Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Simulation Modeling of Reactive Protocols for Adhoc Wireless Network

Simulation Modeling of Reactive Protocols for Adhoc Wireless Network

Ratings: (0)|Views: 773|Likes:
Published by ijcsis
Ad hoc wireless networks are characterized by multihop wireless connectivity, infrastructureless environment and frequently changing topology. As the wireless links are highly error prone and can go down frequently due to mobility of nodes, therefore, stable routing is a very critical task due to highly dynamic environment in adhoc wireless networks. In this research paper, simulation modelling of prominent on-demand routing protocols has been done by presenting their functionality using NS2. An effort has been made to evaluate the performance of DSR and AODV on a self created scene using TCL for varying number of mobile nodes. The performance differential parameters analyzed are; packet delivery ratio and sent & received packets with varying speed and pause time. Subsequently, using results obtained after simulation, the recommendations have been made about the significance of either protocol in various situations. It has been observed that both DSR and AODV are good in performance in their own categories but the emphasis for stable and reliable routing is still on AODV as it performs better in denser environments.
Ad hoc wireless networks are characterized by multihop wireless connectivity, infrastructureless environment and frequently changing topology. As the wireless links are highly error prone and can go down frequently due to mobility of nodes, therefore, stable routing is a very critical task due to highly dynamic environment in adhoc wireless networks. In this research paper, simulation modelling of prominent on-demand routing protocols has been done by presenting their functionality using NS2. An effort has been made to evaluate the performance of DSR and AODV on a self created scene using TCL for varying number of mobile nodes. The performance differential parameters analyzed are; packet delivery ratio and sent & received packets with varying speed and pause time. Subsequently, using results obtained after simulation, the recommendations have been made about the significance of either protocol in various situations. It has been observed that both DSR and AODV are good in performance in their own categories but the emphasis for stable and reliable routing is still on AODV as it performs better in denser environments.

More info:

Published by: ijcsis on Nov 02, 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

11/26/2012

pdf

text

original

 
Simulation Modeling of Reactive Protocols forAdhoc Wireless Network
Sunil Taneja
Department of Computer Science,Government Post Graduate College,Kalka, Indiasuniltaneja.iitd@gmail.com
Ashwani Kush
Department of Computer Science,University College, KurukshetraUniversity, Kurukshetra, Indiaakush20@gmail.com
Amandeep Makkar
Department of Computer Science,Arya Girls College,Ambala Cantt, Indiaaman.aryacollege@gmail.com
Abstract
 Ad hoc wireless networks are characterized by multihop wireless connectivity, infrastructureless environment and frequently changing topology. As the wireless links are highly error prone and can go down frequently due to mobility of nodes, therefore, stable routing is a very critical task due to highly dynamic environment in adhoc wireless networks. In this research paper, simulation modelling of prominent on-demand  routing protocols has been done by presenting their functionality using NS2. An effort has been made to evaluate the performance of DSR and  AODV on a self created scene using TCL for varying number of mobile nodes.The performance differential parameters analyzed are; packet delivery ratio and sent & received packets with varying speed and pause time. Subsequently, using results obtained after simulation, the recommendations have been made about the significance of either protocol in various situations. It has been observed that both DSR and AODV are good in performance in their own categories but the emphasis for stable and  reliable routing is still on AODV as it performs better in denserenvironments. 
Keywords:
 Adhoc Wireless Networks, DSR, AODV, Routing,Simulation
I.
 
INTRODUCTION TO ADHOC WIRELESS NETWOKS
The wireless networks are classified as Infrastructured orInfrastructure less. In Infrastructured wireless networks, themobile node can move while communicating, the base stationsare fixed and as the node goes out of the range of a basestation, it gets into the range of another base station. InInfrastructureless or Ad Hoc wireless network [15], the mobilenode can move while communicating, there are no fixed basestations and all the nodes in the network act as routers. Themobile nodes in the Ad Hoc network dynamically establishrouting among themselves to form their own network ‘on thefly’. In this research paper, intend is to study the mobilitypatterns of DSR and AODV using simulation modeling byvarying ‘number of mobile nodes’, ‘speed’, ‘pause time’,‘UDP connections’ and ‘TCP connections’. A Mobile Ad HocNetwork is a collection of wireless mobile nodes forming atemporary network without any fixed infrastructure where allnodes are free to move about arbitrarily and where all thenodes configure themselves. Unlike traditional networkswhereby routing functions are performed by dedicated nodesor routers, in MANET, routing functions are carried out by allavailable nodes. There are no fixed base stations and eachnode acts both as a router and as a host. Even the topology of network may also change rapidly. The mobile nodes in the AdHoc network dynamically establish routing among themselvesto form their own network ‘on the fly’. In essence, thenetwork is created in ad-hoc fashion by the participating nodeswithout any central administration. Further ad hoc networkscan be classified as single-hop or multi-hop. In single-hop adhoc networks, nodes are in their reach area and cancommunicate directly but in case of multi-hop, some nodes arefar and cannot communicate directly. The traffic has to beforwarded by other intermediate nodes. Ad hoc networks areprimarily meant for use by military forces or for emergencyrescue situations. At the state of war an army cannot rely onfixed infrastructure, as it is an easy and attractive target for theenemy. Ad hoc networks are optimal solution in such cases.For civil use ad hoc networks are crucial if the fixedinfrastructure has been torn down by some natural disaster,like a flood or an earthquake. Then rescue operations could insuch a situation be managed through utilizing ad hocnetworks. Mobile ad hoc networks have several advantagesover traditional wireless networks including ease of deployment, speed of deployment and decreased dependenceon a fixed infrastructure but there are certain open researchissues too in its implementation. Some of the research issues[15] are:
 Dynamic topology,
 
 Autonomous or n
o centralizedadministration,
 Device discovery,
Bandwidth
optimization
,
Scalability, Limited security, Power Aware Routing, Self healing, Poor transmission quality, Ad hoc addressing, and Topology maintenance.
 In Ad hoc network, nodes can change position quitefrequently. Each node participating in the network must bewilling to transfer packets to other nodes. For this purpose, arouting protocol is needed. Our focus in this research paper ison the stable and reliable routing over mobile adhoc networks.The proposed routing scheme is to select a stable and reliablepath in such a manner that load is balanced over the entirenetwork.
II.
 
ROUTING PROTOCOLS
 
A routing protocol [15] is required whenever a packet needsto be transmitted to a destination via number of nodes andnumerous routing protocols have been proposed for such kindof ad hoc networks. These protocols find a route for packetdelivery and deliver the packet to the correct destination. Thestudies on various aspects of routing protocols [1, 2] havebeen an active area of research for many years. Manyprotocols have been suggested keeping applications and typeof network in view. Basically, routing protocols can bebroadly classified into two types as: Table Driven Protocols orProactive Protocols and On-Demand Protocols or ReactiveProtocols. In Table Driven routing protocols each nodemaintains one or more tables containing routing information to
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 8, No. 7, October 2010259http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
 
every other node in the network. All nodes keep on updatingthese tables to maintain latest view of the network. Some of the existing table driven protocols are DSDV [4], GSR [9],WRP [8] and ZRP [11]. In on-demand routing protocols,routes are created as and when required. When a transmissionoccurs from source to destination, it invokes the routediscovery procedure. The route remains valid till destination isachieved or until the route is no longer needed. Some of theexisting on demand routing protocols are: DSR [5], AODV [3]and TORA [10]. The emphasis in this research paper isconcentrated on the study of mobility pattern and performanceanalysis of two prominenton-demand routing Protocols i.e.DSR and AODV.Surveys of routing protocols for ad hocnetworks have been discussed in [12, 13, 14]. A brief reviewof DSR and AODV is presented here as these have beenanalyzed in this paper for their performance.(a)
 
 DSR
[5, 7] is an Ad Hoc routing protocol which issource-initiated rather than hop-by-hop and is based onthe theory of source-based routing rather than table-based. This is particularly designed for use in multi hopwireless ad hoc networks of mobile nodes. Basically,DSR protocol does not need any existing network infrastructure or administration and this allows theNetwork to be completely self-organizing and self-configuring. This Protocol is composed of two essentialparts of route discovery and route maintenance. Everynode maintains a cache to store recently discoveredpaths. When a node desires to send a packet to somenode, it first checks its entry in the cache. If it is there,then it uses that path to transmit the packet and alsoattach its source address on the packet. If it is not there inthe cache or the entry in cache is expired (because of long time idle), the sender broadcasts a route requestpacket to all of its neighbors asking for a path to thedestination. The sender will be waiting till the route isdiscovered. During waiting time, the sender can performother tasks such as sending/forwarding other packets. Asthe route request packet arrives to any of the nodes, theycheck from their neighbor or from their caches whetherthe destination asked is known or unknown. If routeinformation is known, they send back a route replypacket to the destination otherwise they broadcast thesame route request packet. When the route is discovered,the required packets will be transmitted by the sender onthe discovered route. Also an entry in the cache will beinserted for the future use. The node will also maintainthe age information of the entry so as to know whetherthe cache is fresh or not. When a data packet is receivedby any intermediate node, it first checks whether thepacket is meant for itself or not. If it is meant for itself (i.e. the intermediate node is the destination), the packetis received otherwise the same will be forwarded usingthe path attached on the data packet. Since in Ad hocnetwork, any link might fail anytime. Therefore, routemaintenance process will constantly monitors and willalso notify the nodes if there is any failure in the path.Consequently, the nodes will change the entries of theirroute cache.(b)
 
 ADOV 
 
[3, 7] is a variation of Destination-SequencedDistance-Vector (DSDV) routing protocol which iscollectively based on DSDV and DSR. It aims tominimize the requirement of system-wide broadcasts toits extreme. It does not maintain routes from every nodeto every other node in the network rather they arediscovered as and when needed & are maintained only aslong as they are required. The algorithm used by AODVfor establishment of unicast routes can be summarizedas. When a node wants to send a data packet to adestination node, the entries in route table are checked toensure whether there is a current route to that destinationnode or not. If it is there, the data packet is forwarded tothe appropriate next hop toward the destination. If it isnot there, the route discovery process is initiated. AODVinitiates a route discovery process using Route Request(RREQ) and Route Reply (RREP). The source node willcreate a RREQ packet containing its IP address, itscurrent sequence number, the destination’s IP address,the destination’s last sequence number and broadcast ID.The broadcast ID is incremented each time the sourcenode initiates RREQ. Basically, the sequence numbersare used to determine the timeliness of each data packetand the broadcast ID & the IP address together form aunique identifier for RREQ so as to uniquely identifyeach request. The requests are sent using RREQ messageand the information in connection with creation of aroute is sent back in RREP message. The source nodebroadcasts the RREQ packet to its neighbours and thensets a timer to wait for a reply. To process the RREQ,the node sets up a reverse route entry for the source nodein its route table. This helps to know how to forward aRREP to the source. Basically a lifetime is associatedwith the reverse route entry and if this entry is not usedwithin this lifetime, the route information is deleted. If the RREQ is lost during transmission, the source node isallowed to broadcast again using route discoverymechanism. Maintenance of routes is done using Localroute repair scheme.
III.
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DSR AND AODV
 
DSR and AODV share certain salient characteristics.Specifically, they both discover routes only in the presence of data packets in the need for a route to a destination. Routediscovery in either protocol is based on query and reply cyclesand route information is stored in all intermediate nodes on theroute in the form of route table entries (AODV) or in routecaches (DSR). However, there are several importantdifferences [7, 16] in the dynamics of these two protocols,which may give rise to significant performance differentials.The important differences are given below in the form of benefits and limitations of these protocols. These differenceshelp in studying the pattern analysis and performanceevaluation of either protocol.
 Benefits and Limitations of DSR
DSR protocol has number of benefits. It does not useperiodic routing messages (e.g. no router advertisements and
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 8, No. 7, October 2010260http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
 
no link-level neighbor status messages), thereby reducingnetwork bandwidth overhead, conserving battery power, andavoiding the propagation of potentially large routing updatesthroughout the ad hoc network. There is no need to keeprouting table so as to route a given data packet as the entireroute is contained in the packet header. The routes aremaintained only between nodes that need to communicate.This reduces overhead of route maintenance. Route cachingcan further reduce route discovery overhead. A single routediscovery may yield many routes to the destination, due tointermediate nodes replying from local caches. The DSRprotocol guarantees loop-free routing and very rapid recoverywhen routes in the network change. It is able to adapt quicklyto changes such as host movement, yet requires no routingprotocol overhead during periods in which no such changesoccur. In addition, DSR has been designed to compute correctroutes in the presence of asymmetric (uni-directional) links.In wireless networks, links may at times operateasymmetrically due to sources of interference, differing radioor antenna capabilities, or the intentional use of asymmetriccommunication technology such as satellites. Due to theexistence of asymmetric links, traditional link-state or distancevector protocols may compute routes that do not work. DSR,however, will find a correct route even in the presence of asymmetric links.DSR protocol is not totally free from limitations as it is notscalable to large networks. It is mainly efficient for mobile adhoc networks with less than two hundred nodes. DSR requiressignificantly more processing resources than most otherprotocols. In order to obtain the routing information, eachnode must spend lot of time to process any control data itreceives, even if it is not the intended recipient. Thecontention is increased if too many route replies come back due to nodes replying using their local cache. The RouteReply Storm problem is there. An intermediate node may sendRoute Reply using a stale cached route, thus polluting othercaches. This problem can be eased if some mechanism topurge (potentially) invalid cached routes is incorporated. TheRoute Maintenance protocol does not locally repair a brokenlink. The broken link is only communicated to the initiator.Packet header size grows with route length due to sourcerouting. Flood of route requests may potentially reach allnodes in the network. Care must be taken to avoid collisionsbetween route requests propagated by neighboring nodes.
 Benefits and Limitations of AODV 
AODV protocol has number of benefits. The routes areestablished on demand and destination sequence numbers areused to find the latest route to the destination. The connectionsetup delay is lower. It also responds very quickly to thetopological changes that affects the active routes. It does notput any additional overheads on data packets as it does notmake use of source routing. It favors the least congested routeinstead of the shortest route and it also supports both unicastand multicast packet transmissions even for nodes in constantmovement.AODV has also certain limitations like DSR. Theintermediate nodes can lead to inconsistent routes if the sourcesequence number is very old and the intermediate nodes havea higher but not the latest destination sequence number,thereby having stale entries. The various performance metricsbegin decreasing as the network size grows. It is vulnerable tovarious kinds of attacks as it based on the assumption that allnodes must cooperate and without their cooperation no routecan be established. The multiple Route Reply packets inresponse to a single Route Request packet can lead to heavycontrol overhead. The periodic beaconing leads to unnecessarybandwidth consumption. It expects/requires that the nodes inthe broadcast medium can detect each others’ broadcasts. It isalso possible that a valid route is expired and thedetermination of a reasonable expiry time is difficult. Thereason behind this is that the nodes are mobile and theirsending rates may differ widely and can change dynamicallyfrom node to node.
IV.
 
PERFORMANCE METRICS
There are number of qualitative and quantitativeperformance metrics that can be used to study the mobilitypattern of reactive routing protocols viz. packet delivery ratio,average end to end delay, protocol control overhead etc.
Packet Delivery Ratio:
This is the ratio of number of packetsreceived at the destination to the number of packets sent fromthe source. In other words, fraction of successfully receivedpackets, which survive while finding their destination, iscalled as packet delivery ratio.
Sent and Received Packets:
This refers to the number of packets sent over the network by the source node and thenumber of packets actually received by the destination node.
 Average end-to-end delay
: This is the average time delay fordata packets from the source node to the destination node.Most of the existing routing protocols ensure the qualitativemetrics. Therefore, we have used the packet delivery ratio asquantitative metrics for pattern analysis and performanceevaluation of aforementioned routing protocols usingsimulation modeling for 20 and 50 mobile nodes. The resultshave also been analyzed for DSR and AODV using sent andreceived packets with respect to varying speed and pause time.
V.
 
SIMULATION MODEL OF DSR AND AODV
A random waypoint model [17] has been used and somedense/sparse medium scenarios have been generated usingTCL. An extensive simulation model having scenario of 20and 50 mobile nodes is used to study inter-layer interactionsand their performance implications. The Simulator used is NS2.34 [18]. Packet size is 512 bytes. Same scenario has beenused for both protocols to match the results. The performancedifferentials are analyzed using packet delivery ratio withrespect to varying speed and pause time and then sent andreceived packets with respect to speed and pause time.
 Packet Delivery Ratio with respect to Speed and Pause Time for simulation of 20 mobile nodes
Area considered is 750 meter × 750 meter and simulation runtime is 500 seconds during pattern analysis of 20 nodes usingUDP and TCP connections both with respect to varying speedand pause time. Graph 1 shows the packet delivery ratio usingspeed as a parameter. This performance metric has beenevaluated for DSR and AODV using 20 nodes and 6 UDPconnections. Speed has been varied from 1m/s to 10 m/s. The
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 8, No. 7, October 2010261http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500

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)//-->