Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
41Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
A Comparative study of MANET and VANET Environment

A Comparative study of MANET and VANET Environment

Ratings: (0)|Views: 10,468|Likes:
On demand set up, fault tolerance and unconstrained connectivity are a couple of advantages ,that why mobile computing continues to enjoy rapid growth. In last three decade ,tremendous improvement is made in research area of wireless adhoc network and now a days ,one of the most attractive research topic is inter vehicle communication i.e. realization of mobile adhoc network .VANETs have been recently attracting an increasing attention from both industry as well as research communities .A rich literature in MANET exists, but the availability of traffic data and vehicle equipment motivate the researchers to explore the special characteristics of VANET. In this paper we survey and compare from the literature ,the environment for MANET and VANET. Finally we share a collection of useful references. Link: https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/volume-2-issue-7-july-2010
On demand set up, fault tolerance and unconstrained connectivity are a couple of advantages ,that why mobile computing continues to enjoy rapid growth. In last three decade ,tremendous improvement is made in research area of wireless adhoc network and now a days ,one of the most attractive research topic is inter vehicle communication i.e. realization of mobile adhoc network .VANETs have been recently attracting an increasing attention from both industry as well as research communities .A rich literature in MANET exists, but the availability of traffic data and vehicle equipment motivate the researchers to explore the special characteristics of VANET. In this paper we survey and compare from the literature ,the environment for MANET and VANET. Finally we share a collection of useful references. Link: https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/volume-2-issue-7-july-2010

More info:

Published by: Journal of Computing on Jul 25, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/20/2013

pdf

text

original

 
JOURNAL
 
OF
 
COMPUTING,
 
VOLUME
 
2,
 
ISSUE
 
7,
 
JULY
 
2010,
 
ISSN
 
2151
9617
 
HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
 
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG
 
87
 
A Comparative study of MANET andVANET Environment
Arzoo Dahiya , Dr.R.K.Chauhan
Abstract-
On demand set up, fault tolerance and unconstrained connectivity are a couple of advantages ,that why mobile computingcontinues to enjoy rapid growth. In last three decade ,tremendous improvement is made in research area of wireless adhoc networkand now a days ,one of the most attractive research topic is inter vehicle communication i.e. realization of mobile adhoc network.VANETs have been recently attracting an increasing attention from both industry as well as research communities .A rich literaturein MANET exists, but the availability of traffic data and vehicle equipment motivate the researchers to explore the specialcharacteristics of VANET. In this paper we survey and compare from the literature ,the environment for MANET and VANET. Finallywe share a collection of useful references.
 Index Terms-
MANET, VANET, routing ,VN ,ITS etc.
-----------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
1. Introduction
MANETs consist of mobile/semi mobile nodes withno existing pre-established infrastructure. Theyconnect themselves in a decentralized, self-organizing manner and also establish multi hoproutes. If the mobile nodes are vehicles then thistype of network is called VANET(vehicular ad-hocnetwork). One important property that distinguishesMANET from VANET is that nodes move withhigher avg. speed and number of nodes isassumed to be very large. Vehicular networksconsist of vehicles and Road Side Units (RSU)equipped with radios. Plummeting cost ofelectronic components and permanent willingnessof manufacturers to increase road safety and todifferentiate themselves from their competitorsvehicles are becoming “Computer on Wheels”rather than “Computer N/W on Wheels”.Convergence of forces from both the public andprivate sector implies that in not-too-distant futurewe are likely to see the total birth of vehicular n/w.
Ms.Arzoo Dahiya isworking with Department of I.T.,Lingaya’s University,Faridabad.Dr.R.K.Chauhan is Chairman,Deptt.Of Computer Science,Kurukshetra University,Kurukshetra.
In 1999, U.S. federal communication Commission(FCC) allocated a block of spectrum in 5.850 to5.925 GHz band for applications primarily intendedto enhance the safety of our networks on roadssystems. In fact BMW, Fiat, Renault and someother organizations have united to develop a car-to-car communication consortium, dedicatedprecisely to impose Vehicle to Vehicle (V2V) andVehicle to infrastructure (V2I) communication,vehicle share safety related information and accesslocation based services[1]. The wealth ofinformation that could be obtained from vehicularnetworks is quite enormous, ranging from locationand speed of emergency alerts and request forroadside assistance. In particular, many envisionedsafety related applications require that the vehiclescontinuously broadcast their current position andspeed in so called heart beat messages. Thismessaging increases the awareness of vehiclesabout their neighbors’ whereabouts and warnsdrivers off dangerous situations. But the veryrichness of information also threatens to causedeployment to come to a grinding halt if there isadverse consumer reaction to technology.In this paper we start the discussion with theintroduction of vehicular adhoc networks. Next wespecify various unique characteristics of VANETthat differentiate it from MANET. We then examinerouting techniques for both MANET and VANET
 
JOURNAL
 
OF
 
COMPUTING,
 
VOLUME
 
2,
 
ISSUE
 
7,
 
JULY
 
2010,
 
ISSN
 
2151
9617
 
HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
 
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG
 
88
 
and make a comparison study. Finally we end withthe discussion and few useful references.
2. Unique VANET characteristics andcomparison with MANET
2.1 Unique VANET characteristics
Though Vehicular network share commoncharacteristics with conventional ad-hoc sensornetwork such as self organized and lack of centralcontrol. VANET have unique challenges thatimpact the design of communication system and itsprotocol security[2]. These challenges include-
1. Potentially high number of nodes.
RegardingVANETs as the technical basis for envisionedIntelligent Transportation System (ITS) we expectthat a large portion of vehicles will be equippedwith communication capabilities for vehicularcommunication. Taking additionally potential road-side units into account, VANET needs to bescalable with a very high number of nodes.
2. High mobility and frequent topologychanges
. Nodes potentially move with high speed.Hence in certain scenarios such as when vehiclepass each other, the duration of time that remainsfor exchange of data packets is rather small. Also,intermediate nodes in a wireless multi-hop chain offorwarding nodes can move quickly.
3. High application requirement on datadelivery.
Important VANET applications are fortraffic safety to avoid road accidents; potentiallyincluding safety-of-life. These applications havehigh requirements with respect to real time andreliability. An end-to-end delay of seconds canrender a safety information meaningless.
4. No confidentiality of safety information.
Forsafety application the information contained in amessage is of interest for all road users and hencenot confidential.
5. Privacy.
Communication capabilities in vehiclesmight reveal information about the driver/user,such as identifier, speed, position and mobilitypattern. Despite the need of messageauthentication and non-repudiation of safetymessages, privacy of users and drivers should berespected in particular location privacy andanonymity.
2.2 Comparison of MANET and VANET
Mobile Ad-hoc networks and Vehicular Ad-hocnetworks are very much similar on varioustechnical grounds but following are someparameters on the basis of which we can contrastboth environments.Sr.No. Parameters MANET VANET1. Cost ofproductionCheap Expensive2. Change inn/wtopologySlow Frequent and very fast3. Mobility Low High4. NodedensitySparse Dense and frequently variable5. Bandwidth HundredkpsThousand kps6. Range Upto100mUpto 500m7. NodeLifetimeDependson powerresourceDepend on lifetime of vehicle
 
JOURNAL
 
OF
 
COMPUTING,
 
VOLUME
 
2,
 
ISSUE
 
7,
 
JULY
 
2010,
 
ISSN
 
2151
9617
 
HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
 
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG
 
89
 
8. MultihoproutingAvailable Weakly available9. Reliability Medium High10. Movingpattern ofnodesRandom Regular11. AddressingschemeAttributebasedLocation based12. PositionacquisitionUsingultrasonicUsing GPS,RADAR
Table1: Comparison of MANET and VANET[20]
3. Routing Techniques for MANET andhitting the reality for VANET
3.1 Routing Protocols for MANET
MANETs have numerous applications and each ofsuch application involve different scenarios withmovement pattern, traffic rate and densitydependent on nature of interaction among theparticipants and environment. Active research isbeen done in the area of exploiting the routing formobile networks but based on different applicationareas the classification is very vast. Routingtechniques can be on the basis of unicast ormulticast OR topology based OR QoS based ORpower awareness based OR broadcast based etc.As discussed above , the operational principles ofboth VANET and MANET are same to someapproach. Thus most of the routing strategies aretaken from MANET but due to very high mobilityand node’s unpredictable behavior routingprotocols for MANET are not suited for vehicularcommunication environment. So first of all wediscuss some not all routing and summarize theiradvantages and disadvantages.Classification of current routing protocols[3]-MANET Routing Protocol
Flat
Pro-active(table-driven)
E.g.OLSR,DSDV,WRP,GSR,FSR,STAR,DREAM,CGSRHSR,
Reactive(On demand)
E.g. DSR ,AODV,LMR,TORA,LAR,ARA,FORP,CBRP
Hierarchical
E.g. ZRP,ZHLS,SLURP
Position Based
LAR
Power Aware
ABR
Signal Stability
SSA
Multicast
M-AODVAnd many more…….Many protocols have been proposed within theframework of internet engineering task force(IETF)for MANET.In Flat, Pro-active routing protocols, such asDestination Sequence DistanceVector(DSDV)[7],routes updates are periodicallyperformed regardless of network load, network sizeand bandwidth. Major point of these protocols isthat nodes maintain a constantly updatedunderstanding of network topology. reactive or on-demand routing are designed to reduce theoverhead by maintaining information for activeroutes only at the expense of delay due to routesearch. This means that routes are determined andmaintained for nodes that require to send data toparticular destination. Route discovery occurs byflooding a route request(RREQ) and routeresponse(RREP) packets through the network.This scheme is significant for Ad hoc environmentsince battery power is conserved both by not

Activity (41)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Dan Tabarez liked this
Farouk Mezghani liked this
prathamgunj liked this
Glory Pachnanda added this note
excellent explanation......
洪威岳 liked this
Nadeem Ashraf liked this
Anant Ram liked this
agr512 liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->