182

IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.8 No.8, August 2008

An Efficient DAD Scheme for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Handoff

P. Harini* and Dr.O.B.V.Ramanaiah**
*St.Anns college of Engineering and Technology, AP, India **J N T U College of Engineering, Anantapur, AP,India Summary
Since the interruption between receiving new ARs RA and receiving BA from HA is depending upon DAD (Duplicate Address Detection), Mobile Nodes handoff performance is very much impaired by the Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) procedure for the newly formed Care-of Address in Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (HMIPv6). In this paper, we recommend a novel cross-protocol design approach for the DAD problem. It uses information from current routing protocol traffic. This utilizes Passive Duplicate Address Detection (PDAD) to identify duplicate addresses. Using PDAD, a node examines incoming routing protocol packets to develop hints about address controversies. Since it is independent of the routing protocol, it produces nearly no protocol overhead and reduces initial delay. By simulation results, we show that, the handoff delay and packet loss are reduced in case of PDAD based handoff, when compared with the standard DAD based handoff.

Keywords:
Duplicate Address Detection, Mobile IP, Handoff, HMIPv6, Packet loss, CAN.

Mobile IP solves the problem commenced by the fact that traditional IP addresses simultaneously represent the hosts identity and encode the hosts topological location on the IP network [Pos81b]. With respect to the networks IP topology, a host gives the result of entering into a secondary network following the physical movement of the hosts attachment. Once this takes place, a new IP address must be assigned to the host, so that packets may be correctly routed to the hosts new location. This sort of a move ruptures any transport layer connections (for example, TCP sessions), which were active for the duration of the movement because the hosts IP address is also utilized as a transport level end point identity. So, it results losing of packets sent to the earlier IP address. Moreover the hosts prior peers will not know the new address where they are supposed to send their IP packets at this moment. As a result of establishing two IP addresses for mobile hosts, Mobile IP facilitates in the region of this problem. They are a static home address and a transitory Care-ofaddress. The static home address of the host is recognized worldwide (for long-lived identity). As soon as attached to different parts of the network, the transitory Care-of Address is temporarily recognized (for routing purposes). The mobile host appears accessible from its home address yet in fact attached to the internet by its foreign address through dynamically managed IP-in-IP tunnels (in Mobile IPv4) and specifically encoded packetforwarding rules (in Mobile IPv6). As a result of ensuring this, just the address is being used by transport (and higher) a layer, network layer mobility is supported by Mobile IP to be transparent towards all upper layers. Accordingly, even in a mobile host environment applications designed just about the assumptions of the traditional, non-mobile Internet will maintain to function.

1. Introduction
1.1 Mobile IP
A desire to support mobility at the IP level has been motivated by the development of IP-based data and voice applications in the perspective of mobile devices (for example PDAs, laptops and 3rd and 4th generation mobile phones) and new access technologies (for instance Bluetooth, GPRS, 802.11 Wireless LANs, ADSL, and DOCSIS cable modems). Allowing the applications on a mobile IP host to stay in touch with other hosts while roaming between different IP networks is the main objective of this work. When a mobile host physically shifts to a new location and chooses to make use of a different access link technology naturally roaming takes place. This can result in the host vanishing from one point on the Internet and, topologically at least, come back by the side of another point. Such a move would effect in interruption to the mobile hosts continuing communication, with standard IPv4 or IPv6. Just a tiny interruption perceived by the mobile host using mobile IP and subsequently carries on exchanging packets as still nothing has happened.

1.2 Mobile IPv6

Mobile IPv6 is designed to manage Mobile Node (MN) movements among IPv6 networks. With Mobile IPv6, every MN turns into reachable to all further hosts through its home address identity. A Home Agent (HA) is a router on the MNs home network. The HA hold the mobility of the MN through maintaining MNs current location information. An Access Router (AR) is defined to be the

Manuscript received August 5, 2008. Manuscript revised August 20, 2008.

IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.8 No.8, August 2008

183

last router in the foreign network which can forward packets to MN. In Mobile IPv6, the idea of Foreign Agent (FA) does not exist. As an alternative, AR takes part in the related role of FA in a foreign network except assigning its IP address [the MNs Care-of Address (CoA) would be the IP address]. The MN acquires a new CoA at the time it moves to a new sub network. The CoA is either configured using IPv6 stateless Address Auto configuration or stateful Address configuration (such as DHCP). The MN subsequently registers this CoA to the HA.

When the MN moves inside a MAP domain, it can be able to prefer between basic mode and extended mode. In basic mode, the MAP acts the same as the local HA to receive packets, which are sent to MN inside the same domain. The MAP receives all packets intended to the RCoA and subways them to the corresponding LCoA of the MN. In extended mode, the RCoA is the MAPs address. The MAP keeps a binding table with the current LCoA corresponding with the MN home address. When the MAP receives packets intended to a MN, it detunnels and retunnels them to the LCoA.

1.3 Hierarchical Mobile IPv6

1.4 Handoff in HIMPv6

Fig.1 Hierarchical Mobile IPv6

A MN may vary its point of attachment to different networks so frequently that significant network overhead and increased signaling messages introduced by the basic Mobile IP. HMIPv6 [SCEB04], an extension of basic Mobile IPv6, provides a localized mobility management protocol (micro-mobility support) for MN. This scheme introduces a new conceptual entity, called as the Mobility Anchor Point (MAP) to handle mobility management. MAP is a router or a set of routers. This MAP maintains uniquely authoritative administration of a particular domain. MAP connects the domain, and serves to the Internet with its publicly routable IP address (Figure 1). In HMIPv6 a MN has two types of addresses - a regional care-of address (RCoA) and an on link care-of address (LCoA). The RCoA specifies a particular domain of the Internet and is known as global address. LCoA is known as locally unique address within the domain. When the MN moves between local networks inside a MAP domain (micro/intra-domain handoff), it transforms its LCoA and simply requires registering the new LCoA to a MAP on the local link. While moving a MN from one MAP domain to a new MAP domain (macro/inter domain handoff), it changes both addresses. Therefore, this needs registering new local LCoA and new RCoA to the new MAP. At this instant, the new MAP registers global RCoA to the MNs HA.

Fig.2 Inter-domain Handoff in HMIPv6

The system for Inter-domain handoff is based on the following scenario: the MN has a regional Care-of Address RCoA1 and an on-link Care-of Address LCoA3 (Fig.2). When the CN sends packets to the MN, the packets will be sent through MAP1 to the MNs LCoA3. When the MN is about to move from the MAP1 domain to the MAP2 domain: The MN sends a request control message to MAP1 to construct a multicast group for the MN. MAP1 forms a multicast group for the MN and sends a multicast group join request to all other neighboring ARs. The neighboring ARs send response messages after receiving these multicast group requests toward MAP1 to show their availability to receive multicast packets from MAP1. The packets encapsulated by MAP1 are tunneled from the CN to the multicast group members. These ARs buffer the packets. As a final point, these neighboring ARs forward the packets. When the MN travels from MAP1 domain to MAP2 domain: The MN initially acquires a new address from the MAP2 network (RCoA2, LCoA4).

184

IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.8 No.8, August 2008

The MN sends a Binding Update to MAP2 through AR4 and sends a message requesting AR4 to forward a multicast message. AR4 receives the request message, and subsequently forwards the buffered packets to the MN. Whereas AR4 constantly sends multicast packets to MN, MAP2 receives the Binding Update and checks for DAD. MAP2 sends a Binding Update to the MNs Home Agent after receiving the DAD. After that MAP2 waits for a binding acknowledgment from the Home Agent. MAP2 followed by sends a Binding Acknowledgement to the MN. The MN receives the Binding Acknowledgement and sends a Binding Update to the CN via MAP2. After receiving the Binding Update, CN changes the destination address RCoA1 to new RCoA2 and consequently directs the packets to MN in the new network via MAP2 and AR4. AR4 stops sending multicast packets from MAP1 as soon as it receives new packets intended to the MN. MN at this moment receives packets directly from the CN as with Hierarchical Mobile IPv6.

Fig.4 MNs BU procedure when performing handoff when RTT of BU/BA > random delay before first NS

In summary, the delay between receiving new ARs RA and receiving BA from HA is:

In this equation, RTT MN and HA/MAP, T

BU/BA

means the link delay between means the random delay before

PreDAD

sending the first NS on a new link.

2. Impact of DAD on Handoff

2.1 Interaction of DAD and BU Registration
When MN senses the movement, it receives the Router Advertisement and configures the new CoA in a stateless manner [7]. To achieve better handoff performance, MN sends BU to HA/MAP immediately, though the CoA is hesitant yet. The AR sends NS to inquire the unknown link layer address of MN after receiving BA from HA/MAP. Due to the random delay before the DAD starts, there are two possibilities as illustrated in Figure 3 and Figure 4.

When in a HMIPv6 MAP domain, if MN moves from one AR to another, the RTT is much less than the
BU/BA

counterpart in MIPv6. Let RTT respectively, then we get:

MAP

and RTT

HA

denote each

From the discussion above, we can see that the traditional DAD procedure will greatly impair the handoff performance of Mobile IPv6. To reduce such performance degradation, we propose a mechanism based on Passive Duplicate Address Detection (PDAD).

3. Related work
Fig.3 MNs BU procedure when performing handoff when RTT of BU/BA < random delay before first NS

Nakajima, N. [5] proposed a Robust Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (RH-MIPv6), which provides incorrect tolerance and strength in mobile networks. In RH-MIPv6, a mobile node (MN) registers primary (P-RCoA) and secondary (SRCoA) regional care of addresses to two different MAPs (Primary and Secondary) at the same time. They have

IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.8 No.8, August 2008

185

developed a method to permit the mobile node or correspondent node (CN) for the detection of the failure of primary MAP and modify their attachment from primary to secondary MAP. Sha Liu et al. [7] examined the origin of such performance degradation, to lessen the impact of DAD on handoff performance. They have proposed an Internet draft with extensive MLD to help in finishing DAD earlier. This is based on such a MLD-based DAD scheme. Our work explains the outline and confirmed the contribution as much better handoff performance. Li Jun Zhang et al. [13] Proposed a comprehensive performance analysis of Fast handover for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (F-HMIPv6) using the fluid-flow and random walk mobility models. Based on the proposed analytical models location update cost, packet delivery cost and total cost functions are formulated. They have examined the collision of several wireless system factors for instance user velocity, user density, mobility domain size, sessionto-mobility ratio on these costs. Moon et al. [14] proposed a method to lessen the handover delays. This is done by cooperating with the information of layer 2 and in addition by performing some functions of the mobile node on the access router. They have recommended a slight more competent and optimized mobility scheme. This method has combined appropriately the advantages of earlier proposed schemes. Yuh-Shyan Chen et al. [15] Proposed a cross-layer partner-assisted handoff mechanism based on HMIPv6 in 802.16e wireless system, termed P-HMIPv6 protocol. The P-HMIPv6 protocol is a cross-layer, layer 2 and layer 3, approach. The partner station (PS) is a new component with transmit ability. This is adopted by our protocol. Moreover it is a static mobile station (MS). The assistance of the PSs, care-of address (CoA) can be pre-acquired and DAD operation can be pre-executed by the PS before the MS initials the layer 2 handoff. Son Tran-Trong et al. [16] proposed an improved handover method across heterogeneous environment with multiple network interfaces in a Mobile Node with the Media Independent Handover (MIH) Services as defined in IEEE 802.21 and Advance Duplicate Address Detection (A-DAD). The analysis of the handover performance has done concerning the velocity of Mobile Node and the latency between Mobile Node and its Corresponding Node.

obtain hints about address conflicts. PDAD does not use any extra bandwidth. The basic thought is to concern various PDAD algorithms to incoming routing protocol packets, which exploit protocol events that either 1) Not at all happens in case of a unique address, however constantly in case of a duplicate address or 2) Hardly ever happens in case of a unique address, but frequently in case of a duplicate address. If the incidence happens once, the conflict is definite in the first case whereas the conflict is there just to a certain possibility in the second case. In this case, long-term monitoring may be essential. Such PDAD algorithms are probabilistic. Each node maintains a table with the conflict probability for each address Whenever a PDAD algorithm identifies a hint about a conflict, it changes the probability for the consequent address in the table. If certain threshold is reached, PDAD believes that the address is certainly duplicated and generates the conflict resolution.

4.1 PDAD Algorithms for On-Demand Routing Protocols

PDAD can also be applied to on-demand routing protocols. The DAD is also on-demand due to their passive nature, as well as can simply identify conflicts between nodes involved in a route discovery or maintenance procedure. In the subsequent, we describe a model of an on-demand routing protocol and present some PDAD algorithms for this model. In the following, special algorithms for on-demand protocols are presented. 1) PDAD-RNS: If a RREQ is received with the receiver's originator address the RREQ-Never-Sent (RNS) algorithm identifies a conflict. However a RREQ has never sent for this destination. In this case, a different node with the same address must have sent the RREQ. 2) PDAD-RwR: If a node receives a RREP meant for its own address the RREP-without-RREQ (RwR) algorithm identifies a conflict, but a RREQ has never sent for this destination 3) PDAD-2RoR: A singe destination node simply replies one time to a specific RREQ caused by the application of a duplicate message cache. The 2RREPs-on-RREQ (2RoR) algorithm identifies a conflict if more than one RREP has been received from the destination address of a specific RREQ. 4) PDAD-SN: This algorithm exploits the Sequence Numbers (SN) in the routing protocol packets to detect duplicate addresses in the network. The assumptions are

4. Passive Duplicate Address Detection

Our approach uses Passive Duplicate Address Detection (PDAD) [4] to identify duplicate addresses. Using PDAD, a node examines incoming routing protocol packets to

186

IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.8 No.8, August 2008

that each node uses a sequence number only once within the time interval td, and that each node increments its own and only its own internal sequence number counter. 5) PDAD-SND: A conflict can as well be detected based on the Sequence Number difference (SND). The difference is higher than the maximum possible increment within t1t2 + td, with t1 and t2 being the points in time when packet 1 and 2 were received, respectively. As a consequence, these packets could not have been sent by the same node. Intermediate nodes hence can conclude that the originator's address is duplicate.

4.2. PDAD and AODV

Fig. 5 Example of a conflict resolution using ACN messages

In this case, a combination of PDAD-RNS, -2RoR, -SN and -SND is able to detect a conflict at the time an RREQ containing the duplicate address is sent. If node A and B both have the same address, there are three possible cases 1) Neither node A nor node B issues an RREQ. As an alternative, a third node C issues an RREQ with the similar address of node A and B as destination address. In this case, node C can detect the conflict with PDAD-2RoR. 2) Either node A or node B issues an RREQ. In this case, any of them can detect the conflict using PDADRNS or -SN. 3) Both node A and B simultaneously issue an RREQ. In this case, they can detect the conflict using PDADSND, PDAD-SNE or -SN. So the combination of algorithms PDAD-SN, -SND, RwR, -RNS and -2RoR can be used for AODV.

We can use the idea of route optimization from Mobile IPv6 [17]: the node that changes its address notifies its communication partners about the new address using a Binding Update (BU) message. It declares its old address as home address. All nodes manage a binding table and can use the routing header in case of IPv6 or an IP tunnel to send data packets destined for the old address to the new address. These packets are then de-capsulated at the destination and arrive at the transport layer with the old destination address. In case a location management or name service exists, it should also be notified about the new address.

5 Experimental Results
5.1 Simulation Setup
We use NS2 to simulate our proposed protocol. In our simulation, the channel capacity of mobile hosts is set to the same value: 2 Mbps. We use the distributed coordination function (DCF) of IEEE 802.11 for wireless LANs as the MAC layer protocol. It has the functionality to notify the network layer about link breakage. The following table summarizes the simulation settings. No. of Nodes Area Size Mac Simulation Time Traffic Source Packet Size Speed Transmission range Routing Protocol 15 1000 X 1000 802.11 50 sec CBR 512 5,10,15,20 75m AODV

4.3 Conflict Resolution and Address Change Management

A node can either detect a conflict of its own address or of another node's address. In any case, at least one node involved in the conflict must be notified, so that it can change its address to resolve the conflict. In our mechanism, Address Conflict Notification (ACN) messages are issued for this purpose. The ACN messages are then unicast to the duplicate address. To prevent the distribution of additional information in the network, an ACN message is sent in the direction from which the corresponding routing protocol packet was received this way, the node that has joined the network most recently tends to change its address and no additional information must be distributed in the network. (See Fig.5)

For the simulation, we make use of Hierarchical Mobile IP (HMIP) implementation, which has implemented in Columbia IP Micro-mobility Software (CIMS) [13]. It supports micro mobility protocols for instance Hawaii,

IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.8 No.8, August 2008

187

Cellular IP, and HMIP extension meant for the ns-2 network simulator based on version 2.1b6. We have additionally included MAP functionality to provide regional registration with the existing CIMS implementations. The simulation has carried out using the network topology shown in Figure 4.

Fig 8 shows the handoff delay for PDAD and DAD based schemes. Clearly the handoff delay for PDAD is significantly less when compared with DAD.
PacketLoss 1000 800 Packets 600 400 200 0 1 2 3 4 Movem ents DAD PDAD

Fig.7 Movements Vs Packet Loss

Handoff Delay 0.8 Delay(s) 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1 2 3 4 Movements DAD PDAD

Fig.6 Network Topology

Initially the mobile node MN13 was in MAP1 in the domain AR1. During the simulation we perform intra and inter domain handoff on MN13. Initially, at time t1, the mobile node performs intra domain handoff by moving from AR1 to AR2 within MAP1. Next at time t2, it start moving towards AR3 from AR2, thus by performing inter domain handoff. At time t3, it moves from AR3 to AR4, within MAP2. Finally at time t4, it moves back to AR1, once again performing inter domain handoff. In all the 4 movements, PDAD is performed before getting the new CoA. We evaluate the performance of our scheme based on the following parameters. Handoff latency: The handoff latency is defined as the time interval from last packet received form serving BS to and new packet received from target BS. Packet loss: The packet loss counts from the MS disconnecting to serving BS to receiving new packets from the target BS.

Fig.8 Movements Vs Handoff Delay

Next we vary the speed of the MN as 5, 10, 15 and 20 m/s. From Fig 9, we can see that the packet loss is once again less in the case of PDAD scheme when compared with DAD. Fig 10 shows that PDAD based handoff has low delay when compared with DAD based handoff.
PacketLoss 800 Packets 600 400 200 0 5 10 15 20 Speed(m /s) DAD PDAD

5.2 Results
We move the mobile node to AR1, AR2, AR3 and AR4. Fig 7 shows the packet loss for HMIP handoff with PDAD and DAD schemes. We can see that the packets loss is less in PDAD based handoff.

Fig.9 Speed Vs Packet Loss

188

IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.8 No.8, August 2008

Thus, the PDAD based scheme with our implementation strategies adapts all scenarios perfectly.
Handoff Delay 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 5 10 15 20 Speed(m /s)

PDAD DAD

Fig.10 Speed Vs Handoff Delay

6. Conclusion
In Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (HMIPv6), mobile nodes handoff performance is very much impaired by the Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) procedure for the newly formed Care-of Address in. In this paper, we have proposed a novel cross-protocol design approach for the DAD problem. It uses information from current routing protocol traffic. This utilizes Passive Duplicate Address Detection (PDAD) to identify duplicate addresses. Using PDAD, a node examines incoming routing protocol packets to develop hints about address controversies. Since it is independent of the routing protocol, it produces nearly no protocol overhead and reduces initial delay. By simulation results, we have shown that, the handoff delay and packet loss are reduced in case of PDAD based handoff, when compared with the standard DAD based handoff.

References
[1] D.Johnson et al, Mobility Support in IPv6, Internet Draft, June 2003. [2] Hesham Soliman, Flarion et al, Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Mobility Management, Internet Draft, June 2003. [3] C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer, and S. Das, Ad hoc ondemand distance vector (AODV) routing, RFC 3561, July 2003. [4] K. Weniger, PACMAN:Passive duplicate address detection in mobile ad hoc networks in Proc. of IEEE WCNC 2003, New Orleans, USA, Mar. 2003. [5] Nakajima, N. Dutta, A. Das, S. Schulzrinne, H. Handoff Delay Analysis and Measurement for SIP based mobility in IPv6 Communications, 2003. ICC '03. IEEE International Conference on 11-15 May 2003 [6] Taewan You, Sangheon Pack, and Yanghee Choi Robust Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (RH-MIPv6) Vehicular Technology Conference, 2003. VTC 2003-Fall. 2003 IEEE 58th Publication Date: 6-9 Oct. 2003

[7] Sha Liu, and Shoubao Yang, "The Impact of DAD on Handoff Performance of Mobile IPv6 and Test of MLDBased DAD", In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Mobile Computing and Ubiquitous Networking (ICMU04), Jan. 2004, pp. 192-195. [8] Theo Pagtzis, Rajiv Chakravortyy, Jon Crowcrofty, Steve Hailes and Peter Kirstein Proactive Mobile IPv6 for Context-aware all-IP Wireless Access Networks Wireless Networks, Communications and Mobile Computing, 2005 International Conference on 3-16 June 2005. [9] A. Viinikainen, J. Puttonen, M. Sulander, T. Hamalainen, T. Ylnen and H. Suutarinen, Flow-Based Fast Handover for Mobile IPv6 Environment Implementation and Analysis, Elsevier Computer Communications Special Issue on IPv6: The Next Generation Internet Protocol, 2005. [10] Vogt, C. A Comprehensive and Efficient Handoff Procedure for IPv6 Mobility Support World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks, 2006. WoWMoM 2006. International Symposium on a Publication Date: 26-29 June 2006. [11] Byungjoo Park, Youn-Hee Han, and Haniph Latchman EAP: New Fast Handover Scheme based on Enhanced Access Point in Mobile IPv6 Networks IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.6 No.9B, September 2006. [12] Ilka Miloucheva, Jens Mdeker, Karl Jonas Seamless Handover for Unidirectional Broadcast Access Networks In Mobile IPv6 Journal of Communications, Vol. 2, No. 6, November 2007. [13] Li Jun ZHANG and Samuel PIERRE Evaluating the Performance of Fast Handover for Hierarchical MIPv6 in Cellular Networks Journal of Networks, Vol. 3, No. 6, June 2008 [14] Moon, Seung Wook Lee, Jong Hyup Reducing Handover Delay in Mobile IPv6 by cooperating with Layer 2 and Layer 3 Handovers Advanced Communication Technology, 2008. ICACT 2008. 10th International Conference on Publication Date: 17-20 Feb. 2008 [15] Yuh-Shyan Chen, Wei-Han Hsiao, and Kau-Lin Chiu, "Cross-Layer Partner-Based Fast Handoff Mechanism for IEEE 802.11 Wireless Networks," Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 2008. [16] Son Tran-Trong, Shahnaza Tursunova, and Young-Tak Kim Enhanced Vertical Handover in Mobile IPv6 with Media Independent Handover Services and Advance Duplicate Address Detection KNOM conference 2008. Prof. P. Harini M.Tech.(Remote Sensing),M.Tech. (CSE), [Ph. D. (Mobile Computing)]. I obtained my M.Tech. (Remote Sensing) in 1997 & M.Tech. (CSE) in 2003 from JNTU, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. I worked as a Research Associate in JNTU, Masab Tank, Hyderabad in Remote Sensing Department for 01 year, 05 years worked as a Assistant Professor in QIS College of Engineering, Ongole and 01 year worked as a Associate Professor in Rao & Naidu Engineering College, Ongole. At present I am working as

Delay(s)

IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.8 No.8, August 2008

189

Professor & Head of the Computer Science and Engineering Department in St. Ann's College of Engineering & Technology, Chirala. Dr. O.B.V. Ramanaiah received Ph.D. in Computer Science from University of Hyderabad in 2005, M. Tech in Computer Science and B. Tech in Computer Science & Engg . My Total Teaching Experience is16 Years with Total Research Experience of 12 Years. I have 3 Publications in International Conference Proceedings and 2 International Journals .I have Visited USA for paper presentation in an IEEE Conference, ITCC 04, held during April 5-7, 2004. I am providing Research Guidance to 8 students and have organized many Refresher Courses.