(IJCSIS)International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 8, No. 5, August 2010
Quality of Service Enhanced Routing in MobileAd Hoc Networks
D.S. Thenmozhi
1
, R. Lakshmipathi
2
1
Lecturer, Institute of Road and Transport Technology, Erode, Tamilnadu, India.
vivek_thenmozhi@rediffmail.com
2
Professor, St. Peter’s Engineering College, Chennai
Tamilnadu,India.
Abstract
—The importance of Mobile Ad hoc Networks(MANETs) has been increasing everyday. Attractive features of MANETs are no need for infrastructure and decentralizednature. Many applications that use MANETs include multimediadata that require Quality of Service (QoS) support for effectivecommunication. Also QoS routing feature is important for amobile network to interconnect wired network having QoSsupport. We approach the problem of providing Quality of Service for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) by the techniqueof bandwidth based path finding. The Ad hoc On demandDistance Vector routing protocol provides efficient routeestablishment between nodes with minimal control overhead andminimal route acquisition latency. The normal route findingmethod of AODV is improved as Quality of Service Enhanced Adhoc On demand Distance Vector (QEAODV) routing. In ourwork QEAODV establishes a path between the source and thedestination meeting the application stipulated throughputrequirement. Contention which is the inherent problem inMANET is considered effectively in QEAODV. QEAODV isimplemented so that additional overhead requirement will bevery less. In this paper, we present a scalable and efficientQEAODV to support QoS in ad hoc networks. Simulation resultsshow significant performance advantages of our protocol whencompared with normal AODV.
Keywords
—Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs), quality of service routing, bandwidth estimation, contention, admissioncontrol, simulations.
I.
I
NTRODUCTION
Ad hoc networks are communication networks formed by anumber of nodes which are small radio devices with limitedcomputational capacity and memory. The most desirableadvantage of ad hoc networks are their easy deployment.Ideally it should be possible to deploy the nodes in the area of operation and have them self-organize to route traffic asrequired. Such an easy deployment would be mostadvantageous in a variety of applications ranging frommilitary operations and disaster relief to commercialapplications.MANETs (Mobile Ad hoc Networks) [12] inherentlypossess many challenges for its easy deployment, the nodesshould not depend on an external energy supply, so they arenormally battery powered, and battery life is often a limitingfactor. The radio transmission channel is limited in bandwidth.Channel bandwidth is shared among neighboring nodes.Nodes in the MANETs can move freely. Nodes mobilitymakes determining and maintaining the network topology themost challenging issue. Networking mechanisms such asrouting protocols for MANETs require high efficiencybecause of limited resources in a mobile node such as network bandwidth, memory capacity and battery power. Routingprotocols in ad hoc networks must manage frequent topologychanges caused by node mobility. The nature of dynamicchanging topology in ad hoc networks introduces difficultiesin end-to-end route finding. A new technique designed for adhoc networks is ‘On-demand’, or reactive routing. In thistechnique nodes are not maintaining the full topological view,but nodes construct routing tables having only routes to nodesthat a source needs to communicate with, that are establishedon demand with the help of source flooding.A lot of work has been made on routing in ad hoc networks:the destination - sequenced distance vector (DSDV) protocol[5], the wireless routing protocol [6], the temporally-orderedrouting algorithms [7], the dynamic source routing protocols[8], the associativity based routing protocol [9], and the zonerouting protocol (ZRP) [10], etc. These protocols tend toestablish a path with least number of hops and achieving ahigh degree of availability of nodes involved in the active pathwhere the network topology changes quickly. Also, all theprevious routing solutions only deal with the best-effort datatraffic.Though, the vast array of technological solutions for ad hocnetworks, their practical implementation and use in the realworld has been limited so far. Because entertainment andother multimedia based applications are naturally what drivethe mass users of a technology. In order to support aboveservices best-effort routing solutions are not sufficient.Normally multimedia applications often have stringent delayand reliability sensitive service requirements. Any networkssupporting multimedia applications must cater aboverequirements. Hence focus has been shifted from best-effortservices to the provision of better defined QoS in ad hocnetworks. Shared nature of the medium in MANETs needsadditional care at the time of Quality of Service support. QoSsupportive routing protocols [2], [3] find important role in
34http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
QoS mechanisms. Since their role is to find which nodes inthe network will meet application requirements in the wireless,mobile ad hoc network environment.
II.
R
ELATED
W
ORKS
In MANETs Quality of Service based routing is a relativelynew problem. In this section we present an overview of theexisting solutions. Chen and Nahrstedt [4] proposed a ticketbased QoS routing algorithm for ad hoc networks. This ticketbased probing scheme achieves a balance between the single-path routing algorithms and the flooding algorithms. It doesmultipath routing without flooding. The required QoS isensured during the time when an established path remainsunbroken. The QoS support however is disrupted during thererouting time. They consider only the type of networkswhose topologies are relatively stable because their routing,rerouting architectures do not support ad hoc networks withviolently changing topologies. Lin and Liu [11] proposed anew bandwidth routing scheme which contains bandwidthcalculation and reservation for mobile ad hoc networks. Theysuggested a TDMA-based approach. This approach requireseffective synchronization between all nodes in the networks.Applying highly synchronized solutions in ad hoc networksbecomes expensive and synchronization may fail when thenodes are mobile. The free slot allocation algorithm based onTDMA scheme is vulnerable to node mobility in the networkssince slot allocations must be reconfigured whenever there arechanges in available bandwidth or changes to routes in thenetwork. Also they have not considered the routing optimality(i.e. shortest path). Hanzo et. al [14] proposed Quality of Service routing in ad hoc networks. They suggestedthroughput constrained Quality of Service routing utilising theDynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocol. DSR is based onsource routing in which each data packet carries completepath information. This requires more overhead compared toAODV.Normally QoS can be achieved by coordinating thetransmission schedule of packets between nodes. Actuallyexisting above discussed approaches are mostly based on localdecisions. All are focusing on the packet level and only dealwith required resource allocation at individual node point of view. In order to support Quality of Service, guarantees forend to end flows, path finding approaches need to becombined with suitable admission control strategy. At thetime of making admission control decisions, a nodeconsiders its local resources simultaneously it must accountthe resource of this contention neighbors because nodes flowmay consume their resources through contention. This paperfulfils this objective by modifying AODV to performadmission control logic at every node and also to considerboth node's local resources and resources at contention-neighbors while making admission control decisions.Admission control is based on the knowledge of availablebandwidth information. We only consider bandwidth as theadmission criteria. This is because bandwidth guarantee is oneof the most critical requirement for real time applications. Theperformance of Quality of Service Enhanced AODV iscompared with its counter part AODV using NS-2 simulator.The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Next sectionpresents basics of QEAODV protocol. Section IV explains thecomplete functioning of Quality of Service Enhanced AODV.Section V deals with QEAODV route discovery process. Theprotocol simulation and results are discussed in section VI.
III.
P
ROTOCOL
D
ESCRIPTION
Basic AODV [13] is based on flooding the network withRoute Request (RREQ) messages. The source node broadcastsa RREQ message with a time-to-live value equal to 1. i.e. abroadcast is limited one hop neighborhood. Each RREQ isuniquely identified through a sequence number, so that thefirst copy of a RREQ received by a node is processed, whileduplicated messages are discarded. When a node receives thefirst copy of a given RREQ it records the address of the nodethat sent the message. When the first RREQ reaches thedesired destination, a route reply (RREP) message isgenerated and sent back to the source node through therecorded reverse path, ensuring a path from the source to thedestination. Normally this approach minimizes the number of hops of the chosen path. The basic functionality of theQEAODV is much similar to the AODV protocol. QEAODVdiffers from AODV in the way the route discovery process ismodified to provide quality of service support by performingbandwidth constrained admission control at each node in thenetwork. Similar to AODV, the QEAODV also uses the RouteRequest, Route Reply and Route Error packets for the routediscovery and maintenance process, except the Route Requestand Reply packet formats are modified to carry additionalinformation through the network
IV.
F
UNCTIONING OF
QEAODV
The main problem of the MANET comes from the sharednature of the wireless medium in single-channel networks.Essentially, nodes that cannot communicate with each otherdirectly may still contend directly with each other for the sameresources. This extended contention area, known as‘neighborhood contention’ affects resource allocation atindividual nodes in two-ways. First allocation decisions at anindividual node require bandwidth information of nodesoutside of its communication range and along the entire route.Second, contention for resource may involve multiple nodesalong a route. QEAODV performs admission control based onknowledge of these characteristics of MANET. We focus onad hoc networks based on single-channel MAC layers likeIEEE 802.11 because these single channel protocols arewidely available and typically support ad hoc communication.Moreover, these protocols are simple to implement and robustand do not rely on stringent time synchronization that is hardto implement in ad hoc network. The physical characteristicsof wireless channels introduce the two challenges. First
35http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
challenge is available bandwidth estimation at a node, secondchallenge is estimation of flow bandwidth requirement in ashared medium.
A. Node’s Available Bandwidth:
In shared wireless medium, when a node starts to transmit aflow, it consumes bandwidth from its contention neighbors.Because each node has a different view of the network, thenode cannot decide on its own whether its contentionneighbors have sufficient unused bandwidth for the new flow.Also, obtaining contention neighbor information is not easysince a node may consume the bandwidth of contentionneighbor but not able to directly communicate with thatneighbors if that neighbors are located outside transmissionrange and inside carrier-sensing range.
B. Flow Bandwidth Consumption:
Multiple nodes on a route may contend for bandwidth at asingle location and not know about each other. A node on theroute of flow cannot tell how much bandwidth the flow willconsume at its contention neighbors. The limited bandwidth of wireless ad hoc networks requires the limitation of anymessage overhead from information collection. In addition,due to mobility, information gathered about the network onlyhas limited lifetime. Hence, it is effective to collectinformation as close as possible to the time and location that itis needed.
C. QEAODV Admission Control
:The objective of admission control is to determine whetherthe available resources can meet the requirements of a newflow while maintaining bandwidth levels for existing flows.Each node views a different channel state, the availablebandwidth in the network is not a local concept. To tackle thiscondition, two terms are introduced: local bandwidth available(BWlocal), contention-neighborhood bandwidth available(BWc-neigh). Local bandwidth available is the amount of unconsumed bandwidth as observed by a given node.Contention neighborhood available bandwidth is themaximum amount of bandwidth that a node can use fortransmission without affecting the reserved bandwidth of anyexisting flows in its carrier-sensing range. Since a node mayconsume the bandwidth of nodes that are with in its contentionrange, the contention neighborhood bandwidth available for agiven node is equal to the smallest local available bandwidthof all its contention neighbors. Hence in order to admit a flow,a node must have required local bandwidth and contentionneighborhood bandwidth.
1. Calculation of Local Bandwidth Available (BWlocal)
It is the unconsumed bandwidth at a given node. Each nodein the MANET can determine its BW
local
by passivelylistening network activities. In our approach, we use thefraction of channel idle time based on the past history as anindication of local available bandwidth at a node. Thisapproach is justifiable since it does not consider that some of the channel time cannot be used due to the idle time caused bythe exponential backoff algorithm in IEEE 802.11 and thecollisions in the network. Using the fraction of idle channeltime can be a simple approximation for local availablebandwidth. A node can perceive the channel as either idle orbusy. The channel is idle if the node is not in any of thefollowing three states. First, the node is transmitting orreceiving a packet. Second, the node receives a RTS or CTSmessage from another node, which receives channel for aperiod of time specified in the message. Third, the node sensesa busy carrier with signal strength larger than a certainthreshold, called the carrier-sensing threshold, but the nodecannot interpret the contents of the message. By monitoringthe amount of channel idle time, T
idle
, during every period of time, T
p
, the local bandwidth available BW
local
, for a node canbe computed using a weighted average [1] as followsBW
local
=
ω
BW
local
+ (1-
ω
)(T
idle
/T
p
) BW
channel
(1)Where BW
channel
is the capacity of the channel and weight
ω
ε
[0,1].
2. Calculation of Contention Neighborhood BandwidthAvailable (BW
c-neigh
)
Each node perceives the network in a different state. Hencea node's local bandwidth available cannot provide informationabout its contention neighbors. Since it does not know theamount of BW
local
at other nodes. Two approaches arenormally used to obtain bandwidth information at contentionneighboring nodes. They are active approaches and passiveapproaches. In active approaches, neighbors voluntarilyexchange bandwidth information between each other. Suchexchanges normally incur high message overhead. In passive
36http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Quality of Service Enhanced Routing in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
The importance of Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs) has been increasing everyday. Attractive features of MANETs are no need for infrastructure and decentralized nature. Many applications that use MANETs include multimedia data that require Quality of…
(More)
504
Reads
4
Readcasts
3
Embed Views
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
