaysia, 23–25 November 2015; pp. 270–275. [Google Scholar]
  119. Do, T.-X.; Kim, Y. EPD-NEMO: Efficient PMIPv6-based distributed network mobility management. Wirel. Netw. 2015, 21, 2303–2314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Do, T.-X.; Kim, Y. Distributed network mobility management. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Advanced Technologies for Communications, Rome, Italy, 4–6 July 2012; pp. 319–322. [Google Scholar]
  121. Wagan, A.A.; Jung, L.T. An efficient distributed mobility management scheme for network mobility. In Proceedings of the 2016 3rd International Conference on Computer and Information Sciences (ICCOINS), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 15–17 August 2016; pp. 270–275. [Google Scholar]
  122. Nguyen, T.-T.; Bonnet, C. A hybrid centralized-distributed mobility management architecture for Network Mobility. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 16th International Symposium on A World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks (WoWMoM), Boston, MA, USA, 14–17 June 2015; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  123. Yan, Z.; Geng, G.; Zeadally, S.; Park, Y.-J. Distributed all-ip mobility management architecture supported by the NDN overlay. IEEE Access 2016, 5, 243–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Aman, M.; Mahfooz, S.; Zubair, M.; Mukhtar, N.; Imran, K.; Khusro, S. Tunnel-free distributed mobility management (DMM) support protocol for future mobile networks. Electronics 2019, 8, 1519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  125. Balfaqih, M.; Balfaqih, Z.; Shepelev, V.; Alharbi, S.A.; Jabbar, W.A. An analytical framework for distributed and centralized mobility management protocols. J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2020, 1–13. Available online: (accessed on 26 March 2022). [CrossRef]
  126. Giust, F.; Bernardos, C.J.; De La Oliva, A. Analytic evaluation and experimental validation of a network-based IPv6 distributed mobility management solution. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2014, 13, 2484–2497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  127. Ha, J.; Park, J.; Han, S.; Kim, M. Live migration of virtual machines and containers over wide area networks with distributed mobility management. In Proceedings of the 15th EAI International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Computing, Networking and Services, New York, NY, USA, 5–7 November 2018; pp. 264–273. [Google Scholar]
  128. Shah, P.A.; Awan, K.M.; Iqbal, K.; Aadil, F.; Muhammad, K.; Mehmood, I.; Baik, S.W. A route optimized distributed IP-based mobility management protocol for seamless handoff across wireless mesh networks. Mob. Netw. Appl. 2018, 23, 752–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Balfaqih, M.; Ismail, M.; Nordin, R.; Balfaqih, Z. Fast handover solution for network-based distributed mobility management in intelligent transportation systems. Telecommun. Syst. 2017, 64, 325–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Kim, M.-S.; Lee, S.; Golmie, N. Enhanced fast handover for proxy mobile IPv6 in vehicular networks. Wirel. Netw. 2012, 18, 401–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Balfaqih, Z. Design and development of network simulator module for distributed mobility management protocol. J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2020, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Murtadha, M.K.; Noordin, N.K.; Ali, B.M.; Hashim, F. Design and simulation analysis of network-based fully distributed mobility management in flattened network architecture. Telecommun. Syst. 2017, 65, 253–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Sun, K.; Kim, Y. Gap analysis for adapting the distributed mobility management model in 4G/5G mobile networks. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE conference on network softwarization (NetSoft), Bologna, Italy, 3–7 July 2017; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  134. Ouali, K.; Kassar, M.; Sethom, K. Handover performance analysis for managing D2D mobility in 5G cellular networks. IET Commun. 2018, 12, 1925–1936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Malathy, S.; Jayarajan, P.; Ojukwu, H.; Qamar, F.; Hindia, M.; Dimyati, K.; Noordin, K.A.; Amiri, I.S. A review on energy management issues for future 5G and beyond network. Wirel. Netw. 2021, 27, 2691–2718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Gachhadar, A.; Maharjan, R.K.; Shrestha, S.; Adhikari, N.B.; Qamar, F. A 5G framework and its analysis of interference cancellation in multi-tier heterogeneous networks. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Electrical, Computer, Communications and Mechatronics Engineering (ICECCME), Mauritius, Mauritius, 7–8 October 2021; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  137. Al-Khaleefa, A.S.; Hassan, R.; Ahmad, M.R.; Qamar, F.; Wen, Z.; Aman, A.H.M.; Yu, K. Performance evaluation of online machine learning models based on cyclic dynamic and feature-adaptive time series. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. 2021, 104, 1172–1184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Chang, W.; Lu, L.; Ren, X.; Lu, L.; Cheng, M.; Liu, D.; Zhang, M. An ultracompact multimode waveguide crossing based on subwavelength asymmetric Y-junction. IEEE Photonics J. 2018, 10, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Santos, B.P.; Goussevskaia, O.; Vieira, L.F.; Vieira, M.A.; Loureiro, A.A. Mobile matrix: Routing under mobility in IoT, IoMT, and social IoT. Ad Hoc Netw. 2018, 78, 84–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Bello, O.; Zeadally, S.; Badra, M. Network layer inter-operation of Device-to-Device communication technologies in Internet of Things (IoT). Ad Hoc Netw. 2017, 57, 52–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Mukherjee, S.; Ravindran, R.; Raychaudhuri, D. A distributed core network architecture for 5G systems and beyond. In Proceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Networking for Emerging Applications and Technologies, Budapest, Hungary, 20–24 August 2018; pp. 33–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Darwish, T.; Kurt, G.; Yanikomeroglu, H.; Lamontagne, G.; Bellemare, M. Location Management in IP-based Future LEO Satellite Networks: A Review. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2101.08336. [Google Scholar]
  143. Chowdhury, M.M.U.; Saad, W.; Güvenç, I. Mobility management for cellular-connected UAVs: A learning-based approach. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC Workshops), Dublin, Ireland, 7–11 June 2020; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  144. Shin, D.; Yun, K.; Kim, J.; Astillo, P.V.; Kim, J.-N.; You, I. A security protocol for route optimization in DMM-based smart home IoT networks. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 142531–142550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Lu, R.; Zhang, L.; Ni, J.; Fang, Y. 5G vehicle-to-everything services: Gearing up for security and privacy. Proc. IEEE 2019, 108, 373–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Wang, K.; Yin, H.; Quan, W.; Min, G. Enabling collaborative edge computing for software defined vehicular networks. IEEE Netw. 2018, 32, 112–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Centralized mobility IP data flow management.
Figure 1. Centralized mobility IP data flow management.
Electronics 11 01366 g001
Figure 2. Paper structure and organization.
Figure 2. Paper structure and organization.
Electronics 11 01366 g002
Figure 3. Mobility management issues.
Figure 3. Mobility management issues.
Electronics 11 01366 g003
Figure 4. (a) SIPTO approach. (b) LIPA scheme.
Figure 4. (a) SIPTO approach. (b) LIPA scheme.
Electronics 11 01366 g004
Figure 5. PMIPv6 in the 3GPP EPC system.
Figure 5. PMIPv6 in the 3GPP EPC system.
Electronics 11 01366 g005
Figure 6. A distributed network that places content servers in the access network.
Figure 6. A distributed network that places content servers in the access network.
Electronics 11 01366 g006
Figure 7. PMIPv6-based DMM.
Figure 7. PMIPv6-based DMM.
Electronics 11 01366 g007
Table 1. Differences between MIPv6 and PMIPv6.
Table 1. Differences between MIPv6 and PMIPv6.
Protocol CriteriaMIPv6PMIPv6
Latency during HONot GoodGood
MN enhancementPossibleNot Possible
Mobility scopeUniversalLocal
Location managementPossiblePossible
Mobility anchorHALMA
Signaling agentFAMAG
Table 2. Summary of related work for network flatting.
Table 2. Summary of related work for network flatting.
IssuesMethodologiesAdvantagesLimitations/Future WorkRefs.
SDN-based Mobility Management
Handling large data traffic management of mobile users in software-defined networks (SDNs)Evolved packet core (EPC)-based SDN network functions virtualization and cloud-computing-based networkBetter routing optimization with lower handover latencyRequires higher user mobility factors[79]
Call control flow for handover scenario in an SDN networkEfficient mobility management that isolates the chains of IP preservation and the data pathImproves the chains of IP preservation without breaking and reestablishing the connectionArchitecture validation is required for multipath transmission control protocol (MPTCP)[80]
Distributed mode of mobility management in an ultra-dense heterogeneous networkSDN-DMM-based technique to handle the distributed functionalities of mobility managementReduce handoff latency and signaling cost, while improving scalability and QoSA hybrid model with SDN extension is needed for autonomous systems[81]
Frequent handover failure and signaling costOn-demand mobility for registration and handover processMinimize delay and signaling cost by up to 50%Required session connectivity; limited by delay intolerance[82]
High signaling cost, handover delay, and packet loss during data offloading in an SDN-based systemEnhanced handover control for DMM and optimum routing scheme
  • It connects to the new MAAR before the MN disconnects
  • Resolves the triangle routing issue in DMM with low packet loss
The proposed technique can be fostered in vehicular communication[83]
Performance in High User Density
A new mobility management scheme is designed to reduce the traffic encapsulationThe control functions are deployed at the edge of the network utilizing the flat architectureLower handover delays with better QoS performanceMulti-attachments and multi-interface terminals cause a delay[84]
Limitation occurs due to the higher number of users and traffic demand for the mobile IPv6 protocolA new DMM solution is proposed, which is based on cryptographically generated addressesBetter performance in terms of handover delayExperimental comparison can be carried out of mobile IPv6 with the FAMA[85]
IP mobility management efficiency issues occur in a centralized approachProposed a distributed approach that provides optimal mobile data path and distributionAchieve scalability and higher efficiencyOptimum channel state information needed with no delay[86]
Investigate local and global mobility support in a distributed mannerProposed a DDM scheme for network resourceDMM outperformed MIPv6 significantlyDDM scheme for various critical cases[87]
Security in Packet Transmission
Prevent the false data injection in the flat wireless sensor network (WSN)A reauthentication routing protocol is proposed, which eliminates the unnecessary node from the poolUpdate the latest routing path and key graph with the node’s mobilityUses TinyOS operating system software to implement routing protocols[88,89]
Malicious and harmful attacks besides the secrecySecure and efficient protocol based on DMM designDefense against multidirectional attacksLimited to SA 5G networks[90]
Distributed location management and secure authentication mechanism for MNsUnique fault-tolerant scheme based on a distributed hash table of access nodes and ticket-reuse approach for secure and robust authentication of the MNs
  • Avoids traffic congestion, single point of failure issues
  • Reduce malicious attacks
  • Less delay in location queries
Traffic congestion increase with higher mobility[91]
Hierarchical security issuesDistributed block-chain strategy based on DMMCounterfeit distributed DoS, impersonation, session hijacking, and backward broadcastingThe proposed technique can be applied to different types of broadcasting mechanism[92]
Integration of fronthaul and backhaul networks for smooth operationNew key exchange and authentication protocol for moving objectsEfficiently manage security parameters along with privacy during handoverA line-of-sight link is required for smart handover[93]
PMIPv6 Testbed and Routing Optimization
Develop a PMIPv6 testbed for experimental useA proxy mobile IPv6 protocol using a flat domain model testbedPMIPv6 testbed was successfully run without errorCan compare with the other testbed and simulation on NS3[94]
Architectural limitations of EPC for effective and strong offloadingFlow-based and operator-centric dynamic mobility management with proxy mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6)Enhancing operation’s flexibility and flow-level functioning; with low overhead signalingIt requires a strong offloading algorithm[95]
The multicast listener related issues for the DMM environmentA DMM scheme based on flat IP architecture can help to tackle multicast-listener-related issuesResolve the tunnel convergence problemExperimental testing can be carried out on the existing PMIPv6 testbed[96]
The scalable centralized flat routing architectureThe CFR routing scheme is based on the open-flow network to improve network scalabilityCFR works efficiently in a realistic environmentMore advanced schemes are needed for optical communication[97]
Table 3. Summary of the literature in distributed mobility management.
Table 3. Summary of the literature in distributed mobility management.
IssuesMethodologiesAdvantagesLimitations/Future WorkRefs.
Stabilizing Latency and Signaling Cost
An optimization problem for provisioning efficient centralized MA deploymentAn HDMM scheme that jointly characterized both centralized and distributed mobility managementBetter results in terms of handover support with no-delay QoSThe threshold needs to be set for switching between DMM and centralized mobility management[117]
Network-based DMM scheme between the mobile node and the access networksModification of PMIPv6 and the IEEE 802.21 media MIH protocols to supply seamless handoverSubstantial aid for signaling cost, handover latency, and packet loss in heterogeneous networksA more advanced algorithm is needed for real-time mobile users[118]
A DMM protocol based on NEMO that mitigates long intervalDMM is based on the PHS method to reduce scalability issues in network mobilityDecrease long intervals with low latency in network mobilityIt can be extended to more detailed parameters for method validation[121]
Network mobility architecture managementHybrid centralized–DMM architecture based on the NEMOBetter results for packet delivery cost, handover latency, and end-to-end delayLack of performance metrics in terms of number of nodes and flows[122]
Deployment of MIPv6/PMIPv6 Protocols
DMM named data networking overlay IPNDN approach of all-IP-based mobility management architecture where multiple anchor points are placed at the edge of the networkSubjugate centralized IP limitations and enhance mobile traffic transmissions pathInduce signaling costs due to state synchronization of location management[123]
Addressing and tunneling management for current DMM based mobility protocolsTunnel-free DMM support protocolMinimize handover latency by about 12%, handover blocking probability by 71%, and packet data loss by up to 82%DMM handover hurdles when multiple MNs perform handover simultaneously[124]
Analyzing the performance of distributed and centralized mobility protocols based on traffic characteristics in the vehicular systemImplement an analytical model for CMM protocols and DMM protocols to analyze handover performance competencyPFMIPv6 provides quality results in low to high mobility environmentsDMM is limited to low–medium mobility cases only to curtail the loss of packets[125]
Analytical and experimental assessment of a network-based DMMDevelop an analytical modelAllows resources to be saved in some situations by reducing packet delivery costThe complexity of the model has increased with higher mobility[126]
Mobility of MNs across Different IP Addresses and Technologies
Seamless mobility of MOs, such as virtual machines or containersLM system and protocol to support mobility of MOs connected via the InternetSeamless mobility of MOs hopping around the different networkExpand the LM testbed on LM of MOs in a large-scale scenario[127]
During mobility of MNs connection failure issues in WMNsDistributed IP-based mobility management protocol to manage intra- and inter- WMNsSupport seamless connectivity and multi-hopping transmission scenariosLimited to one aspect of DMM functionality to MBGs, MARs, and end nodes[128]
Changes in IP addresses of MNs in intelligent transportation systemsFast HO for network-based DMM (FDMM) based on the fast HO for PMIPv6 (PFMIPv6) protocolHO latency, session recovery, and packet loss FDMM performed better than IETF network-based DMMExtra signaling cost[129]
MNs mobility in vehicular networks under geographic restrictionsEnhanced PFMIPv6
h (ePFMIPv6) for fast HO and modified signaling process by accommodating NML
ePFMIPv6 performs better HO latency, packet loss, and signaling cost than PFMIPv6Limited to a small geographical area[130]
GAP Analysis and DMM Module Assessment
Conduct simulation test to verify DMM operational and functional characteristicsDesign of network simulator module for DMM protocolThe DMM module shows high reliability and theoretical results are almost similarHigher mobility causes degradation in the network output[125]
A comprehensive performance evaluation of DMM and CMM modelsImplement a network-based full-DMM process on the NS-2 simulatorFull-DMM approach supports lower end-to-end latency than CMMIncrease HO latency and packet loss at MN speed[132]
Gap analysis to demonstrate technology that needs standard-based applicability and extension for interoperabilityAn IP-based DMM model is obtained from five models specified by IETF DMM WG, and the 3GPPAll DMM models and technologies are applicable, defined in the standardization documents in 4G EPCEffective mobility distribution model in different scenarios[133]
Survey on handover performance in DMM-based D2D mobility in 5G networksPMIPv6-, LIPA-, SIPTO-, SDN-, and routing-based approaches performedSDN-based DMM technique is a promising candidate to manage D2D mobilityRequired sophisticated SDN architecture to manage and increase the operational abilities[134]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Siddiqui, M.U.A.; Qamar, F.; Tayyab, M.; Hindia, M.N.; Nguyen, Q.N.; Hassan, R. Mobility Management Issues and Solutions in 5G-and-Beyond Networks: A Comprehensive Review. Electronics 2022, 11, 1366.

AMA Style

Siddiqui MUA, Qamar F, Tayyab M, Hindia MN, Nguyen QN, Hassan R. Mobility Management Issues and Solutions in 5G-and-Beyond Networks: A Comprehensive Review. Electronics. 2022; 11(9):1366.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Siddiqui, Maraj Uddin Ahmed, Faizan Qamar, Muhammad Tayyab, MHD Nour Hindia, Quang Ngoc Nguyen, and Rosilah Hassan. 2022. "Mobility Management Issues and Solutions in 5G-and-Beyond Networks: A Comprehensive Review" Electronics 11, no. 9: 1366.

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop