Comparative Analysis of Mobility Management Schemes in a Low Earth Orbit Satellite Network

In the 60's the United Status and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics engaged in a "space race" to be the first to put a man on the moon. Today, the space race is between large multinational telecommunication corporations with the winner receiving the financial rewards by providing communication services to the billions without even a simple telephone. Many entrants are using Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites to provide the communications infrastructure, but the number of customers a satellite can support is limited by bandwidth available. This resource must be used efficiently, and this involves reducing the management overhead. This thesis investigates one aspect of management overhead, the bandwidth cost associated with mobility management. This thesis provides a performance analysis of three different mobility management topologies and their associated protocols when used in a LEO satellite constellation. Simulations were developed to compare two aspects of mobility management protocols. The first aspect was to determine which is the better location for the Visitor Location Register (VLR) and Authentication Center, collocated with the Home Location Register in the terrestrial gateways or placed on the communications satellites.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.