Prioritized Network-based Vertical

Handover Decision in Multi-Access Wireless

Networks
Miyim, A.M., Ismail, Mahamod and Nordin, Rosdiadee
Department of Electrical, Electronics & Systems Engineering
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM)
43600 Bangi Selangor, MALAYSIA
{ammiyim, mahamod, adee}@eng.ukm.my

Abstract - The integration of wireless worldwide
interoperability for microwave access network (Wi-
MAX and Long Term Evolution (LTE) in an all IP
based heterogeneous networks that require seamless
mobility is predicated on enabling the connection and
retrieval of data by a mobile user not mindful of the
medium or technology used. This phenomenon
facilitates freedom of movement while maintaining
service continuity. However, the interoperability
between multiple access technologies should be able to
realize the vision of 4G technology and beyond to
allow mobile user equipment (UE) to roam freely
when intersecting the cell-boundaries of different
network platforms without losing the service. To
achieve such task, a proposed mobility management
system designed to detect conditions of the network
early enough and effect changes to handover
parameters while maintaining the network
connectivity is being highlighted. The proposed system
investigates how the signal strength threshold (RSSTh)
influences handover decision for a prioritized network
with regards to distance and velocity. Computer
simulation based on a designed algorithm for vertical
handover optimization is being implemented to trigger
the inter-radio access technology (RAT) handover for
evaluating the performance of next generation
wireless network systems. The results show that the
prioritized network stand to be the preferred network
as the UE is connected to it most of the time.
Key Words: LTE-Advanced, HHO, VHO, WiMAX,
MTPN, MAPN, RSS, Delay, inter-RAT
I. INTRODUCTION
Driven by new generations of
communication devices (smart phones, iPods,
tablets, etc), high capacity demands, and faster
speed, the demand for higher data rates by mobile
users in recent times has witnessed a significant
increase in application services. Recent
developments [1], [2] have shown that wide-area
cellular networks based on the 3GPP standards
(LTE/LTE-Advanced) and IEEE standard
(IEEE802.16x) can coexist to offer the needed high
speed data services to clients by complementing
each other because of the similarity in the network
characteristics. The combination of these
technologies tends to provide broad coverage as
well as broadband access, for a converged system
[1], [2], [3].
Figure 1 Vertical and Horizontal Handovers in
Wireless Heterogeneous Network
Vertical handover, a term used to describe the
switching from one network to another network of
different technologies, is a scheme suitable for
inter-RAT technology where seamless vertical
handover between different network technologies
are considered as demonstrated in Fig.1. The aim in
vertical handover is to provide continuous service
for mobile users. This has become an issue in
heterogeneous networks since each of these
technologies has their own mobility management
solutions which force a major challenge as it tackles
two main issues: location and handover
management [4], [5]. While location management
monitors the User Equipment (UE) for successful
information delivery with the help of Mobile IP
(MIP) to enable seamless roaming, handover
management on the other hand, maintains an active
connection for the roaming user equipment when
their points of attachment (PA) are being changed
from one network to the other. The focus of this
paper therefore is for the identification of an
algorithm for the vertical handover decision
technique. Such technique should be capable of
predicting whether the user equipment’s presence in
the preferred network will over stay the minimum
required time before making appropriate decision.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows:
Section II gives the scenarios of handover schemes
of the two different technologies. Section III
discusses the proposed algorithm developed to

978-1-4673-4728-0/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE 828 APCC 2012

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Ilan Univ.. Downloaded on March 04,2021 at 15:28:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 handle the handover procedures. Section IV
describes the simulation; while the results and
analysis is discussed in section V. Section VI
concludes the paper.
II. VERTICAL HANDOVER
SCHEMES
Two types of handover schemes are considered in
this scenario: (i) handover from WiMAX
(IEEE802.16m) to LTE (3GPP) and (ii) from LTE
to WiMAX. Consideration is given to the handover
from WiMAX to LTE with WiMAX as the
preferred network because of its better throughput
performance and low service cost [6]. To achieve
seamless handover, issues like handover measures,
algorithms for handover decisions and mobility to
keep mobile user connected need to be addressed.
Several studies have been carried out on handover
schemes for eNodeB and access points (AP) in the
heterogeneous systems [2], [7]. However, for
vertical handovers, the following challenges stand
as problems:
i) Signal degradation (decay) of the current
system may not necessarily be a reason for
handover triggering, when mobile user
moves from LTE-Advanced to WiMAX
platform as could be found in horizontal
handover [3].
ii) Unlike the horizontal handover, there is a
missing link on the availability of the
measured signal strength between LTE and
WiMAX in vertical handover to lend
support for decision making.
iii) During handover (HO), the upper layer
applications metrics focus only on the
network conditions such as bandwidth
availability, delay, user preference, etc.,
and not on the physical layer parameters
like received signal strength (RSS) and
signal-to-interference and noise ratio
(SINR).
A. Prioritized Network-based VHO
Different handover techniques exist in the
converged network. Horizontal Handover (HHO) is
an intra-technology handover process in which the
mobile terminals handover resources to access
points or eNodeBs while utilizing the same access
technology. Subsequently, Vertical Handover
(VHO) is an inter-technology process which takes
place when a mobile terminal roams between
different technologies to handover its resources.
The vertical handover is asymmetry and moves
between networks of different technologies thereby
introducing the concept of prioritized network.
Two (2) scenarios are considered in this paper: (i)
Moving Towards the Preferred Network (MTPN)
and (ii) Moving Away from the Preferred Network
(MAPN). As shown in Figure 1, the UE is always
attached to the AP at a distance (d) to improve the
829
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Ilan Univ.. Downloaded on March 04,2021 at 15:28:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
resource utilization of the preferred network, as
long as the preferred network satisfies the user
application. Furthermore, this handover should be
seamless with minimum user intervention, while
dynamically adapting to the wireless channel
quality state, network layer characteristics, and the
application layer requirements [8], [9].
Considering the received signal strength (RSS),
handover latency and service application, QoS and
delay tolerance, an adaptive-based VHO (A-VHO)
algorithm is proposed. The adoption of the
algorithm is to satisfy the system handover
signaling load and other requirements by adjusting
the signal threshold (RSSTh). A mathematical model
to evaluate the performance of the AVHO as well
as to determine the threshold for optimizing the
signaling, user available bandwidth and packet
delay is proposed.
III. PROPOSED ALGORITHM FOR
HANDOVER DECISION PROCEDURE
The UE’s position and velocity are considered
important and therefore incorporated into the
handover decision algorithm to predict the period
user require in justifying the cost of the handover.
The algorithm will coordinate the use of prioritized
network-based information taking into
consideration the possibility of a Network Layer
(layer-3; L3) handover. It also coordinates the use
of the handover information in L3 horizontal
handover to LTE/LTE-Advanced networks while
considering the position, speed, and direction of the
user. The minimum required duration a mobile user
would stay in the LTE/LTE-A network coverage is
determined by other parameters like bandwidth and
delay. This is the minimum period required to
accomplish the handover procedures for the UE to
receive data packets. In determining the distance
between UE and the LTE node, location-based
information is chosen for the process. However,
scanning or probing for access point is assumed to
be the mechanism adopted for discovering the
LTE/LTE-A coverage.
A. WiMAX (WLAN) HHO Decision
Horizontal handover is said to occur when the UE
start sensing weak signal strength (degradation)
while moving from one access point to another on
the same network[12],[13]. Figure 2 shows an
algorithm for recovering such phenomenon, which
could determine whether the availability of other
APs belong to the same network or not. Because the
link layer (L2) maintains its latency during the
horizontal handover process, it becomes impossible
for the network (IEEE802.16m) to trigger.
However, L3 procedures are required (as described
earlier), if the target AP belongs to a different
network.
 strong signal forms part of discovery of available
WLAN coverage. Once a strong signal is received,
the UE triggers the L2 and L3 handover procedures
to the target WLAN. In this case, only the router
discovery procedure would be effective.
Though some factors (speed, distance,
mobility) were considered in both the horizontal
and vertical handovers, mobility is performed on
the same layer for HHO while in VHO it is
performed between different layers as the mobile
equipment dissects across the different
heterogeneous networks. Considering the Poison’s
Figure 2 Proposed Prioritized Network-based Random Waypoint Mobility Model (PRWPMM)
Algorithm for UL and DL VHD from Wi-MAX to and constant speed, the thresholds in VHO network
LTE Networks selection were based on analytical hierarchy process
that decomposes the network selection problems
As mentioned earlier, the horizontal handover into several sub-problems and uses Grey Rational
latency in L3 of a visited network could exceed that analysis to select the network with the highest
of a downward handover of a visited network by a ranking. This is not the case for horizontal handover
serving network. Consequently, the proposed scenario.
algorithm needs to be triggered to predict the time
spent by the mobile user when in the new WWAN
and also to assess the suitability of such handover.
As illustrated in Figure 2, once the target eNodeB
does not belong to the user’s current network, the
UE notifies the eNodeB to trigger the same
location-based evaluation [17], [18]. Additionally,
while the UE awaits the notification of the decision
from the eNodeB, at the same time it monitors the
level of the SNR. Only when the SNR dropped
below the fixed threshold value, then the wireless
adaptor would be invoked. Apparently, the LTE
network may also be invoked to avoid the UE from Figure3 Proposed Prioritized Network-based VHD
Algorithm from LTE to Wi-MAX.
being out of coverage for a delayed period, which
might cause upper-layer disconnection (i.e., TCP
Supporting such functionality at the UE, the
and Application). The mobile user is likely to be out
of the coverage area far before a decision by the “Location-based Evaluation and Decision Stage”
prioritized network (WiMAX) is taken. This is as a was inserted into the conventional handover
paradigm at the UE (Figure 3).
result of L3 –horizontal handover running at the
The proposal comprises factors such as position,
LTE-Advanced is taken over.
velocity and coverage to advise the mobile UE
Therefore, when the signal to noise ratio (SNR)
whether a handover would be suitable at a given
drops below the threshold level, a connection with
the LTE network is once again re-established time or not.
(upward handover). It is less risky than triggering
the L3 horizontal handover (visit may be brief, but C. Performance Metric for VHO
likely to cause signal degradation). The preferred
network-based evaluation decision stage may be This section proposes an analytical method to
triggered once more when after re-establishing the effectively set the threshold power level (Pldg).
connection, the RSS of WiMAX coverage Given the Fritz path loss model [10] as in equation
(1), the analysis try to relate the ratio of the time
continues to show strength. However, the UE
(Rtime) when the UE is disconnected during a
continue transferring data over the LTE/LTE-A
handover, to the power level threshold coefficient
connection without any interruption as it awaits the
(α), and the speed of the mobile terminal, v. The
handover decision from the eNodeB of a WiMAX
important thing is to obtain a threshold value that
network.
will accurately depict the operation [13, 17].
WLAN however, is designed to give effect of RSSI
B. Downlink VHO Decision
by locating closely or afar from LTE in order to
make Multi Criteria Decision Making algorithm
Figure 3 provides the basic outline of the proposed
substantially affective.
algorithm for incorporating the preferred network-
In order to facilitate forced handovers and to predict
based information into the WLAN handover model.
a UE’s future movement, the study proposes two
The adapter at the UE performs functions of the
types of threshold circles in the WLAN coverage
coverage discovery stage. It could be recalled that
vis-a-viz, the handover threshold circle and the exit
in the conventional approach, the reception of a

830

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Ilan Univ.. Downloaded on March 04,2021 at 15:28:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 threshold circle as shown in Figure 4. The handover
threshold (HT) circle in the WLAN cell represents
the coverage boundary. It is the distance from the
AP at which a UE performs a vertical handover to
another network reaches the Trigger and the
Threshold lines for effective handover with the
network chosen by the algorithm.
The UE monitors the RSS by receiving data streams
coming from the Access Point (AP). Thus, the UE
and the AP remain as receiver and transmitter
respectively.
where,
Prx- Power of Received Signal (dB/watts)
β- Path loss exponent
d- Distance in meters between the MUE (receiver)
and the AP (transmitter).
Prx(d0)- Received Power at the free space path loss
model.
Considering the Mobile UE to randomly roam
starting from the AP and move at a steady velocity
v. At a time t equal to zero, it is possible to
determine Rtime:
Where, tnew is time for the newly established
connection. Having known the values of v, tnew, and
Pldg for the UE, equation (2) could be the source for
estimating the ratio of packets lost during a
handover (Rpckt), while assuming the traffic to be
constant.
IV SIMULATION PARAMETERS
A. Simulation Parameter
The simulation depicts a coverage area of two
different overlapping network technologies
(IEEE802.16m and 3GPP) as shown in Figure 4.
The hexagons represent the LTE-A network, while
the circular rings represent the various signal levels
of the WiMAX network as dissipated energy.
Figure 4 WLAN system model and RSSI level
831
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Ilan Univ.. Downloaded on March 04,2021 at 15:28:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
The values of the parameters used in the simulation
are given in the table 1.
Table 1 Simulation configuration
Path Loss Model Configuration
Transmit Power (Ptx) 14 dBm
Frequency (f) 2.4GHz
Path Loss Exponent (β) 4
Standard Deviation (σ) 0dB to 4dB
Receive Power (Prx) (- 75 dBm)
B. Simulation Scenario
Four APs were used in the simulation which was
conducted by using the MATLAB simulation
software. It is to confirm and evaluate the model
presented. The results obtained from the simulation
were used to establish parameter values and to set
the threshold for Link Degradation (LDG). The
scenario is made up of an IEEE 802.16 cell,
overlaid on a 3GPP cell that offers a wider coverage
area. The Server sends Data Bit Rate (DBR) traffic
stream at certain time intervals as the UE moves.
The movement of the UE starts within the WiMAX
cell (prioritized network) and moving at a constant
speed away from the WLAN AP towards the edge
of the network, until it starts sensing weak signal
from the AP (through active or passive scanning).
As, the UE reaches a point where the signal level
goes below a threshold level (Prxth), a handover to
the 3GPP cell is performed. With correct
assumptions and the signal level reaching Pldg, an
LDG event is triggered and the associated
handshake process performed.
V. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Within the coverage area, each access point (AP)
area is conceptually divided into three different
concentric areas as shown in Figure 4. The
innermost area is tagged RSS1 and has the strongest
RSS, whereas the second area which is outside
RSS1 has a lower RSS than RSS1. Consequently,
the third area (RSS3) represents the remaining
portion and has the weakest RSS. However, RSS2
is potentially the HHO region while RSS3 is the
potential VHO area.
A. Mobility Model
As the UE moves randomly and approaching the
HT boundary, it had a clear estimate of the time
available to spend in the current cell. This in turn
allows it to utilize available resources more
efficiently before moving out. Chen et al [17]
proposed a similar concept called the minimum
coverage. The problem with the minimum coverage
circle was that it also included empty coverage-less
areas. Hence the UE would sometimes have to
perform a vertical handover before moving out of
the minimum coverage circle. A point may be
raised that a UE when handing over at the HT
distance might do so before reaching the end of the
 actual coverage at that point, resulting in an
underutilization of the available radio resources.
However coverage predictability could be achieved
through the precise knowledge of time before
vertical handover is executed. This is believed to
assist in the efficient allocation of radio resources in
both the serving and target networks, based on the
UE’s needs.
The second circle is the exit threshold (ET) circle,
introduced to improve the predictability of the UE’s
direction change. This simple, yet effective concept
was adopted by Chiu and Bassiouni in [18], who
proposed the threshold distance (TD) which is a
distance smaller than the cell radius that specifies
an inner circle. The TD radius is carefully chosen
such that a UE once outside the TD, rarely
undergoes a drastic change in direction. This helps
to minimize the false submission of reservation
requests to a neighbouring cell.
The experiments in [18] focused on the vehicular
movements and were carried out in a cellular
environment with a cell radius of 1000 m and a TD
radius of 800 m. This study however, targets
pedestrian behaviour where UEs are more likely to
experience frequent and random changes in
direction, the ET distance is dependent on the HT
distance and is kept closer to it, within 10-15 m. At
pedestrian speeds (3km/h, 16km/h 70km/h), it gives
the UE enough time to submit new requests to the
neighbouring AP. In the case of an AP at the
coverage boundary, it allows the UE to prepare for
effect is absent. Consequently, fading between the
AP and the UE could be modelled using the free
space path loss equation in which the mobility
model was based on Gaussian.
The analysis therefore, demonstrates that the UE
might be assessing both the WiMAX and the
LTE/LTE-A networks simultaneously at a certain
distance on the edge of the WiMAX boundary. This
could be possible because of the desire to initiate a
handover before reaching the edge of the coverage
area, while either moving away from or moving
towards the coverage area.
C. Results
The RSS threshold value was set for the UE to
trigger when the signal strength starts degrading.
Fig. 5(a) shows the trajectory of the received signal
against time. The degraded Signal (fading) is seen
to go beyond RSSth (-100dBm) and so is the
corresponding handover time as demonstrated in
figure 5 (b). This degradation shows how many
times handover (horizontal and vertical) occurs as
the UE roam across the boundaries of the APs as
well as across the different networks. It is clear
from the results that the UE hardly stays longer than
necessary (about 2 seconds) in the 3GPP network.
However, the UE spend most of the time in the
priority network (IEEE802.16m).
0
RSS(dBm)

a vertical handover to the next available network. -50

Therefore the main function of the exit threshold -100

(ET) circle to define an area beyond which the UE 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Time (s)
can start the process of a vertical handover through 5
the submission of resource requests to the new 4
NBServ(dBm)

network if it is available. 3

1
B. Propagation Model 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
As every mobile user defines its course or path Time(s)

(since the surrounding environments tend to vary
with the location of the receiver in question), a log-
normal shadowing will be useful when dealing with
real situation and denoted as
For an ideal decaying signal, the analysis of packets
drop during handover is considered necessary and
Figure 5. Number of Handovers (Vertical and
Horizontal) as UE crosses cell boundaries.
As the RSS of the prioritized network gets stronger,
less VHO occur. The reverse is the case when the
signal strength degrades as the frequency of VHO
increases. As earlier stated, the frequency of
vertical handover might stem from the network
topology.
Empirical CDF
1
R=5km

important to also investigate the shadowing effects 0.9

0.8
R=15km
R=25km

which may likely affect the propagation model 0.7

(depending on the topology of the network). These 0.6

P(RSS)(%)

0.5
(shadowing) effects can be modelled by introducing 0.4

a component Xσ to the Fritz path loss model as 0.3

shown in equation 4. 0.2

0.1

0
-100 -90 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30
RSS(dBm)

Figure 6. CDF of HHO and VHO at different radial

distances.
With sigma (σ) values changing from 6 to 8 and
Xσ is a random variable taken from a Gaussian
then to 20, results indicate that the shadowing
distribution with a standard deviation of σ [10]. For
model in equation 3 has little effect on the
a zero value of σ, is an indication that shadowing

832

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Ilan Univ.. Downloaded on March 04,2021 at 15:28:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 sensitivity of the receiver because the difference of IEEE Wireless Communications 11(3)(2004)
the RSS values did not exceed 1dB at 50% pp.8-15
probability as depicted in Fig. 6. This indicates that [5] Tae-Sub Kim, et al, “Vertical Handover
the UE did not notice any break in service as it between LTE and Wireless LAN Systems based
on Common Resource Management (CRRM)
moves from an AP to the other.
Priority
and Generic Link Layer(GLL)”, ACM ICIS
1

0.9
Prioritized 2009, November, pp24-26, Seoul, Korea.
Non-Prioritized

0.8
[6] Xiaohuan Yan, et al, “A survey of VHO
0.7 decision algorithms in 4G heterogeneous
0.6
wireless networks”, Journal of computer
P(RSS(%)

0.5

0.4
networks, pp1848-1863, Vol.54, 2010
0.3 [7] S. Woon, et al, “Effective link triggers to
0.2
improve HO performance”, 17th Annual IEEE
0.1

0
International Symposium on Personal, indoor
-100 -90 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10
RSS(dBm) and Mobile Radio Communications
Figure 7 CDF of Prioritized vs Non-Prioritized (PIMRC’06)
Networks [8] J. Makela, M. Ylianttila, K. Pahlavan, “Handoff
At 50% probability, the graph in Fig. 7 show the Decision in Multi Service Networks”, The 11th
signal sensitivity of (-72dBm) for the prioritized International Symposium on Personal, Indoor
and Mobile Radio Communications,
network, while that of the non-prioritized reads (-
2000(PIMRC’00), Vol.1, pp.655-659
69dBm) giving a difference in the RSS as 3dB. This [9] E.Gustafsson, A. Johnsson; “Always Best
has proved that the prioritized (WiMAX) network is Connected (ABC)”, IEEE Wireless
adjudged the preferred network and that is why the Communications 10(1)(2003)pp.49-55
UE is kept connected to it most of the time than to [10] Theodore S. Rappaport, “Wireless
the Non-Prioritized (LTE) network. Such an Communications: Principles and Practice”,
outcome could be as a result of UE speed and the Pearson Education International, 2002.
expected TCP/IP handover latency. [11] ANSI/IEEE802.11,”EEE standard for Wireless
LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and
Physical Layer(PHY) specifications”, 1999
Edition.
VI CONCLUSION [12] K. Pahlavan, et al; “Handoff in Hybrid Mobile
The paper has discussed about a prioritized Data Networks”, Personal Communications,
network-based algorithm for VHD that considered IEEE Vol.7, Issue No. 2, pp.34-47, April, 2000
location, speed and time as factors that influences [13] M. Ylianttila, M. Pande, J. Makela and P.
the decision of VHO in the wireless heterogeneous Mahonen, “Optimization Scheme for Mobile
network system. It could be deduced that the result Users Performing Vertical Handoffs between
has also demonstrated how the proposed algorithms IEEE802.11 and GPRS/EDGE Networks”,
were able to achieve handover predictions well Global Telecommunications Conference
(GLOBECOM’01), IEEE, Vol.6, pp.3439-3443,
before it is anticipated. This would mean
25-29 November, 2001
identifying and setting up both wireless and TCP/IP [14] Abbas Jamalipour, “The wireless mobile
connections to the next AP prior to handover Internet architectures, protocols and services”,
procedure. Wiley, 2003.
[15] Wonkwang Baik, Hyong woo Lee, “A hybrid
Acknowledgement cdma/tdma protocol for integrated voice/data
The authors would like to acknowledge the transmission,” JCCI 2000, 2000.
financial contributions from Grant: GUP-2012-036 [16] Haiming Wang, Dajie Jiang, Esa Tuomaala,
for the publication of the research work in this “UL capacity of VoIP on LTE system”,IEEE
Asia Pacific Conference on communications,
conference.
pp. 397–400, 2007.
[17] Chen, W., Liu, J. and Huang, H., “An Adaptive
REFERENCE Scheme for Vertical Handoff in Wireless
Overlay Networks”, Proceedings of the 10th
[1] I. F. Akyilikiz, J. Xie, S. Mohanty, “A Survey International Conference on Parallel and
of Mobility Management in Next Generation Distributed Systems, 2004.
All-IP-Based Wireless System”, IEEE wireless [18] Ming-Hsing Chiu and Bassiouni, M.A.,
communications 11(4) (2004) pp.16-28 “Predictive schemes for handoff prioritization
[2] S. Deklera, J. P. Shim, U. Varshney, G. in cellular networks based on mobile
Knoerzer, “Evolution and Emerging Issues in positioning”, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas
Mobile Wireless Networks”, ACM in Communications Vol. 18, Issue No.3, pp.510-
Communications 50(6)(2000) pp.38-43 522, 2000.
[3] Merien Kesser, Brigitte Kervella, Guy [19] SuKyoung Lee, Kotikalapudi Sriram,
Pujolle,”An overview of Vertical Handover Kyungsoo Kim, Yoon Hyuk Kim, and Nada
decision strategies in heterogeneous wireless Golmie, “Vertical Handoff Decision
networks”, Science Direct:Computer Algorithms for Providing Optimized
Communications 31(2008) pp.2607-2620 Performance in Heterogeneous Wireless
Networks”, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular
[4] J. McNair, F. Zhu, “Vertical Handoffs in Fourth Technology, Vol. 58, No. 2, February 2009
Generation Multi-network Environments”,

833

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Ilan Univ.. Downloaded on March 04,2021 at 15:28:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.