Survey on Handoff techniques in various wireless networks
Chaitanya B. Modi, sem.-I Roll No: 08MCE024,
Nirma Institute of Technology(Computer Engg),
Nirma University, Ahmedabad-380015, Gujarat, India
Abstract
As many network technologies use different
handoff techniques with the various handoffs. Among
that all techniques Support has become one of the most
important issue especially for the wireless
technologies. Number of users move with devices one
wireless network to another, one cell to another cell,
one zone to another zone either on WI-FI or Bluetooth
or some radio-freq techniques. So In order to ensure
proper QOS for real-time communication in a mobile
and wireless Internet environment is essential. It is
also essential to minimize the transient packet loss and
efficient use of battery when the mobile is moving
between different cells (subnets) within a domain.
Different wireless techniques and schemes have been
proposed to provide handoff during a client’s frequent
movement within a domain. This paper introduces
various techniques to achieve handoff in various
wireless networks,.
Key Words- BT, BS, seamless handoff,
vertical handoff, smart decision, policy-based
handoff, mobile computing, ATM, soft handoff,
hard handoff, multilayered handoff, Bluetooth
handoff.
1. Introduction
Most wireless network installations today involve a
set of access points with overlapping coverage zones,
each access point being connected to a wired network
tap. So HANDOFF is an important aspect of cellular
mobile, Bluetooth, ATM and other wireless network
communication. Handoff occurs when the user
switches between different network access points.
Handoff techniques have been well studied and
deployed in the domain of cellular system and are
gaining a great deal of momentum in the wireless
computer networks, as IP-based wireless networking
increases in popularity. Mobility is the most important
feature of a wireless cellular communication system.
Usually, continuous service is achieved by supporting
handoff (or handover) from one cell to another.
Handoff is the process of changing the channel
(frequency, time slot, spreading code, or combination
of them) associated with the current connection while
a call is in progress. It is often initiated either by
crossing a cell boundary or by deterioration in quality
of the signal in the current channel. Handoff is divided
into two broad categories— hard and soft handoffs.
They are also characterized by “break before make”
and “make before break.”
The aim of a handoff procedure is to decrease
forced termination probability while not increasing
call blocking probability significantly.
2. Handoff in Wireless ATM networks
Handoff is the procedure by which a user's radio
link is transferred between radio ports in the network
with out an interruption of the user connection. In this
paper, we discuss how a Wireless Asynchronous
Transfer Mode (ATM) network may reroute a user
connection during a handoff.
Handoff is implemented by the network to give the
users freedom of motion beyond a limited wireless
coverage area while they are communicating. The
handoff is the procedure by which a user's radio link is
transferred from one radio port to another through the
network without an interruption of the user connection
In this paper, we first summarize the handoff
procedure in the wireless ATM network; then propose
a novel procedure (Nearest Common Node Rerouting
or NCNR) for rerouting connections in the wireless
ATM network to support a handoff event. We
conclude by comparing the proposed handoff scheme
to the existing schemes in the literature and discussing
the benefits of NCNR.
2.1 Handoff Procedure
The handoff procedure is performed to assure the
integrity of a radio connection and to minimize
interference to the users in the coverage area of
neighboring cells. The wireless ATM network consists
of radio ports, user terminals and network interface
equipment. A user terminal might have a few
simultaneous connections in the wireless ATM
network. When a handoff occurs these connections
may need to be rerouted. In this paper, we assume that
a group of radio ports is connected to the same
wireless ATM network interface equipment. This
collection of ports is called a \Zone". The zone
architecture is illustrated in Figure 1. The zone is
managed by the \Zone Manager" process. There are
two levels in a handoff event: Network Level and
Radio Level. The radio level hand-off is the actual
transfer of the radio link between two ports. The
network level handoff supports the radio level handoff
by performing rerouting and buffering. The radio level
handoff determines some of the procedures used in
network level handoff. We also assume that these
zones are interconnected by wireless ATM network
switching nodes. Based on the \zone" concept, a few
different situations for the rerouting may be
investigated:
2.2 Intra-zone Handoff
In the intra-zone handoff the user is moving within the
zone. The only rerouting that is performed in this case
is in the wireless ATM network interface equipment
within the zone. This type of rerouting does not
involve ATM network switching; hence, is not
discussed any further.
2.3 Inter-zone Handoff
The inter-zone handoff occurs when the radio ports
involved in the handoff belong to different zones. In
this case the rerouting involves the wireless ATM
network. An inter-zone handoff might require
rerouting at one or more wireless ATM switches
depending on the location of handoff and topology of
the network.
3. Handoff in Wireless Mobile Networks
Mobility is the most important feature of a wireless
cellular communication system. Usually, continuous
service is achieved by supporting handoff (or
handover) from one cell to another. Handoff is the
process of changing the channel (frequency, time slot,
spreading code, or combination of them) associated
with the current connection while a call is in progress.
It is often initiated either by crossing a cell boundary
or by a deterioration in quality of the signal in the
current channel. Handoff is divided into two broad
categories—hard and soft handoffs. They are also
characterized by “break before make” and “make
before break.” In hard handoffs, current resources are
released before new resources are used; in soft
handoffs, both existing and new resources are used
during the handoff process. Poorly designed handoff
schemes tend to generate very heavy signaling traffic
and, thereby, a dramatic decrease in quality of service
(QoS). (In this chapter, a handoff is assumed to occur
only at the cell boundary.) The reason why handoffs
are critical in cellular communication systems is that
neighboring cells are always using a disjoint subset of
frequency bands, so negotiations must take place
between the mobile station (MS), the current serving
base station (BS), and the next potential BS. Other
related issues, such as decision making and priority
strategies during overloading, might influence the
overall performance. In the next section, we introduce
different types of possible handoffs. In Section 1.3, we
describe different handoff initiation processes. The
types of handoff decisions are briefly described in
Section 1.4 and some selected representative handoff
schemes are presented in Section 1.5.
3.1 types of handoffs
Handoffs are broadly classified into two
categories—hard and soft handoffs. Usually,
the hard handoff can be further divided into
two different types—intra- and intercell
handoffs. The soft handoff can also be
divided into two different types—multiway
soft handoffs and
softer handoffs. In this chapter, we focus
primarily on the hard handoff.
A hard handoff is essentially a “break
before make” connection. Under the control
of the MSC, the BS hand off the MS’s call to
another cell and then drops the call. In a
hard handoff, the link to the prior BS is
terminated before or as the user is
transferred to the new cell’s BS; the MS is
linked to no more than one BS at any given
time. Hard handoff is primarily
used in FDMA (frequency division multiple
access) and TDMA (time division multiple
access), where different frequency ranges
are used in adjacent channels in order to
minimize channel interference. So when the
MS moves from one BS to another BS, it
becomes impossible for it to communicate
with both BSs (since different frequencies
are used). Figure
1.1 illustrates hard handoff between the MS
and the BSs.
3.2 handoff initiation
A hard handoff occurs when the old
connection is broken before a new
connection is activated. The performance
evaluation of a hard handoff is based on
various initiation criteria [19, 21]. It is
assumed that the signal is averaged over
time, so that rapid fluctuations due to the
multipath nature of the radio environment
can be eliminated. Numerous studies
have been done to determine the shape as
well as the length of the averaging window
and the older measurements may be
unreliable. Figure 1.2 shows a MS moving
from one BS (BS1) to another (BS2). The
mean signal strength of BS1 decreases as
the MS moves away from it. Similarly, the
mean signal strength of BS2 increases as
the MS approaches it. This figure is used to
explain various approaches described in the
following subsection.
3.2.1 Relative Signal Strength
This method selects the strongest received
BS at all times. The decision is based on a
mean measurement of the received signal.
In Figure 1.2, the handoff would occur at
position A. This method is observed to
provoke too many unnecessary handoffs,
even when
the signal of the current BS is still at an
acceptable level.
3.2.2 Relative Signal Strength with Threshold
This method allows a MS to hand off only if
the current signal is sufficiently weak (less
than threshold) and the other is the
stronger of the two. The effect of the
threshold depends on its relative value as
compared to the signal strengths of the two
BSs at the point at which they are equal. If
the threshold is higher than this value, say
T1 in Figure 1.2, this scheme performs
exactly like the relative signal strength
scheme, so the handoff occurs at position A.
If the threshold is lower than this value, say
T2 in Figure 1.2, the MS would delay handoff
until the current signal level crosses the
threshold at position B. In the case of T3,
the delay may be so long that the MS drifts
too far into the new cell. This reduces the
quality of the communication link from BS1
and may result in a dropped call. In
addition, this results in additional
interference to co channel users. Thus, this
scheme may create overlapping cell
coverage areas. A threshold is not used
alone in actual practice because
its effectiveness depends on prior
knowledge of the crossover signal strength
between the current and candidate BSs.
3.2.3 Relative Signal Strength with Hysteresis
This scheme allows a user to hand off only
if the new BS is sufficiently stronger (by a
hysteresis margin, h in Figure 1.2) than the
current one. In this case, the handoff would
occur at point C. This technique prevents
the so-called ping-pong effect, the repeated
handoff between two BSs caused by rapid
fluctuations in the received signal strengths
from both BSs. The first handoff, however,
may be unnecessary if the serving BS is
sufficiently sstrong.
3.2.3 Relative Signal Strength with Hysteresis and
Threshold
This scheme hands a MS over to a new BS
only if the current signal level drops below a
threshold and the target BS is stronger than
the current one by a given hysteresis
margin. In Figure 1.2, the handoff would
occur at point D if the threshold is T3.
3.2.4 Prediction Techniques
Prediction techniques base the handoff
decision on the expected future value of the
received signal strength. A technique has
been proposed and simulated to indicate
better results, in terms of reduction in the
number of unnecessary handoffs, than the
relative signal
strength, both without and with hysteresis,
and threshold methods.
3.3 handoff decision
There are numerous methods for
performing handoff, at least as many as the
kinds of state information that have been
defined for MSs, as well as the kinds of
network entities that maintain the state
information [22]. The decision-making
process of handoff may be centralized or
decentralized (i.e., the handoff decision
may be made at the MS or network). From
the decision process point of view, one can
find at least three different kinds of handoff
decisions.
3.3.1 Network-Controlled Handoff
In a network-controlled handoff protocol,
the network makes a handoff decision
based on the measurements of the MSs at a
number of BSs. In general, the handoff
process (including data transmission,
channel switching, and network switching)
takes 100–200 ms. Information about the
signal quality for all users is available at a
single point in the network that facilitates
appropriate resource allocation. Network-
controlled handoff is used in first-
generation analog systems such as AMPS
(advanced mobile phone system), TACS
(total access communication system), and
NMT (advanced mobile phone system).
3.3.2 Mobile-Assisted Handoff
In a mobile-assisted handoff process, the
MS makes measurements and the network
makes the decision. In the circuit-switched
GSM (global system mobile), the BS
controller (BSC) is in charge of the radio
interface management. This mainly means
allocation and release of radio channels and
handoff management. The handoff time
between handoff decision and execution in
such a circuit-switched GSM is
approximately 1 second.
3.3.3 Mobile-Controlled Handoff
In mobile-controlled handoff, each MS is
completely in control of the handoff
process. This type of handoff has a short
reaction time (on the order of 0.1 second).
MS measures the signal strengths from
surrounding BSs and interference levels on
all channels. A handoff
can be initiated if the signal strength of the
serving BS is lower than that of another BS
by a certain threshold.
3.4 handoff schemes
In urban mobile cellular radio systems,
especially when the cell size becomes
relatively small, the handoff procedure has
a significant impact on system
performance. Blocking probability of
originating calls and the forced termination
probability of ongoing calls are the primary
criteria for indicating performance. Different
traffic models and handoff schemes are
used in handoff procedure like Hong and
Rappaport’s Traffic Model (Two-
Dimensional). Hong and Rappaport propose
a traffic model for a hexagonal cell
(approximated by a circle) [23]. They
assume that the vehicles are spread evenly
over the service area; thus, the location of a
vehicle when a call is initiated by the user is
uniformly distributed in the cell. They also
assume that a vehicle initiating a call
moves from the current location in any
direction with equal probability and that this
direction does not change while the vehicle
remains in the cell. Other is El-Dolil et al.’s
Traffic Model (One-Dimensional), An
extension of Hong and Rappaport’s traffic
model to the case of highway microcellular
radio network has been done by El-Dolil et
al. [24]. The highway is segmented into
micro cells with small BSs radiating cigar-
shaped mobile radio signals along the
highway. Steele and Nofal’s Traffic Model
(Two-Dimensional), Steele and Nofal
studied a traffic model based on city street
microcells, catering to pedestrians making
calls while walking along a street. Xie and
Kuek’s Traffic Model (One- and Two-
Dimensional), This model assumes a
uniform density of mobile users throughout
an area and that a user is equally likely to
move in any direction with respect to the
cell border.
4. Handoff Techniques in Cellular
Networks
ELLULAR systems deploy smaller cells in
order to achieve high system capacity due
to the limited
spectrum. The frequency band is divided
into smaller bands and those bands are
reused in noninterfering cells [1-3]. Smaller
cells cause an active mobile station (MS) to
cross several cells during an ongoing
conversation. This active call should be
transferred from one cell to another one in
order to achieve call continuation during
boundary crossings. Handoff (or handover)
process is transferring an active call from
one cell to another. The transfer of current
communication channel could be in terms
of time slot, frequency band, or code word
to a new base station (BS) [1- 4]. If new BS
has some unoccupied channels than it
assigns one of them to the handed off call.
If all of the channels are in use at the
handoff time there are two possibilities: to
drop the call or to delay it for a while.
Different handoff techniques are proposed
in literature and two of the most important
metrics for evaluating a handoff technique
are forced termination probability and call
blocking probability. The forced termination
probability is the probability of
dropping an active call due to handoff
failure and the call blocking probability is
probability of blocking a new call request
[2, 5-6]. The aim of a handoff procedure is
to decrease forced termination probability
while not increasing call blocking
probability significantly.
II. HANDOFF INITIATION
Handoff initiation is the process of deciding
when to request a handoff. Handoff
decision is based on received signal
strengths (RSS) from current BS and
neighboring BSs. In Fig. 1 we examine RSSs
of current BS (BS1) and one neighboring BS
(BS2). The RSS gets weaker as MS goes
away from BS1 and gets stronger as it gets
closer to the BS2 as a result of signal
propagation. The received signal is
averaged over time using an averaging
window to remove momentary fadings due
to geographical and environmental factors
[1-2]. Below, we will examine the four main
handoff initiation techniques mentioned in
[2-3]: relative signal strength, relative signal
strength with threshold, relative signal strength with
hysteresis, and relative signal strength with
hysteresis and threshold.
A. Relative Signal Strength
In relative signal strength, the RSSs are
measured over time and the BS with
strongest signal is chosen to handoff. In Fig.
1 BS2’s RSS exceeds RSS of BS1 at point A
and handoff is requested. Due to signal
fluctuations, several handoffs can be
requested while BS1’s RSS is still sufficient
to serve MS. These unnecessary handoffs
are known as ping-pong effect.
Fig.1 Movement of a MS in the handoff zone
As the number of handoffs increase, forced
termination probability also increases. So,
handoff techniques should avoid
unnecessary handoffs.
B. Relative Signal Strength with Threshold
Relative signal strength with threshold
introduces a threshold value (T1 in Fig. 1) to
overcome the ping-pong effect. The handoff
is initiated if BS1’s RSS is lower than the
threshold value and BS2’s RSS is stronger
than BS1’s. The handoff request is issued at
point B in Fig. 1.
C. Relative Signal Strength with Hysteresis
This technique uses a hysteresis value (h in
Fig.1) to initiate handoff. Handoff is
requested when the BS2’s RSS exceeds the
BS1’s RSS by the hysteresis value h (point C
in Fig. 1).
D. Relative Signal Strength with Hysteresis and
Threshold
The last technique combines both the
threshold and hysteresis values concepts to
come with a technique with minimum
number of handoffs. The handoff is
requested when the BS1’s RSS is below the
threshold (T1 in Fig. 1) and BS2’s RSS is
stronger than BS1’s by the hysteresis value
h (point C in Fig. 1). If we would choose a
lower threshold than T1 (but higher than
T2) than the handoff initiation would be
somewhere at the right of point C. All the
techniques discussed above initiate handoff
before
point D where it is the “receiver threshold”.
Receiver threshold is the minimum
acceptable RSS for call
continuation (T2 in Fig. 1) [1]. If RSS
drops below receiver threshold, the ongoing
call is than dropped. The time interval
between handoff request and receiver
threshold enable cellular systems to delay
the handoff request until the receiver
threshold time is reached when the
neighboring cell does not have any empty
channels. This technique is known as
queuing handoff calls and will be discussed
in Section V.
In [7], a handoff algorithm using multi-level
thresholds is proposed which assigns
different threshold values to the users
according to their speed. Since low speed
users spend more time in handoff zone they
are assigned a higher threshold to
distribute high and low speed users evenly.
High speed users are assigned lower
thresholds. The performance results
obtained by [7] shows that an 8-level
threshold algorithm operates better than a
single threshold algorithm in terms of
forced termination and call blocking
probabilities.
III. HANDOFF DECISION
In the previous section we discussed when
the handoff is requested. In this section we
will examine the handoff decision protocols
used in various cellular systems.
A. Network Controlled Handoff (NCHO)
NCHO is used in first generation cellular
systems such as Advanced Mobile Phone
System (AMPS) where the mobile telephone
switching office (MTSO) is responsible for
overall handoff decision [8]. In NCHO, the
network handles the necessary RSS
measurements and handoff decision.
B. Mobile Assisted Handoff (MAHO)
In NCHO the load of the network is high
since network handles the all process itself.
In order to reduce the load of the network,
MS is responsible for doing RSS
measurements and send them periodically
to BS in MAHO. Based on the received
measurements, the BS or the mobile
switching center (MSC) decides when to
handoff [3-4]. MAHO is used in Global
System for Mobile Communications (GSM)
[4].
C. Mobile Controlled Handoff (MCHO)
MCHO extends the role of the MS by giving
overall control to it. The MS and BS, both,
make the necessary measurements and the
BS sends them to the MS [3]. Then, the MS
decides when to handoff based on the
information gained from the BS and itself.
Digital European Cordless Telephone
(DECT) is a sample cellular system using
MCHO [4].
IV. HANDOFF TYPES
In this section we will mention about
different types of handoffs. First, we will
concentrate on channel usage. Then, we
will investigate handoff in microcells and
multilayered systems. Finally, we will
explain handoff in homogeneous and
heterogeneous systems.
A. Hard vs. Soft Handoff
The hard handoff term is used when the
communication channel is released first and
the new channel is acquired later from the
neighboring cell. Thus, there is a service
interruption when the handoff occurs
reducing the quality of service. Hard
handoff is used by the systems which use
time division multiple access (TDMA) and
frequency division multiple access (FDMA)
such as GSM and General Packet
Radio Service (GPRS) [9]. In contrast to hard
handoff, a soft handoff can establish
multiple connections with neighboring cells.
Soft handoff is used by the code division
multiple access (CDMA) systems
where the cells use same frequency band
using different code words. Each MS
maintains an active set where BSs are
added when the RSS exceeds a given
threshold and removed when RSS drops
below another threshold value for a given
amount of time specified by a timer. When
a presence or absence of a BS to the active
set is encountered soft handoff occurs. The
sample systems using soft handoff are
Interim Standard 95 (IS-95) and Wideband
CDMA (WCDMA) [2, 4, 9].
B. Microcellular vs. Multilayer Handoff
In this section we will first look at the
handoff issues in microcellular
environments. Later, we will investigate
some systems that use microcells overlaid
by macrocells in order to minimize number
of handoffs.

Fig. 2 A city segment with three BSs
deployed on streets
1) Microcellular Handoff
The microcells are cells with small radii and
employed in highly populated areas such as
city buildings and streets to meet high
system capacity by frequency reuse. In Fig.
2 we have two streets intersecting with
three BSs employed on streets. BS1 and
BS3 have line-of-sight (LOS) with each
other. The handoff between BS1 and BS3 is
called LOS handoff while the handoff
between BS1 and BS2 is a non-
LOS (NLOS) handoff since they don’t have
LOS [2, 4, 9]. In NLOS handoffs, when a MS
lose LOS (by turning the corner) with
current BS, a drop in RSS (20-30 dB) occurs
[4, 9]. This effect is called corner effect and
needs faster handoff algorithms since the
RSS can drop quickly below receiver
threshold resulting in a call drop. Two types
of handoffs, LOS and NLOS, have different
characteristics where LOS handoffs try to
minimize the number of unnecessary
handoffs between BSs and NLOS must be as
quickly as possible because of the corner
effect. In [9], a fast handoff algorithm for
hard handoffs is
proposed to remove fast fading fluctuations
resulting in algorithm that reacts more
quickly to corner effect. They propose a
technique called local averaging, in which
the averaging time interval is smaller than
averaging time interval of common handoff
algorithms and improve handoff
performance. A direction biased algorithm
is proposed in [10] where all the BSs in
handoff decision are grouped in two groups.
One
set of BSs are those in which MS is
approaching and the other set includes the
BSs in which the MS moves away. In
handoff initiation an encouraging hysteresis
( e h ) is used to first group where a
discouraging hysteresis ( d h ) is applied to
the second one. The relation between these
hysteresis values are e d h ≤ h ≤ h . A signal
strength based direction estimation method
is used for determining the mobile
positions.
2) Multilayer Handoff
Some designs used a multilayer approach
in order to decrease the number of handoffs
and to increase system capacity. A number
of microcells are overlaid by a macrocell
and the users are assigned to each layer
according to their speeds. Microcells and
macrocells coverage area are respectively
about 500 meters and 35 km for GSM900 in
[11]. Since slow users are assigned to the
microcells and fast users are assigned to
the macrocells, the total number of handoff
requests is decreased. Macrocells not only
serve the fast users but also serve slow
users when the microcells are congested.
When a microcell allocates all of its
channels, the new and handoff calls are
overflowed to the macrocell layer. When the
microcells load decreases it is possible to
assign slow users back to the microcell. This
type of handoff is called take-back. So far,
we have four types of handoffs: microcell-
to-microcell, microcell-to-macrocell,
macrocell-to-macrocell, and macrocell-to-
microcell [4]. In [6], a bonus-based
algorithm is proposed where it is
compared with classical and macro
algorithms. In the classical algorithm, in the
case of new call request a user is assigned
to microcell or overflowed to macrocell if
capacity of microcell is full. After the user
speed estimation is done, the user is
assigned to the appropriate layer using
overflow and take-back. This scheme results
in too many handoffs known as the ping-
pong effect. Macro algorithm is similar to
classical algorithm with one exception.
When a user is assigned to the macrocell it
is not permitted to take-back to
microcell which decreases the number of
handoffs. The bonus-based algorithm tries
to prevent unnecessary handoffs to
microcell when fast users temporarily slow
down. For each fast user a time bonus is
given and user can use this time bonus
during temporary slow downs. If a user
exceeds the timer then it is assigned as a
slow user and is taken-back to the
microcell layer. Hu and Rappaport [12] also
described and proposed a
model for three-layer hierarchical network
consisting of microcells, macrocells, and
spot beams. Microcells and macrocells are
terrestrial part of the network whereas spot
beams correspond to satellite part. The
users can be overflowed from low layers to
the uppers but take-back is not allowed
here.
C. Horizontal vs. Vertical Handoff
Handoff between homogenous networks
where one type of network is considered is
called horizontal handoff. On the other
hand, handoff between different types of
networks is also possible. A handoff in such
a heterogeneous environment is named
vertical handoff and it is out of scope of this
paper [13]. All the issues described in this
paper are related to horizontal handoff.
V. PRIORITIZATION SCHEMES
In non-prioritization schemes new calls and
handoff calls are treated the same way.
When a BS has an idle channel, it is
assigned due to first-come first-serve basis
regardless of whether the call is new or
handoff. But, forced termination of an
active call is less desirable by the cellular
users in contrast to new call blocking [1, 5,
14]. In order to provide lower forced
termination probability, prioritization
schemes
assigns more channels to the handoff calls.
The two wellknown prioritization schemes
are: guard channels and queuing handoff
calls [1, 3-5].
A. Guard Channels
The guard channel scheme reserves some
fixed or adaptively changing number of
channels for handoff calls only. The rest of
the channels are used by new and handoff
calls. So, the handoff calls are better served
and forced termination probability is
decreased. The cost of such a scheme is an
increase in call blocking probability and
total carried traffic. In [14] the number of
guard channels is determined
dynamically by the use of neighboring BSs.
Each BS determines the number of MSs in
pre handover zone (PHZ) periodically and
informs its neighbor BS related to that PHZ.
PHZ is a small area located next to handoff
zone and contains the possible users that
will enter handoff zone soon. When the BS
gets the number of MSs in PHZ it reserves
that amount of guard channels for handoff
calls. A new call is assigned a channel if no
handoff calls are queued in the queue
where handoff calls are kept and the total
number of free channels is greater than the
number of guard channels. Zhang and Liu
[15] proposed an adaptive algorithm which
assigns the number of channels adaptively.
When forced termination probability
exceeds a predefined threshold the guard
channel number is increased to decrease
forced termination probability to below the
threshold. The number of guard channels is
decreased in the case where BS does not
use reserved guard channels significantly.
B. Queuing Handoff Calls
Queuing handoff calls prioritization scheme
queues the handoff calls when all of the
channels are occupied in a BS. When a
channel is released, it is assigned to one of
the handoff calls in the queue. A new call
request is assigned a channel if the queue
is empty and if there is at least one free
channel in the BS. Also, some systems
queue new calls to decrease call blocking
probability [16]. The time interval between
handoff initiation and receiver threshold
makes it possible to use queuing handoff
calls. Queuing handoff calls can be used
with/without the guard channel scheme. In
[3], a timer based handoff priority scheme
is proposed. When a channel is released at
BS, a timer is started. If a handoff request is
done in that time interval it is assigned to it.
Otherwise, when the timer expires, the
channel can be assigned to new or handoff
calls depending on the arrival order.
Tekinay and Jabbari [5] introduced a new
prioritization
scheme called Measurement Based
Prioritization Scheme (MBSP). The handoff
calls are added to the queue and priorities
of the calls changes dynamically based on
the power level they have. The calls with
power level close to the receiver threshold
have the highest priorities. This scheme
provided better results from the first-in first-
out (FIFO) queuing scheme where the
handoff calls are served due to arrival time.
The Most Critical First (MCF) policy
described in [14] determines the first
handoff call that will be cut off and assigns
the first released channel to that call. The
first handoff call that will be cut off has the
highest priority. The authors proposed a
method to predict the first handoff call to be
cut off by using simple radio
measurements. In [16] a queuing scheme
using guard channels is described. Both
new calls and handoff calls are queued. A
number of guard channels are reserved for
handoff calls. When the new calls are
congested, a channel from the guard
channels is used if it is available. This
scheme decreases the call blocking
probability while increasing forced
termination probability slightly. Salih and
Fidanboylu [17], [18] described and
modeled queuing techniques for two-tier
cellular networks. In [17], a
microcell/macrocell network using a FIFO
queue in macrocell tier and in [18] a
microcell/macrocell network using a FIFO
queue in microcell tier is introduced and
compared with each other. The results of
both systems showed that forced
termination probability for slow users is
decreased when the FIFO queue is used in
microcell and forced termination for fast
users is decreased when the queue is in
macrocell.
5. Cellular IP Handoff technique
The Cellular IP hard handoff algorithm is
based on a simplistic approach to mobility
management that supports fast and simple
handoff at the price of potentially some
packet loss. Handoff is initiated by mobile
hosts. Hosts listen to beacons transmitted
by base stations and initiate handoff based
on signal strength measurements. To
perform a handoff a mobile host has to tune
its radio to the new base station and send a
route-update packet. This creates routing
cache mappings on route to the gateway
hence configuring the downlink route to the
new base station. Handoff latency is the
time that elapses between the handoff and
the arrival of the first packet through the
new route. For hard handoff this equals the
round-trip time between the mobile host
and the cross-over point which is the
gateway in the worst case. During this time,
downlink packets may be lost. The
mappings associated with the old base
station are not cleared at handoff, rather,
they timeout as the associated soft-state
timers expire.
Before the mappings timeout, a period
exists when both the old and new downlink
routes are valid and packets are delivered
through both base stations. This feature is
used in the Cellular IP semisoft handoff
algorithm that improves handoff
performance but still suits the lightweight
nature of the base protocol providing
probabilistic guarantees instead of fully
eliminating packet loss. Semisoft handoff
adds one additional state variable to the
existing mobile state maintained at mobile
hosts and base stations. The semisoft
handoff procedure has two components.
First, in order to reduce handoff latency, the
routing cache mappings associated with the
new base station must be created before
the actual handoff takes place. When the
mobile host initiates a handoff, it sends a
semisoft packet to the new base station and
immediately returns to listening to the old
base station. While the host is still in
contact with the old base station, the
semisoft packet configure routing cache
mappings associated with the new base
station. After a semisoft , the host can
perform a regular handoff. The semisoft
delay can be an arbitrary value between the
mobile-gateway round-trip time and the
route-timeout. The delay ensures that by
the time the host tunes its radio to the new
base station, its downlink packets are
delivered through both the old and new
base stations.
While the semisoft packet ensures that the
mobile host continues to receive packets
immediately after handoff, it does not,
however, fully assure smooth handoff.
Depending on the network topology and
traffic conditions, the time to transmit
packets from the cross-over point to the old
and new base stations may be different and
the packet streams transmitted through the
two base stations will typically not be
synchronized at the mobile host. If the new
base station "lags behind'' the old base
station, the mobile host may receive
duplicate packets. Reception of duplicate
packets in this case is not disruptive to
application operations. If, however, the new
base station "gets ahead'' then packets will
be deemed to be missing from the data
stream observed at the receiving mobile
host. The second component of the
semisoft handoff procedure is based on the
observation that perfect synchronization of
the two streams is not necessary. The
condition can be eliminated by temporarily
introducing into the new path a constant
delay sufficient to compensate, with high
probability, the time difference between the
two streams. This can be best achieved at
the cross-over switch that understands that
a semisoft handoff is in progress due to the
fact that a semisoft packet has arrived from
a mobile host that has a mapping to
another interface.The mapping created by
the semisoft packet has a flag to indicate
that downlink packets routed by this
mapping must pass a "delay device'' before
transmission. After handoff, the mobile host
will send data or route-update packets
along the new path which will clear this flag
and cause all packets in the delay device to
be forwarded to the mobile host.
Conclusion
Hear I am present different handoff techniques
which are used in wireless networks. Each technique
uses their own method and solves the handoff
problems.
3. References
 vol. 3, 1999, pp. 335- 350.
[1] S. Tekinay and B. Jabbari, “Handover and Channel
Assignment in
[14] P. Agrawal, Dinesh K. Anvekar and B. Narendran,
Mobile Cellular Networks”, IEEE Communications Magazine,
“Channel
vol.
Management Policies for Handovers in Cellular
29, November 1991, pp. 42-46.
Networks”, Bell Labs
Technical Journal, vol. 1, Autumn, 1996, pp. 96-109.
[2] Gregory P. Pollioni, “Trends in Handover Design”,
IEEE
Communications Magazine, vol. 34, March 1996, pp. 82-90 [15] Y. Zhang and D. Liu, “An Adaptive Algorithm for Call
Admission
[3] P. Marichamy, S. Chakrabati and S. L. Maskara, Control in Wireless Networks”, IEEE Global
“Overview of Telecommunications
Conference (GLOBECOM’01), vol. 6, 2001, pp. 3628-3632.
handoff schemes in cellular mobile networks and their
comparative
performance evaluation”, IEEE VTC’99,vol. 3, 1999, pp. [16] S. Choi and K. Sohraby, “Analysis of a Mobile
1486-1490. Cellular Systems with Hand-off Priority and Hysteresis
Control”, IEEE INFOCOM 2000,
vol. 1, March 2000, pp. 217-224.
[4] Nishint D. Tripathi, Jeffrey H. Reed and Hugh F.
VanLandinoham,
“Handoff in Cellular Systems”, IEEE Personal [17] T. Salih and K. Fidanboylu, “Performance Analysis
Communications, vol. and Modeling of Two-Tier Cellular Networks with
5, December 1998, pp. 26-37. Queuing Handoff Calls”, Proc. of the 8th IEEE Symposium on
Computers and Communication (ISCC’03), vol. 1, 2003, pp.
143-148.
[5] S. Tekinay and B. Jabbari, “A Measurement-Based
Prioritization
Scheme for Handovers in Mobile Cellular Networks”,
IEEE Journal
on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 10, no. 8, Oct. 1992,
pp.
1343-1350.
[6] A. Iera, A. Molinaro and S. Marano, “Handoff
Management with
Mobility Estimation in Hierarchical Systems”, IEEE
Transactions on
Vehicular Technology, vol. 51, Sept. 2002, pp. 915-934.

[7] Y. Kim, K. Lee and Y. Chin, “Analysis of Multi-level

Threshold
Handoff Algorithm”, Global Telecommunications Conference
(GLOBECOM’96), vol. 2, 1996, pp. 1141-1145.

[8] Andrew S. Tanenbaum, Computer Networks - Fourth

Edition, Prentice Hall, 2003

[9] Alexe E. Leu and Brian L. Mark, “Modeling and

Analysis of Fast
Handoff Algorithms for Microcellular Networks”,
Proceedings of the
10th IEEE MASCOTS’2002, Oct. 2002, pp. 321-328.

[18] T. Salih and K. Fidanboylu, “A Comparison of the

[10] Mark D. Austin and Gordon L. Stüber, “Direction
Performance of Two- Tier Cellular Networks Based on
Biased Handoff
Queuing Handoff Calls”, International Journal of Signal
Algorithms for Urban Microcells”, Proceedings of 44th IEEE
Processing, vol. 1, 2004, No. 1-4, pp. 343-347.
Vehicular Technology Conference, vol. 1, 1994, pp. 101-105.

[11] J. Naslund, C. Carneheim, C. Johansson, S.-O. [19]. M. Gudmundson, Analysis of handover

Jonsson, M.
Ljungberg, M. Madfors, J. Skold, “An Evolution of GSM”,
IEEE 44th
Vehicular Technology Conference, vol. 1, 1998, pp. 348-352.
[12] Lon-Rong Hu and Stephen S. Rappaport, “Personal
Communication Systems Using Multiple Hierarchical
Cellular Overlays”, IEEE Joırnal on Selected Areas in
Communications, vol. 13, no. 2, Feb. 1995, pp. 406-415.
[13] M. Stemm and Randy H. Katz, “Vertical handoffs in
wireless overlay networks”, Mobile Networks and Applications,
algorithms, Proc. IEEE VTC ’91, pp. 537–542, May
1991.
[20]. V. Kapoor, G. Edwards, and R. Snkar,
Handoff criteria for personal communication
networks, Proc. IEEE ICC ’94, pp. 1297–1301,
May 1994.
[21]. G. P. Pollini, Trends in handover design,
IEEE Commun. Magazine, pp. 82–90, March
1996.

[22]. N. D. Tripathi, J. H. Reed, and H. F.

Vanlandingham, Handoff in Cellular Systems,
IEEE Personal
Commun., December 1998.

[23] D. Hong and S. S. Rappaport, Traffic model

and performance analysis for cellular mobile
radio
telephone systems with prioritized and
nonprioritized handoff procedures, IEEE Trans.
Veh.

Technol., Vol. VT-35, No. 3, pp. 448–461, August

1986.
[24]. S. A. El-Dolil, W. C. Wong, and R. Steele,
Teletraffic performance of highway microcells
with overlay macrocell, IEEE J. Select. Areas in
Commun., Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 71–78, January 1989.

[24]. R. Steele and M. Nofal, Teletraffic

performance of microcellular personal
communication networks,
IEE PROCEEDINGS-I, Vol. 139, No. 4, August
1992.