Dr. Muhanna, a Senior Consultant at Award Solutions, joined Award Solutions in March 2012, bringing his 15+ years of experience in wireline and wireless technologies in addition to internet and IP mobility, Packet Core System architecture and development, Interworking between different Wireless technologies and IP security.
During his work as Senior Designer and Technical Manager at Nortel, Dr. Muhanna was the design prime for the IOT activities that brought about the first successful end-to-end 1xRTT mobile IP call using QUALCOMM handset and Nortel wireless access and packet core nodes (PDSN and Home Agent). In addition, Dr. Muhanna led the successful delivery of many development projects on Nortel PDSN, Home Agent, and GGSN.
Since 2006 until joining Award Solutions, Dr. Muhanna has been actively participating in IETF, 3GPP2, and 3GPP standardizations in the areas of IP mobility, Packet Core Data System and Services, Interworking between different cellular technologies, cdma2000 RAN and IP Security. During his participation in IETF, 2006-2009, Dr. Muhanna produced many individual IETF drafts and was successful in authoring and co-authoring 4 IETF RFCs.
In addition, Dr. Muhanna has been the vice chair of 3GPP2 TSG-S WG4 [Security] and actively participated in the development of packet switching related cdma2000 Packet Data Services, IP mobility, RADIUS, Diameter, Policy Control, cdma2000 RAN, eHRPD/LTE IWK and security standards. He also authored many contributions on M2M services and architecture over IP-based access network, e.g., cdma2000 and LTE.
While representing Nortel at 3GPP SA3 WG [Security], 2007-2009, Dr. Muhanna worked with tier1 customers to bring contributions that address the security architecture for eHRPD-LTE IWK in TS33.402 including contributions on MIP4 and MIP6 security. In addition and while working at Nortel, Dr. Muhanna has been involved in the overall LTE EPS architecture design and discussion which included the support of Nortel 3GPP SA2, CT1, and CT4 delegates in writing contributions and areas of internet mobility and security
Currently at Award Solutions, Dr. Muhanna is working on the development and the delivery of training on IP Convergence that is related to 4G Backhaul and end-to-end IP Networking for LTE operators. In addition, Dr. Muhanna will be working on LTE-EPC focused training materials with future possible emphasis on M2M and Security
Dr. Muhanna holds a Ph.D. in Engineering from North Carolina State University, a Master of Science degree in Engineering from the University of Wisconsin in Madison, Wisconsin, and a Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering from Al-Mansoura University in Egypt.
It all started as a basic idea of allowing a host with its statically configured IP address to be reachable at the same IP address when moving to a new point of attachment. Thus, there was RFC2002 for IP Mobility. At the time there was no concern of the different applications running on the laptop or the host as there was not many applications anyway or if there were, they all shared similar requirements for quality of services.
With the realization of the very limited number of IPv4 addressing, there was the notion of allowing the host to be reachable at different point of attachment while being dynamically allocated the same IPv4 address. The dice started rolling with many different features for Mobile IPv4 and Mobile IPv6. Despite all the enhancements and changes to allow multiple care-of addresses [RFC-5648], Mobile Router Support [RFC-5177], Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 [RFC-5380], Network-Based Mobility in v6 and v4 flavors [RFC5213, RFC-5563], etc., there always was one fundamental aspect that never changed. The mobility aspect was always controlled via the network layer without interference from the application layer [Remember: All applications were treated as the same from the network layer point of view]. Thus, all applications running on the same host use the same reachability, i.e., the same IP address and consequently the same IP anchor, e.g., home agent.
As everything around us started to move to all-IP based networking including time-sensitive applications, restricting the IP mobility management to the network layer without the knowledge of the specific needs of the different applications which are using the underlined transport pipe becomes problematic.
In other words, if a host or a mobile device has a VoIP application, a Video Conferencing application, an http session, and email running at the same time, then anchoring all of these applications traffics at a single node in the network (e.g., home agent) becomes overkill. It would probably work without noticeable problem with the http and email sessions but may cause some unacceptable delay which may cause a reduced level of Quality of Experience (QoE) by the end user. In addition, the http and email session may not require an IP address that is mobile across different access network points of attachment. In other words, most probably no noticeable degradation in the QoE will occur if such applications traffic is always anchored at the access gateway with the possibility of having a different IP address allocated whenever the point of attachment is changed, for example. That for sure can NOT be afforded for a time-sensitive application like VoIP or Video Conferencing.
This introduced the whole idea of how to provide IP Mobility at the network layer while taking on consideration the type of application that is using this transport pipe. In other words, how to make sure that the transport pipe being established satisfies the mobility requirement of the application that is using it. Thus, the concept of Distributed Mobility Management which more accurately was later defined within IETF as Dynamic Mobility Management or DMM. To be followed.