This document summarizes and compares two extended versions of the AODV routing protocol for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs): Reverse AODV (RAODV) and Multicast AODV (MAODV). RAODV aims to improve routing performance by allowing multiple route reply messages, while MAODV allows nodes to send multicast data packets through a multicast group tree. The document outlines the key features and operations of each protocol, including route discovery processes. It then evaluates and compares the performance of RAODV and MAODV using metrics like end-to-end delay and overhead while varying the number of nodes.
Comparing: Routing Protocols on Basis of sleep mode
The architecture of ad hoc wireless network consists of mobile nodes for communication
without the use of fixed-position routers. The communication between them takes place without
centralized control. Routing is a very crucial issue, so to deal with this routing algorithms must deliver
the packet in significant delay. There are different protocols for handling the mobile environment like
AODV, DSR and OLSR. But this paper will focus on performance of AODV and OLSR routing protocols.
The performance of these protocols is analyzed on two metrics: time and throughput
Prediction Algorithm for Mobile Ad Hoc Network Connection Breaks
A Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) is a decentralized network of mobile node that are connected to an arbitrary topology via wireless connections. The breakdown of the connecting links between adjacent nodes will probably lead to the loss of the transferred data packets. In this research, we proposed an algorithm for link prediction (LP) to enhance the link break provision of the ad hoc on-demand remote protocol (AODV). The proposed algorithm is called the AODV Link Break Prediction (AODVLBP). The AODVLBP prevents link breaks by the use of a predictive measure of the changing signal. The AODVLBP was evaluated using the network simulator version 2.35 (NS2) and compared with the AODV Link prediction (AODVLP) and the AODV routing protocols. The simulation results reveal the effectiveness of AODVLBP in improving network performance in terms of average end-to-end delay, packet delivery ratio, packet overhead ratio, and packet drop-neighbour break.
THE IMPACT OF NODE MISBEHAVIOR ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MANET
This document compares the performance of four routing protocols (AODV, DSR, OLSR, GRP) under the security attack of node misbehavior in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). The document presents background information on MANETs and the four routing protocols. It then discusses two types of misbehaving nodes (partially selfish and fully selfish) that are modeled in simulations. The simulations vary the percentage of misbehaving nodes and measure performance metrics like packet delivery ratio, end-to-end delay, data dropped, and load. The results show that packet delivery ratio decreases and data dropped increases as the percentage of misbehaving nodes increases for all protocols. OLSR generally has the lowest delay while
IJCER (www.ijceronline.com) International Journal of computational Engineerin...
This document summarizes a research paper that evaluates the performance of two routing protocols (AODV and DSDV) under different traffic patterns (TCP and CBR) in a mobile ad hoc network (MANET) simulation. The paper describes MANET characteristics and challenges for routing. It provides an overview of reactive (AODV), proactive (DSDV), and hybrid routing protocols. It also defines TCP and CBR traffic patterns. The research aims to analyze and compare the packet delivery ratio and end-to-end delay of AODV and DSDV under different traffic loads using the NS-2 simulator. Preliminary results show that reactive protocols perform better in terms of these metrics.
IJERA (International journal of Engineering Research and Applications) is International online, ... peer reviewed journal. For more detail or submit your article, please visit www.ijera.com
The growth in wireless communication technologies has resulted in a considerable amount of
attention given to mobile adhoc networks. All mobile hosts in an adhoc network are embedded with
packet forwarding capabilities. It is decentralized and is independent of infrastructure. Since mobile
hosts in an adhoc network usually move freely, the topology of the network changes dynamically and
disconnection occurs frequently. These characteristics require the routing protocols to find an
alternative path towards the destination for data transfer. The existing on-demand routing protocols
does the alternative path establishment only after the disconnection of links in the existing path. The
data sent by the source during alternate path establishment period will be lost leading to incomplete
data transfer. The network traffic will therefore increase considerably. This problem can be overcome
by establishing an alternative path when the existing path is more likely to be broken, by sending a
warning message to the source indicating the likelihood of disconnection. In this paper an attempt has
been made to analyze a protocol that improves the network connectivity by preempting the alternative
path before the existing link gets failed by monitoring the signal strength and ‘age of the path’.
Comparatively analysis of AODV and DSR in MAC layer for Ad Hoc Environmentijsrd.com
In Wireless Adhoc Network is a group of wireless mobile nodes is an autonomous system of mobile nodes connected by wireless links. Every node operates as an end system and as a router to forward packets. In this paper mainly focused on Mac layer because this layer is most important for the data communication using control the packet loss and we worked on the comparison based performance of wimax802.16 and wireless802.11 networks using Ad hoc on- demand Distance Vector Routing Protocol and Dynamic Source Routing Protocol. In this paper we used the different maximum speed for the network. And this comparison based on unicast On-demand routing procedure and our simulation for mobile ad hoc networks discover and maintain only needed the design and follows the idea that each node by sending routing packets whenever a communication is requested and compared various parameter packet delivery ratio, normalized routing load and e-e delay. These simulations are carried out using the Network simulator version-2. The results presented in this work illustrate the importance in carefully evaluating and implementing routing protocols in an ad hoc environment.
MANET Routing Protocols , a case studyRehan Hattab
L. Yi, Y. Zhai, Y. Wang, J. Yuan and I. You , Impacts of Internal Network Contexts on Performance of MANET Routing Protocols: a Case Study, Sixth International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing,2012.
Study of Attacks and Routing Protocol in Wireless Networkijsrd.com
Wireless mesh networks (WMNs) are attractive as a new communication paradigm. Ad hoc routing protocols for WMNs are classified into: (1) proactive, (2) reactive, and (3) hybrid approaches. In general, proactive routing is more suitable for a stationary network, while reactive routing is better for a mobile network with a high mobility. In many applications, a node in WMN is mobile but it can fluctuate between being mobile. Wireless mesh networks is an emergent research area, which is becoming important due to the growing amount of nodes in a network.
Comparing: Routing Protocols on Basis of sleep modeIJMER
The architecture of ad hoc wireless network consists of mobile nodes for communication
without the use of fixed-position routers. The communication between them takes place without
centralized control. Routing is a very crucial issue, so to deal with this routing algorithms must deliver
the packet in significant delay. There are different protocols for handling the mobile environment like
AODV, DSR and OLSR. But this paper will focus on performance of AODV and OLSR routing protocols.
The performance of these protocols is analyzed on two metrics: time and throughput
Prediction Algorithm for Mobile Ad Hoc Network Connection BreaksIJCNCJournal
A Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) is a decentralized network of mobile node that are connected to an arbitrary topology via wireless connections. The breakdown of the connecting links between adjacent nodes will probably lead to the loss of the transferred data packets. In this research, we proposed an algorithm for link prediction (LP) to enhance the link break provision of the ad hoc on-demand remote protocol (AODV). The proposed algorithm is called the AODV Link Break Prediction (AODVLBP). The AODVLBP prevents link breaks by the use of a predictive measure of the changing signal. The AODVLBP was evaluated using the network simulator version 2.35 (NS2) and compared with the AODV Link prediction (AODVLP) and the AODV routing protocols. The simulation results reveal the effectiveness of AODVLBP in improving network performance in terms of average end-to-end delay, packet delivery ratio, packet overhead ratio, and packet drop-neighbour break.
THE IMPACT OF NODE MISBEHAVIOR ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MANETIJCNCJournal
This document compares the performance of four routing protocols (AODV, DSR, OLSR, GRP) under the security attack of node misbehavior in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). The document presents background information on MANETs and the four routing protocols. It then discusses two types of misbehaving nodes (partially selfish and fully selfish) that are modeled in simulations. The simulations vary the percentage of misbehaving nodes and measure performance metrics like packet delivery ratio, end-to-end delay, data dropped, and load. The results show that packet delivery ratio decreases and data dropped increases as the percentage of misbehaving nodes increases for all protocols. OLSR generally has the lowest delay while
IJCER (www.ijceronline.com) International Journal of computational Engineerin...ijceronline
This document summarizes a research paper that evaluates the performance of two routing protocols (AODV and DSDV) under different traffic patterns (TCP and CBR) in a mobile ad hoc network (MANET) simulation. The paper describes MANET characteristics and challenges for routing. It provides an overview of reactive (AODV), proactive (DSDV), and hybrid routing protocols. It also defines TCP and CBR traffic patterns. The research aims to analyze and compare the packet delivery ratio and end-to-end delay of AODV and DSDV under different traffic loads using the NS-2 simulator. Preliminary results show that reactive protocols perform better in terms of these metrics.
IJERA (International journal of Engineering Research and Applications) is International online, ... peer reviewed journal. For more detail or submit your article, please visit www.ijera.com
IMPROVED NETWORK CONNECTIVITY IN MANETSIJCNCJournal
The growth in wireless communication technologies has resulted in a considerable amount of
attention given to mobile adhoc networks. All mobile hosts in an adhoc network are embedded with
packet forwarding capabilities. It is decentralized and is independent of infrastructure. Since mobile
hosts in an adhoc network usually move freely, the topology of the network changes dynamically and
disconnection occurs frequently. These characteristics require the routing protocols to find an
alternative path towards the destination for data transfer. The existing on-demand routing protocols
does the alternative path establishment only after the disconnection of links in the existing path. The
data sent by the source during alternate path establishment period will be lost leading to incomplete
data transfer. The network traffic will therefore increase considerably. This problem can be overcome
by establishing an alternative path when the existing path is more likely to be broken, by sending a
warning message to the source indicating the likelihood of disconnection. In this paper an attempt has
been made to analyze a protocol that improves the network connectivity by preempting the alternative
path before the existing link gets failed by monitoring the signal strength and ‘age of the path’.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
Survey comparison estimation of various routing protocols in mobile ad hoc ne...ijdpsjournal
MANET is
an autonomous system of mobile nodes attached by wireless links. It represents
a complex and
dynamic distributed systems that consist of mobile wireless nodes that can freely self organize into
an ad
-
hoc network topology. The devices in the network may hav
e limited transmission
range therefore multiple
hops may be needed by one node to transfer data to another node in network. This leads to the need f
or an
effective routing protocol. In this paper we study various classifications of routing protocols and
th
eir types
for wireless mobile ad
-
hoc networks like DSDV, GSR, AODV, DSR, ZRP, FSR, CGSR, LAR, and Geocast
Protocols. In this paper we also compare different routing proto
cols on based on a given set of
parameters
Scalability, Latency, Bandwidth, Control
-
ov
erhead, Mobility impact
The Effects of Speed on the Performance of Routing Protocols in Mobile Ad-hoc...Narendra Singh Yadav
Mobile ad hoc network is a collection of mobile nodes communicating through wireless channels without any existing network infrastructure or centralized administration. Because of the limited transmission range of wireless network interfaces, multiple "hops" may be needed to exchange data across the network. Consequently, many routing algorithms have come into existence to satisfy the needs of communications in such networks. Researchers have conducted many simulations comparing the performance of these routing protocols under various conditions and constraints. One question that arises is whether speed of nodes affects the relative performance of routing protocols being studied. This paper addresses the question by simulating two routing protocols AODV and DSDV. Protocols were simulated using the ns-2 and were compared in terms of packet delivery fraction, normalized routing load and average delay, while varying number of nodes, and speed.
IJERD (www.ijerd.com) International Journal of Engineering Research and Devel...IJERD Editor
This document summarizes a study that evaluates the performance of four routing protocols - FSR, STAR-LORA, DYMO, and DSR - in a mobile ad hoc network (MANET) simulation using QualNet. Two scenarios were tested: one with constant bit rate (CBR) client traffic and one with CBR server traffic. Performance metrics like throughput, average end-to-end delay, and average jitter were measured for 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 nodes. The results showed that reactive protocols DYMO and DSR generally had lower delay but higher jitter than proactive protocols FSR and STAR-LORA. This study aims to help identify the most efficient routing
Performance Comparison of AODV and DSDV Routing Protocols for Ad-hoc Wireless...Narendra Singh Yadav
This document compares the performance of two routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks: Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) and Ad Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV). It presents the results of simulations run using the ns-2 network simulator. The simulations varied the number of nodes, pause time (mobility rate), and number of data sources. The performance metrics measured were packet delivery ratio, average end-to-end delay, and normalized routing load. The results showed that AODV had higher packet delivery ratios and lower routing loads than DSDV. However, AODV experienced higher delays than DSDV due to its on-demand route discovery process. DSDV performed better in low
ENERGY AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF REACTIVE, PROACTIVE, AND HYBRID ROUTING ...ijwmn
This paper evaluates the energy consumption of well-known routing protocols, along with other metrics
such as throughput, packet delivery ratio (PDR), and delay in different scenarios. We consider two other
metrics in order to capture the efficiency of the energy consumption: e-throughput which is the ratio
between the consumed energy and the throughput; and the e-PDR which is the ratio between the
consumed energy and the PDR. We compare four routing protocols: AODV, OLSR, and HWMP in
Reactive and Proactive modes. The number of nodes is varying between 25 and 81 nodes, with different
mobility models. Simulations are conducted using NS3 and the parameters of a real network interface
card. From the results, AODV presents the lowest energy consumption and a better e-Throughput. OLSR
provides a better e-PDR in mobile scenarios. With a smaller e-PDR and e-Throughput, the proactive
mode of HWMP is more energy efficient than the reactive mode.
Welcome to International Journal of Engineering Research and Development (IJERD)IJERD Editor
This document summarizes a simulation-based performance analysis of three routing protocols (CBRP, DSR, AODV) for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) under different node densities. The analysis varies the number of data sources and evaluates the protocols based on packet delivery ratio, average end-to-end delay, and normalized routing load. The simulation is conducted using the NS-2 network simulator for dense and sparse network topologies with 50 nodes each, varying node speeds and transmission ranges. Results show that CBRP performs better than DSR and AODV in terms of normalized routing load for more than 15 sources in both dense and sparse topologies, while AODV has lower delay than CBR
Cross-layer based performance optimization for different mobility and traffic...IOSR Journals
This document summarizes a research paper that proposes and evaluates a cross-layer optimization approach for the Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocol and the 802.11 MAC layer in mobile ad hoc networks. The approach tracks signal strengths of neighboring nodes to distinguish between packet losses due to mobility versus congestion. This information is provided to DSR to avoid unnecessary route error and maintenance processes when losses are due to congestion rather than broken links. Simulations evaluate the approach under different static and mobile scenarios and traffic patterns, showing improvements in routing overhead, packet losses and throughput compared to the conventional DSR protocol.
Mobility is one of the basic features that define an ad hoc network, an asset that leaves the field free for the
nodes to move. The most important aspect of this kind of network turns into a great disadvantage when it
comes to commercial applications, take as an example: the automotive networks that allow communication
between a groups of vehicles. The ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) routing protocol, designed
for mobile ad hoc networks, has two main functions. First, it enables route establishment between a source
and a destination node by initiating a route discovery process. Second, it maintains the active routes, which
means finding alternative routes in a case of a link failure and deleting routes when they are no longer
desired. In a highly mobile network those are demanding tasks to be performed efficiently and accurately.
In this paper, we focused in the first point to enhance the local decision of each node in the network by the
quantification of the mobility of their neighbours. Quantification is made around RSSI algorithm a well
known distance estimation method.
Analyzing the Effect of Varying CBR on AODV, DSR, IERP Routing Protocols in M...IOSR Journals
This document analyzes the performance of the AODV, DSR, and IERP routing protocols in a mobile ad hoc network (MANET) with varying constant bit rate (CBR) traffic loads. It conducts simulations in QualNet 6.1 and evaluates the protocols based on average end-to-end delay, throughput, average jitter, and packet delivery ratio under different CBR values. The results show that AODV generally performs best with low and stable delay, jitter and high throughput and delivery ratio. DSR has better performance than IERP for throughput and delivery ratio. IERP shows the worst performance for delay and jitter as CBR increases. The document concludes by stating AODV is best overall but
This document summarizes a research paper that surveyed detection and prevention mechanisms for flooding attacks in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It began with an abstract that described how MANETs are increasingly being used but also face security threats like flooding attacks. It then provided definitions and characteristics of MANETs and described two common routing protocols: AODV and OLSR. The paper discussed flooding attacks and different detection and prevention schemes that have been proposed. It concluded with a survey of these mechanisms to detect and mitigate flooding attacks in MANETs.
Survey comparison estimation of various routing protocols in mobile ad hoc ne...ijdpsjournal
This document summarizes and compares various routing protocols for mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs). It first describes the characteristics and challenges of MANETs. It then classifies routing protocols for MANETs into three main categories: table-driven (proactive), on-demand (reactive), and hybrid protocols. Examples of protocols from each category are described in detail, including DSDV, AODV, DSR, and ZRP. Key features such as route discovery, table maintenance, and use of proactive and reactive approaches are discussed for each example protocol. Finally, the document compares different protocols based on parameters like scalability, latency, bandwidth overhead, and mobility impact.
A Survey of Enhanced Routing Protocols for Manetspijans
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs) form a class of dynamic multi-hop networks consisting of a set of
mobile nodes that intercommunicate on shared wireless channels. MANETs are self-organizing and selfconfiguring multi-hop wireless networks, where the network structure changes dynamically due to the node
mobility. There exists no fixed topology due to the mobility of nodes, interference, multipath propagation
and path loss. Hence efficient dynamic routing protocols are required for these networks to function
properly. Many routing protocols have been developed to accomplish this task. In this paper we survey
various new routing protocols that have been developed as extensions or advanced versions of previously
existing routing protocols for MANETs such as DSR, AODV, OLSR etc.
International Journal of Engineering Inventions (IJEI) provides a multidisciplinary passage for researchers, managers, professionals, practitioners and students around the globe to publish high quality, peer-reviewed articles on all theoretical and empirical aspects of Engineering and Science.
Experiment of Routing Protocol AODV (AdHoc On-demand Distance Vector)IJMER
International Journal of Modern Engineering Research (IJMER) is Peer reviewed, online Journal. It serves as an international archival forum of scholarly research related to engineering and science education.
International Journal of Modern Engineering Research (IJMER) covers all the fields of engineering and science: Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Computer Engineering, Agricultural Engineering, Aerospace Engineering, Thermodynamics, Structural Engineering, Control Engineering, Robotics, Mechatronics, Fluid Mechanics, Nanotechnology, Simulators, Web-based Learning, Remote Laboratories, Engineering Design Methods, Education Research, Students' Satisfaction and Motivation, Global Projects, and Assessment…. And many more.
This document analyzes the performance of different routing protocols (AODV, DSR, DSDV) under various mobility models (random waypoint, random direction, random walk) and node speeds in mobile ad hoc networks. It finds that reactive protocols like AODV and DSR generally have higher packet delivery ratios than proactive DSDV, but end-to-end delays vary depending on the mobility model and node speed. The document proposes an algorithm to select the best routing protocol based on whether data delivery or time is the higher priority, and whether nodes are stationary or mobile. DSDV is preferred when data delivery is most important, while DSR performs better for time-critical applications.
This document summarizes an intermediate guardianship based routing protocol proposed to improve the performance of the Ad-hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol in mobile ad hoc networks. The proposed protocol aims to balance energy consumption among nodes by only allowing nodes with sufficient energy to participate in route requests. It also designates intermediate nodes as "guardians" to relay messages when the source or destination nodes have low energy or link failures occur, in order to increase the probability of message delivery. The document provides background on AODV and related work, and describes how the intermediate guardianship approach extends AODV to address energy efficiency and reliability issues in intermittent and low-power ad hoc networks.
A New Theoretical Approach to Location Based Power Aware RoutingIOSR Journals
This document proposes a new theoretical approach to location based power aware routing in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It aims to extend the network lifetime by improving power utilization during routing. The approach uses nodes' location information, remaining battery power, and bandwidth status to assign link stability and select routes with lower "uptime values" and minimum bandwidth over time. This is hypothesized to better utilize nodes' power sources and bandwidth. The document outlines calculating a root up time factor for each node based on its power backup and required power, and only using nodes with maximum backup. It concludes future work will design and validate a new protocol based on this approach.
Network Surveillance Based Data Transference in Cognitive Radio Network with ...IRJET Journal
The document compares different wireless routing protocols to find the most energy efficient for creating a cognitive radio network model with attacker nodes. It first describes cognitive radio networks and their ability to dynamically access unused radio spectrum. It then summarizes the characteristics of reactive, proactive, and hybrid routing protocols. Reactive protocols determine routes on demand through flooding, while proactive protocols constantly update routing tables. The document analyzes the ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) and dynamic source routing (DSR) reactive protocols as well as the destination sequenced distance vector (DSDV) and optimized link state (OLSR) proactive protocols. It aims to compare these protocols and determine the most energy efficient for the cognitive radio network model.
Network Surveillance Based Data Transference in Cognitive Radio Network with ...IRJET Journal
This document compares different wireless routing protocols to find the most energy efficient for creating a cognitive radio network model with attacker nodes. It analyzes reactive, proactive, and hybrid routing protocols including AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR, and a hybrid protocol. Simulation results show the hybrid protocol consumes the least energy compared to other protocols, making it well-suited for an energy efficient cognitive radio network model.
This document summarizes a review article about energy efficient routing protocols in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It discusses how MANETs use multi-hop wireless connections between mobile nodes without a fixed infrastructure. It then reviews several prominent routing protocols for MANETs, including reactive protocols like AODV and DSR, proactive protocols like DSDV and OLSR, and a hybrid protocol. Finally, it proposes a new energy-efficient clustering-based routing algorithm that selects cluster heads based on node mobility and battery power to improve path efficiency and stability in MANETs.
Performance Improvement of Multiple Connections in AODV with the Concern of N...pijans
Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETS) consists of a collection of mobile nodes without having a central
coordination. In MANET, node mobility and dynamic topology play an important role in the performance.
MANET provide a solution for network connection at anywhere and at any time. The major features of
MANET are quick set up, self organization and self maintenance. Routing is a major challenge in MANET
due to it’s dynamic topology and high mobility. Several routing algorithms have been developed for
routing. This paper studies the AODV protocol and how AODV is performed under multiple connections in
the network. Several issues have been identified. The bandwidth is recognized as the prominent factor
reducing the performance of the network. This paper gives an improvement of normal AODV for
simultaneous multiple connections under the consideration of bandwidth of node.
Mobility is one of the basic features that define an ad hoc network, an asset that leaves the field
free for the nodes to move. The most important aspect of this kind of network turns into a great
disadvantage when it comes to commercial applications, take as an example: the automotive
networks that allow communication between a groups of vehicles. The ad hoc on-demand
distance vector (AODV) routing protocol, designed for mobile ad hoc networks, has two main
functions. First, it enables route establishment between a source and a destination node by
initiating a route discovery process. Second, it maintains the active routes, which means finding
alternative routes in a case of a link failure and deleting routes when they are no longer
desired. In a highly mobile network those are demanding tasks to be performed efficiently and
accurately. In this paper, we focused in the first point to enhance the local decision of each node
in the network by the quantification of the mobility of their neighbours. Quantification is made
around RSSI algorithm a well known distance estimation method.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
Design Test-bed for assessing load utilising using Multicast Forwarding Appro...IOSR Journals
This document describes a study that developed a test bed to evaluate load and battery lifetime in wireless mesh networks using a multicast forwarding approach. The test bed used the AODV routing protocol and implemented layer 3 acknowledgments and retransmissions. Results found that the network supported data delivery with acknowledgments even under full load. Battery lifetime across mesh nodes was measured between 19-100% and load was minimum compared to previous work, demonstrating the effectiveness of the multicast forwarding approach. Future work could enhance security and implement cross-layer support between network and MAC layers.
Analysis of Blackhole Attack in AODV and DSR IJECEIAES
This document analyzes the blackhole attack in the AODV and DSR routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It first provides background on MANETs and describes common routing protocols like AODV and DSR. It then explains what a blackhole attack is, where a malicious node advertises the best route to destinations but drops packets instead of forwarding them. Through simulation, the document evaluates the performance of AODV and DSR under blackhole attacks, finding how the attack disrupts the operation of MANET routing protocols.
The document evaluates the performance of 5 routing protocols (AODV, DSR, TORA, OLSR, GRP) in a mobile ad hoc network (MANET) using the OPNET simulator. Simulations were run with 30, 60, and 90 nodes using email and video conferencing applications. Performance was analyzed based on throughput, delay, load, and data dropped. In general, GRP and OLSR had the lowest delay, DSR and GRP had the lowest load, and OLSR and AODV had the highest throughput, while TORA often had the worst performance based on the metrics. The evaluation provides insights into the relative performance of the routing protocols under different conditions in a MANET
This document evaluates the performance of the AODV and DSR routing protocols under black hole attacks in a mobile ad hoc network (MANET). It conducts simulations using the network simulator NS-2 to compare the protocols' throughput, packet delivery ratio, and end-to-end delay both with and without black hole attacks from malicious nodes. The results show that under black hole attacks, the throughput and packet delivery ratio of both protocols decreases as the number of malicious nodes increases. However, AODV is shown to be more resistant to the effects of black hole attacks compared to DSR, experiencing smaller decreases in performance under black hole attacks.
This document summarizes a research paper on load balancing protocols in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It begins with an abstract of the paper and introduces MANETs and the importance of load balancing in them given nodes' limited resources. It then discusses various load metrics and load balancing routing protocols. Specific protocols covered include Ad Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV), Ad hoc On-Demand Multipath Distance Vector (AOMDV), and Scalable Multipath On-Demand Routing (SMORT). AOMDV and SMORT aim to compute multiple loop-free paths during route discovery to help balance traffic load across multiple paths. The document concludes that load balanced routing protocols use different metrics to select routes
Similar to PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ON EXTENDED ROUTING PROTOCOL OF AODV IN MANET (20)
INDIAN AIR FORCE FIGHTER PLANES LIST.pdfjackson110191
These fighter aircraft have uses outside of traditional combat situations. They are essential in defending India's territorial integrity, averting dangers, and delivering aid to those in need during natural calamities. Additionally, the IAF improves its interoperability and fortifies international military alliances by working together and conducting joint exercises with other air forces.
Quantum Communications Q&A with Gemini LLM. These are based on Shannon's Noisy channel Theorem and offers how the classical theory applies to the quantum world.
Coordinate Systems in FME 101 - Webinar SlidesSafe Software
If you’ve ever had to analyze a map or GPS data, chances are you’ve encountered and even worked with coordinate systems. As historical data continually updates through GPS, understanding coordinate systems is increasingly crucial. However, not everyone knows why they exist or how to effectively use them for data-driven insights.
During this webinar, you’ll learn exactly what coordinate systems are and how you can use FME to maintain and transform your data’s coordinate systems in an easy-to-digest way, accurately representing the geographical space that it exists within. During this webinar, you will have the chance to:
- Enhance Your Understanding: Gain a clear overview of what coordinate systems are and their value
- Learn Practical Applications: Why we need datams and projections, plus units between coordinate systems
- Maximize with FME: Understand how FME handles coordinate systems, including a brief summary of the 3 main reprojectors
- Custom Coordinate Systems: Learn how to work with FME and coordinate systems beyond what is natively supported
- Look Ahead: Gain insights into where FME is headed with coordinate systems in the future
Don’t miss the opportunity to improve the value you receive from your coordinate system data, ultimately allowing you to streamline your data analysis and maximize your time. See you there!
Fluttercon 2024: Showing that you care about security - OpenSSF Scorecards fo...Chris Swan
Have you noticed the OpenSSF Scorecard badges on the official Dart and Flutter repos? It's Google's way of showing that they care about security. Practices such as pinning dependencies, branch protection, required reviews, continuous integration tests etc. are measured to provide a score and accompanying badge.
You can do the same for your projects, and this presentation will show you how, with an emphasis on the unique challenges that come up when working with Dart and Flutter.
The session will provide a walkthrough of the steps involved in securing a first repository, and then what it takes to repeat that process across an organization with multiple repos. It will also look at the ongoing maintenance involved once scorecards have been implemented, and how aspects of that maintenance can be better automated to minimize toil.
YOUR RELIABLE WEB DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT TEAM — FOR LASTING SUCCESS
WPRiders is a web development company specialized in WordPress and WooCommerce websites and plugins for customers around the world. The company is headquartered in Bucharest, Romania, but our team members are located all over the world. Our customers are primarily from the US and Western Europe, but we have clients from Australia, Canada and other areas as well.
Some facts about WPRiders and why we are one of the best firms around:
More than 700 five-star reviews! You can check them here.
1500 WordPress projects delivered.
We respond 80% faster than other firms! Data provided by Freshdesk.
We’ve been in business since 2015.
We are located in 7 countries and have 22 team members.
With so many projects delivered, our team knows what works and what doesn’t when it comes to WordPress and WooCommerce.
Our team members are:
- highly experienced developers (employees & contractors with 5 -10+ years of experience),
- great designers with an eye for UX/UI with 10+ years of experience
- project managers with development background who speak both tech and non-tech
- QA specialists
- Conversion Rate Optimisation - CRO experts
They are all working together to provide you with the best possible service. We are passionate about WordPress, and we love creating custom solutions that help our clients achieve their goals.
At WPRiders, we are committed to building long-term relationships with our clients. We believe in accountability, in doing the right thing, as well as in transparency and open communication. You can read more about WPRiders on the About us page.
RPA In Healthcare Benefits, Use Case, Trend And Challenges 2024.pptxSynapseIndia
Your comprehensive guide to RPA in healthcare for 2024. Explore the benefits, use cases, and emerging trends of robotic process automation. Understand the challenges and prepare for the future of healthcare automation
Transcript: Details of description part II: Describing images in practice - T...BookNet Canada
This presentation explores the practical application of image description techniques. Familiar guidelines will be demonstrated in practice, and descriptions will be developed “live”! If you have learned a lot about the theory of image description techniques but want to feel more confident putting them into practice, this is the presentation for you. There will be useful, actionable information for everyone, whether you are working with authors, colleagues, alone, or leveraging AI as a collaborator.
Link to presentation recording and slides: https://bnctechforum.ca/sessions/details-of-description-part-ii-describing-images-in-practice/
Presented by BookNet Canada on June 25, 2024, with support from the Department of Canadian Heritage.
Scaling Connections in PostgreSQL Postgres Bangalore(PGBLR) Meetup-2 - MydbopsMydbops
This presentation, delivered at the Postgres Bangalore (PGBLR) Meetup-2 on June 29th, 2024, dives deep into connection pooling for PostgreSQL databases. Aakash M, a PostgreSQL Tech Lead at Mydbops, explores the challenges of managing numerous connections and explains how connection pooling optimizes performance and resource utilization.
Key Takeaways:
* Understand why connection pooling is essential for high-traffic applications
* Explore various connection poolers available for PostgreSQL, including pgbouncer
* Learn the configuration options and functionalities of pgbouncer
* Discover best practices for monitoring and troubleshooting connection pooling setups
* Gain insights into real-world use cases and considerations for production environments
This presentation is ideal for:
* Database administrators (DBAs)
* Developers working with PostgreSQL
* DevOps engineers
* Anyone interested in optimizing PostgreSQL performance
Contact info@mydbops.com for PostgreSQL Managed, Consulting and Remote DBA Services
Support en anglais diffusé lors de l'événement 100% IA organisé dans les locaux parisiens d'Iguane Solutions, le mardi 2 juillet 2024 :
- Présentation de notre plateforme IA plug and play : ses fonctionnalités avancées, telles que son interface utilisateur intuitive, son copilot puissant et des outils de monitoring performants.
- REX client : Cyril Janssens, CTO d’ easybourse, partage son expérience d’utilisation de notre plateforme IA plug & play.
Kief Morris rethinks the infrastructure code delivery lifecycle, advocating for a shift towards composable infrastructure systems. We should shift to designing around deployable components rather than code modules, use more useful levels of abstraction, and drive design and deployment from applications rather than bottom-up, monolithic architecture and delivery.
Quality Patents: Patents That Stand the Test of TimeAurora Consulting
Is your patent a vanity piece of paper for your office wall? Or is it a reliable, defendable, assertable, property right? The difference is often quality.
Is your patent simply a transactional cost and a large pile of legal bills for your startup? Or is it a leverageable asset worthy of attracting precious investment dollars, worth its cost in multiples of valuation? The difference is often quality.
Is your patent application only good enough to get through the examination process? Or has it been crafted to stand the tests of time and varied audiences if you later need to assert that document against an infringer, find yourself litigating with it in an Article 3 Court at the hands of a judge and jury, God forbid, end up having to defend its validity at the PTAB, or even needing to use it to block pirated imports at the International Trade Commission? The difference is often quality.
Quality will be our focus for a good chunk of the remainder of this season. What goes into a quality patent, and where possible, how do you get it without breaking the bank?
** Episode Overview **
In this first episode of our quality series, Kristen Hansen and the panel discuss:
⦿ What do we mean when we say patent quality?
⦿ Why is patent quality important?
⦿ How to balance quality and budget
⦿ The importance of searching, continuations, and draftsperson domain expertise
⦿ Very practical tips, tricks, examples, and Kristen’s Musts for drafting quality applications
https://www.aurorapatents.com/patently-strategic-podcast.html
Are you interested in dipping your toes in the cloud native observability waters, but as an engineer you are not sure where to get started with tracing problems through your microservices and application landscapes on Kubernetes? Then this is the session for you, where we take you on your first steps in an active open-source project that offers a buffet of languages, challenges, and opportunities for getting started with telemetry data.
The project is called openTelemetry, but before diving into the specifics, we’ll start with de-mystifying key concepts and terms such as observability, telemetry, instrumentation, cardinality, percentile to lay a foundation. After understanding the nuts and bolts of observability and distributed traces, we’ll explore the openTelemetry community; its Special Interest Groups (SIGs), repositories, and how to become not only an end-user, but possibly a contributor.We will wrap up with an overview of the components in this project, such as the Collector, the OpenTelemetry protocol (OTLP), its APIs, and its SDKs.
Attendees will leave with an understanding of key observability concepts, become grounded in distributed tracing terminology, be aware of the components of openTelemetry, and know how to take their first steps to an open-source contribution!
Key Takeaways: Open source, vendor neutral instrumentation is an exciting new reality as the industry standardizes on openTelemetry for observability. OpenTelemetry is on a mission to enable effective observability by making high-quality, portable telemetry ubiquitous. The world of observability and monitoring today has a steep learning curve and in order to achieve ubiquity, the project would benefit from growing our contributor community.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ON EXTENDED ROUTING PROTOCOL OF AODV IN MANET
1. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
DOI : 10.5121/ijasuc.2013.4403 27
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ON EXTENDED
ROUTING PROTOCOL OF AODV IN MANET
Debraj Modak1
and Dipankar Saha2
1
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering,
Abacus Institute of Engineering and Management, Mogra, Hooghly.
ddebraj.hetc@gmail.com
2
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering,
Global Institute of Management and Technology, Krishnanagar, Nadia.
dipankar.hetc@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
A Mobile Ad-hoc Network is a collection of mobile nodes that form a wireless network and the mobile
nodes dynamically communicate to other nodes without the use of any preplanned infrastructure. Each
node can acts as a router and forwards data packets to every other nodes in the network. Topology of the
network changes very frequently due to mobility of the nodes. AODV(Ad-hoc on demand distance vector
routing protocol) has been extensively used protocol in MANET. But AODV and other on demand routing
protocol use single route reply. An extension version of AODV called RAODV (Reverse AODV) [11] tries
multiple route replies and enhances the network performances like packet delivery ratio. Another extended
version of AODV namely MAODV allows each node in the network to send out multicast data packets
rather than sending unicast traffic. An evaluation of these two protocols has been carried out by using NS-
2.34.The comparisons of these protocols has been studied using some performance metrics like end to end
delay, overhead by varying number of nodes which has not been done.
KEYWORDS
Manet, Raodv, Maodv, Routing Protocol, MACT massage, GRPH massage
1. INTRODUCTION
Mobile ad hoc network (MANET) plays an important role in the communication networks now-a-
days and for coming advancement. The important role is the fact that as the distances among the
nodes in an ad hoc network become very less, the network easily access information from space
that provides capacity per Joule of energy. Recent research advances in low power, low cost and
low rate wireless communications endure a promising future for the deployment of sensor
networks to support a broad range of applications like health monitoring, habitat monitoring,
target tracking and disaster management [1, 2, 3].
Mobile ad hoc networks consist of nodes that can communicate through the use of wireless links
and do not form any static topologies. The fundamental features of these networks is that it does
not possess any infrastructure and dedicated nodes which are present in the fixed kind of
networks and provide network connectivity operations. For maintaining connectivity in a mobile
ad hoc network all mobile nodes in the network go through routing operation of network traffic.
2. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
28
The communication among the nodes cannot be imposed by a centralized administration system.
Thus, for such self-deployed a protocol of physical or network layer must be come in the frame
that enforce connectivity requirements in order to guarantee the unstoppable operation of the
higher layer protocols.
Mobile ad hoc networks (MANET) composed of set of mobile nodes which communicate with
each other wirelessly and do not need any preinfrastructure. The mobile ad-hoc network topology
changes very frequently since the nodes are capable to move and we need to cope with problems
raised through this type of networks. If the source and destination nodes are not within the
transmission range of each other, then intermediate nodes would be served as intermediate routers
for the communication between the two nodes. Moreover, if the communication between mobile
nodes does not occur mutually, it can use other neighboring nodes to achieve communication and
communicates through frequently changing network [4, 5].
The main contribution of this paper is that we have made a substantial effort to study the
performance of two AODV family of routing protocols, namely MAODV, and RAODV for a
Mobile Ad-Hoc network environment. Since the computation time between two receiving signals
is less for an MANET, these two protocols find undisrupted links and feasible routes from
performance parameters without considering the fluctuation in signal strengths and network
topologies of mobile ad hoc networks. Firstly, we take a widely used protocol namely Ad-hoc
On-Demand Distance Vector Routing Protocol (AODV) that uses a source on-demand route
establishment process, then represent an extended version of this algorithm namely Reverse
AODV (RAODV). Route stability parameters have been used for selecting stable routes in the
network [6]. The remaining part of the paper describes about another extended version of AODV
called Multicast AODV (MAODV).In the next section, these two protocols have been compared
with some deterministic metrics and finally we concluded our paper.
2. REVERSE ADHOC ON-DEMAND DISTANCE VECTOR ROUTING
PROTOCOL
It is the extended reverse version of AODV. In AODV and other on-demand routing protocol,
source node initiates route discovery process [8] by broadcasting route request packet to its
neighbor to find a route to the destination. Each intermediate node acknowledges the RREQ by
sending a Route Reply (RREP) packet to the source node or rebroadcasts the RREQ to its
neighbors after incrementing the broadcast id. One of the disadvantages of AODV is that it is
based on single route reply along the first reverse path to establish routing path. Random change
of topology in the network leads that the route reply could not reach to the source node. Loss of
RREP leads to the source node to reinitiates route discovery process which degrades the routing
performances. In R-AODV, loss of RREP messages considered. This protocol discovers routes or
paths when source node needs a new route by using a reverse route discovery procedure. The
source node and destination node plays basically same role during route discovery process from
the point of sending control messages. So, when the destination node receives route request
(RREQ) packet, it broadcasts reverse request (R-RREQ) packet to find out the source node. When
source node gets an R-RREQ message it starts data transmission.
The source node initiates route discovery procedure by broadcasting RREQ to its neighbor.
Whenever the source node issues aRREQ, the broadcast ID is incremented by one. The source
node broadcasts the RREQ to all other nodes in the network. When a RREQ received by an
intermediate node, it starts checking that already it has that RREQ with the same source address.
The node cashes broadcast id and source address and drops redundant RREQ messages. The
RREQ packet contains the following fields:
3. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
29
Table:1Packet Format of RREQ
When the destination node receives first route request message, it generates reverse request (R-
RREQ) message and broadcasts it to neighbor nodes in the network. The R-RREQ packet
contains the following fields:
Table: 2 Packet Format of R-RREQ
When intermediate node receives R-RREQ messages, it goes check for redundancy. If it already
had that the same message, then it drops the message, otherwise send it to the next neighboring
nodes. When the first reverse request message reaches to the source node, it starts transmission of
packet in the network and other R-RREQs that arrived to the source node slowly will reserve for
future use.
3. MULTICAST ADHOC ON-DEMAND DISTANCE VECTOR ROUTING
PROTOCOL
MAODV is the multicast extended routing protocol of AODV. Both AODV and MAODV are on-
demand routing protocols for ad-hoc networks. AODV used for unicast traffic and MAODV[7][9]
for multicast traffic means that it send out multicast data packets and it goes through the multicast
group tree and composed of the group members and several routers, which are not member of the
group member. So all the group member nodes and the routers are all tree members and belong to
the group tree. In every multicast tree, the group member that first builds the tree is the group
leader for that tree, responsible for maintaining the group tree broadcasting Group-Hello (GRPH)
messages periodically in the whole network. Every node has three tables in the network. Firstly,
there is a table called Unicast route table which record the next hop for routes to other
destinations for unicast traffic. Secondly, another table where every hop record the next hops for
the tree structure of each multicast group and known is multicast route table. Each node and its
next neighbour node is connected with each other either downstream or upstream depends on
position. Now, If the next neighbour node is one-way nearer to the group leader node, the
direction is upstream; otherwise, the direction is downstream. In the group leader nodes there
have no upstream nodes, while other nodes in the tree should have one and only one upstream.
The third table is the Group leader table. It stores the currently-known multicast group address
and its group leader address and the next hop when a node receives a periodic GRPH message
towards that group leader.
4. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
30
3.1. Route Discovery and Maintenance
In MAODV, in the network each node tries to send out multicast traffic, if the data source node
is not includes a tree member, then how the packet arrive to the multicast group member. In this
case, there we can incorporate two step. In first step, one route is to be established from that data
source node to a tree member; after that the tree member receives the multicast data packets, and
then it propagates the data through the whole tree, reaching every group member. This
mechanism used for route discovery and maintenance for sending a specific node address in
AODV to accomplish the first step. If the source node discovers a RREQ for MAODV which are
the same as the RREQ used in AODV, broadcasted in the network. The source node knows a
route to reach the group leader if it has the group leader table. In the Group leader table all
information are stored, by using this RREQ packet can be sent unicastly towards the group leader
if this is the first time the node sends RREQ. When RREQ goes through the network, the reverse
route towards the source node to next hop is constructed. If any node has fresh enough route to
that multicast address, or any tree member with identified group leader can respond to this RREQ
with a RREP. Through the reverse route when the RREP is sent back to the source node, every
intermediate node and the source node automatically updates the route to that tree member with
the destination address set to the multicast group address, thus the forwarding route is established
in their Unicast route tables. For this first step, the end node is a tree member. In the multicast
tree construction second step is accomplished.
Figure 3: Initial RREQs
3.2. Multicast Tree Construction
The control packets i.e. RREQ and RREP used in MAODV for tree construction which are
borrowed from AODV. When any node is not a tree member then it initiates a RREQ with a join
flag (RREQ-J) and creates multicast route table then it wants to join that multicast group. After
that it identifies itself as a group member, but with an unknown group leader address. Generally,
in the network RREQ-J is flooded and a node in the multicast group can get information how to
reach data to the group leader address through checking its own Group Leader Table, and for the
first time that it sends out RREQ-J and it can be sent directly towards the group leader.
3.3. Multicast Tree Maintenance
Multicast tree maintenance procedure consist of Periodic Group-Hello Propagation, Neighbour
Connectivity Maintenance, Group Leader Selection and Tree Marge.
5. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
31
3.3.1. Periodic Group-Hello Propagation
In this case, group leader plays the major role and initiates a Group-Hello message (GRPH)
throughout the whole network periodically, to specify the existence of that group and its current
status. So the tree member node receives GRPH from its own upstream can use the GRPH to
update their current group sequence number, current group leader and the current distance from
the group leader. It requires the GRPH messages to be propagated to its own tree structure from
upstream to downstream gradually. Now, a GRPH message is received by a tree member then it
first checks its group leader information stored in its Multicast Route Table. This GRPH is to be
discarded if it is the same group leader address is specified, and the node waits for next GRPH
from its own upstream. If its Multicast Route Table record the group leader information there
exists another tree with the same multicast group address and these two trees can be connected.
3.3.2 Neighbour Connectivity Maintenance
The neighbour connectivity is organised by repairing the downstream node of a link in the tree
realizes that the link is broken. Then it is not receiving any broadcast messages from that
neighbour in a specific time. Then, the downstream node deleting next hop becomes the request
source node sending out RREQ-J to determine a new limb. RREQ-J wants to join the multicast
group, in that this RREQ-J must be broadcast and attached with an extension including other
information about the node hop count to the group leader, When a RREQ-J with Extension
received by a tree member, it must check its own hop count to the group leader, it avoid the old
branch and its own downstream nodes responding to the RREQ-J. Tree partition will be
happened; when the request source node tries several times (RREQ_RETRIES) to repair that
branch, but has not received any RREP-J then network partition should be created. So, for this
partitioned tree a fresh group leader is selected.
3.3.3 Group Leader Selection
In the partitioned tree, a new group leader must be selected or if the group leader revokes its
group membership. Then the current node is a group member, it will become the new group
leader after partitioned the tree. Otherwise, it will force one of its tree neighbours to be the leader.
If there is any downstream node, it removes the entry for that group in its Multicast route table,
specifying it is not the member to the tree anymore, and broadcast a multicast activation (MACT)
message to this downstream node, indicating that it has no existence in that tree and for
maintaining the all nodes the tree needs a leader. If more than one downstream node are there,
then the recent node selects one downstream, become upstream link and broadcasts a a group-
leader flag(MACT-GL) towards that node, indicating that it has other address in the tree then
creates a new group leader node. The node changes the upstream direction into downstream after
receiving MACT-GL from upstream. Otherwise, it continues the above procedure till a group
member is reached and becomes the new group leader.
6. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
32
Figure 4: Group Leader in Multicast Tree
3.3.4 Tree Merge
If the member of the tree has a smaller group leader address that receives group hello packets
(GRPH) generated by another group leader with a larger address for the same group then tree
merge can be detected. After confirming for the leader’s permission for reconstruct the tree, the
tree member initiates the merge by unicastly sending a RREQ with a repair flag (RREQ-R) to the
group leader. Until the leader is reached from downstream to upstream the RREQ-R propagates
continuously. If the other nodes do not have the permission to reconstruct the tree, it can
acknowledge a RREP with a repair flag (RREP-R) to that request node. The RREP-R follows this
reverse route to the request node when receiving RREQ-R, the reverse route to the request node is
formed. If there is another tree for that group with a group leader having a larger address then, the
RREQ-R and RREP-R cycle is omitted and the leader has not allowed any other tree member to
recreate the tree.
4. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
4.1. SIMULATION
The simulations are performed using Network Simulator 2 (NS-2), particularly popular in the
wireless networking community. The performance of RAODV is evaluated by comparing it with
MAODV protocol in same condition. In our simulation, MAC protocol is the IEEE standard
802.11 Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) [10].The traffic sources are constant bit rate
(CBR). Half of nodes are static, half of nodes move with a random mobility model. For mobile
nodes, velocities ranged between 0 m/s and 20 m/s, while the pause time was set to 30 seconds.
The data packet size is 512 bytes.
In the scenarios, the no of nodes in the network increase from 20 to 100 gradually. The size and
the area are selected .So that the nodes density is approximately constant, which would properly
reflect the scalability of routing protocols. Each simulation was run for duration of 900 seconds.
In graph we use is an average of 5 simulations sample data. We evaluated three performance
metrics:
7. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
33
4.1.1. Packet delivery ratio:
The ratio of the data packets delivered to the destinations to those generated by the sources.
4.1.2. Average control overhead:
The control packet overhead that for route discovery, clusters maintain and route repair etc.
4.1.3. End-to-end delay:
The average delay includes all possible delays caused by route discovery, propagation, and
transfer times etc.
4.1.4. Throughput :
The amount of packet successfully delivered to all the nodes in the network. It is generally
expressed in bits per second (bps) or kilobits per second (kbps).
4.2. RESULT AND ANALYSIS:
In the scenario, we studied the scalability of the protocols. For our simulation we have assumed
that the sensor network is static, where all the sensor nodes have the same radio range and also
energy is uniformly distributed among all the sensor nodes. Simulations are carried out in a non-
beacon mode and all the devices have the capabilities of a coordinator.
The results are shown in Fig.3. As shown in Fig. 3(a), both RAODV and MAODV show high
packet delivery ratio even for networks with 100 nodes. But RAODV consistently delivers about
1-2 percent more data packets than MAODV. Due to multipath in MAODV [12] there can be
many stale routes which may contribute to less packet delivery and increase of routing overhead
in the network. Thus, an active route in RAODV usually lasts longer and more data packets can
be delivered.
Fig. 3(b) shows the route overhead of the comparing route protocols. When nodes are above 40
then overhead of MAODV is increasing slowly with RAODV, when the nodes are more than 60,
the overhead of MAODV increase rapidly. In MAODV uses the multicast routing traffic so it
allows the packets to move in many paths. RAODV on the other hand uses reverse path technique
to find the paths which naturally increases the number of control packets needed to keep track of
the increasing number of paths. Here for our simulation since we have assumed that the nodes are
static, link failures is very rare and hence computing for link failures will lead to additional
overhead in MAODV, The low control overhead is critical for RAODV. RAODV has light
overhead.
In fig. 3(c) RAODV has less network delay when compared with MAODV. If the control packet
or overhead is to be more then successful packet will delivered less for that reason delay also be
more and converge at a point as the packets are varied indicating that the network gets saturated.
8. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
34
Here in MAODV the duplicate copies are not discarded immediately. This leads to more end to
end delay in the network for MAODV. So the interval time between sending by the source node
and receiving by the destination node, which includes the processing time and queuing time
increases.
In fig. 3(d) shows the throughput of comparing route protocols. RAODV has better outcomes
than MAODV. It is mainly depends on the lower delay and better successful packet delivered in
the network because when the route will be lost then MAODV uses multicast routing traffic but
RAODV sends packet consistently due to fast route recovery process than MAODV.
Fig: 3(a) Packet Delivery Ratio
Fig: 3(b) Average Control Packet
9. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
35
Fig: 3(c) End to End Delay
Fig: 3(d) Throughput
10. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
36
5. CONCLUSIONS
This approach can be utilized for determine the routing metric with less scalability and mobility
in between two routing protocols, namely reactive routing protocol Multicast Ad hoc On-Demand
Distance Vector Routing (MAODV) and Reverse Adhoc On-Demand Distance Vector routing
protocol in Tool command language and integrated the module in the ns-2 [13] Simulator. We
determine the performance comparison of the two protocols and simulations were carried out with
identical topologies and running different protocols on the mobile node in the network. In the
routing protocols, performance were considered with respect to metrics like Packet delivery ratio,
end to end delay, control overhead, throughput and compared the X-graph between these two
protocols. This simulation results illustrate that RAODV provide better packet delivery rate with
less route latency and overhead than any other routing protocol like AODV. For denser medium
RAODV provides better security to data packets for scrubby and significant security. In RAODV
we changed route replay packet configuration of AODV and named it RRREQ.
Our future work includes designing a new routing protocol that takes in to consideration the
various challenges under which a routing protocol has to work in a unique and challenging sensor
environment. With all these research challenges, we robustly accept as true that we have a very
stirring time ahead of us in the area of MANET.
REFERENCES
[1] I. Akylidiz, W. Su, Sankarasubramaniam, and E.Cayrici, “A survey on sensor networks”, IEEE
Communications Magazine, Volume: 40 Issue: 8, August 2002, pp.102-114.
[2] K. Akkaya and M. Younis, “A survey of Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks”, Elsevier
Ad Hoc Network Journal, 2005, pp 325-349.
[3] Gowrishankar.S, T.G.Basavaraju, SubirKumarSarkar, ”Issues in Wireless Sensor Networks”, In
proceedings of the 2008 International Conference of Computer Science and Engineering, (ICCSE
2008), London, U.K., 2-4 July, 2008.
[4] S. Corson, J. Macker., “Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET): Routing Protocol Performance Issues
and Evaluation Considerations”, IETF RFC2501, 1999.
[5] Kush, A., Taneja, S., “A Survey of Routing Protocols in Mobile Adhoc Networks International
Journal of Innovation”, Management and Technology 1(3), 279–285 (2010).
[6] E. M. Royer and C. Toh, “A Review of Current Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Mobile. Wireless
Networks,” IEEE Personal Communications, pp. 46–55, April 1999.
[7] Royer, E. M. and Perkins, C. E.; "Multicast Operation of the Ad-hoc On-Demand Distance Vector
Routing Protocol", Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile
Computing and Networking (MOBICOM.99), Seattle, WA, USA, August 1999, pages 207-218 .
[8] http://www.ids.nic.in/tnl_jces_Jun_2011/PDF.
[9] Royer, E. M. and Perkins, C. E.; "Multicast Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (MAODV)
Routing", IETF, Intemet Draft: draft- ietf-manet-maodv-00.txt, 2000
[10] "Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications", IEEE
Standard 802.11-1997, IEEE Standards Dept. 1994.
[11] Chonggun Kim, Elmurod Talipov and Byoungchul Ahn, “ A Reverse AODV routing protocol in Ad
hoc Mobile Networks”, EUC
Workshops 2006, LNCS 4097, pp 522-531, 2006.
[12] J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves and M. Mosko, “Multipath Routing in Wireless Mesh Networks”, in first
IEEE Workshop on Wireless Mesh Networks (WiMesh 2005); 2005 September 26;Santa Clara; CA.
[13] http://www .isi.edu /nsnam/ns.
11. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.4, No.4, August 2013
37
AUTHORS:
Debraj Modak received the bachelor’s degree from WBUT of electronics and
communicationengineering in 2009 and master’s from SRM University of Digital
Communicationand Networking in 2011. He has been worked as a Assistant Professor
in the Institute of Science and Technology, Midnapore, during 2011-12. At present, he
work as an Assistant Professorat the Department of Electronics and Communication in
the Abacus Institute of Engineering nd Management, Mogra.
Dipankar Saha received the bachelor’s degree from WBUT of electronics
andcommunicationengineering in 2009 and master’s from SRM University of Digital
Communication and Networking in 2011. He worked as a lecturer in the JIS College of
Engineering, Kalyani, during 2011-12. At present, he work as an Assistant Professor at
the Department of Electronics and Communication in the Global Institute of
Management and Technology, Krishnanagar.