Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
1. Performance Evaluation of AODV, DSR and DSDV for Congestion Control in Wireless Sensor Networks (1-5)

1. Performance Evaluation of AODV, DSR and DSDV for Congestion Control in Wireless Sensor Networks (1-5)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 92|Likes:
Published by ijccts
International Journal of Communication and Computer Technologies
International Journal of Communication and Computer Technologies

More info:

Published by: ijccts on May 26, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


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





International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies
Volume 01 – No.1, Issue: 01 JULY 2012
Page 1
International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies
Performance Evaluation of AODV, DSR and DSDV forCongestion Control in Wireless Sensor Networks
R. B. Dravida Priyaa (M.E – CCE), SNS College of Technology, Coimbatore.
In recent years, Wireless SensorNetworks plays a vital role in various fields.Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) have emergedas an important new area in wireless technology.Wireless sensor network consists of numerous tinysensors deployed at high density in regionsrequiring surveillance and monitoring. There aremany existing protocols, techniques and conceptsfrom traditional wireless networks, such as cellularnetwork, mobile ad-hoc network, wireless localarea network and Bluetooth are applicable and stillused in wireless sensor networks. In WSNs, packetloss occurs due to congestion. In WSN, congestiondetection and congestion control are the majorresearch areas. It is important to design protocolsfor controlling congestion. As wireless sensornetworks are evolving to applications where highload demands dominate and performance becomesa crucial factor, congestion remains a seriousproblem that has to be effectively and efficientlytackled. Congestion in WSNs is mitigated witherby reducing the data load or by increasing capacity(employing sleep nodes). The design of routingprotocols for WSNs must consider the power andresource limitation of network nodes, The timevarying quality of wireless channels and packetloss and delay. Protocols like AODV, DSR andDSDV have been proposed. Simulation resultsshow that AODV performs better in the case of throughput, average end-to-end delay and packetdelivery ratio, whereas DSR performs better in thecase of packet drops.
AODV, DSR, DSDV, Wireless SensorNetworks, Performance Evaluation.
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) aredefined as an autonomous, adhoc system consistingof collection of networked sensor nodes designedto intercommunicate via wireless radio. These aresmall with sensing, computations and wirelessnetworking capabilities and as such these networksrepresent the convergence of importanttechnologies. Sensor networks can containhundreds or thousands of sensing nodes. It isdesirable to make these nodes as cheap and energyefficient as possible and rely on their large numberto obtain high quality results. Network protocolsmust be designed to achieve fault tolerance in thepresence of individual node failure whileminimizing energy consumption. In addition, sincethe limited wireless channel bandwidth must beshared among all the sensors in the network,routing protocols for these networks should be ableto perform local collaboration to reduce bandwidthrequirements. Communication between the sensornodes and the base station is expensive, and thereare no “high energy” nodes through whichcommunication can proceed. The goal of this paperis to carry out a systematic performance of threedynamic routing protocols for WSN, Ad-hoc OnDemand Distance Vector Protocol (AODV),Dynamic Source Routing Protocol (DSR) andDestination Sequenced Distance Vector Protocol(DSDV) in wireless sensor networks using NS2.
Some sensor network applications onlyrequire the successful delivery of messagesbetween a source and destination. However, thereare applications that need even more assurance.These are the real-time requirements of themessage delivery, and in parallel, the maximizationof network lifetime
i) Non-Real Time Delivery
Theassurance of message delivery is indispensable forall routing protocols. It means that the protocolshould always find the route between thecommunicating nodes, if it really exists. Thiscorrectness property cab be very proven in a formalway, while the average case performance can beevaluated by measuring the message delivery ratio.
ii) Real Time Delivery:
Someapplications require that a message must bedelivered within a specified time to a location,otherwise the message becomes useless or itsinformation content is decreasing after the timebound. Therefore, the main objective of theseprotocols is to completely control the network delay.
International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies
Volume 01 – No.1, Issue: 01 JULY 2012
Page 2
International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies
iii) Network Lifetime:
The protocolobjective is crucial for the networks, where theapplication must run on sensor nodes as long aspossible. The protocols aiming this concern try tobalance energy consumption equally among nodesconsidering their residual energy levels. However,the metric used to determine the network lifetime isalso dependent. Most protocols assume that everynode is equally important and they use the timeuntil the first node dies as a metric, or the averageenergy consumption of the nodes as another metric.If nodes are not equally important, then the timeuntil the last or high priority nodes die as areasonable metric.
Simulation Area 500*500Model EnergyTransmitting Power 0.660Receiving Power 0.396Transmission Range 250m to 450mNumber of nodes 50Antenna Model Omni AntennaNetwork Interface Type Phy/ Wireless PhyMAC Type 802.11Routing Type AODV, DSR, DSDVInterface Queue Type Queue/DropTail
In AODV, each node maintains twoseparate counters:1. Sequence number, a monotonically increasingcounter used to maintain freshness informationabout the reverse route to the source.2. Broadcast-ID, which is incremented wheneverthe source issues a new route request (RREQ)message.Each node also maintains informationabout its reachable neighbors with bi-directionalconnectivity. Whenever a node (router) receives arequest to send a message, it checks its routingtable to see if a route exists. Each routing tableentry consists of the following fields:a) Destination addressb) Next Hop addressc) Destination Sequence numberd) Hop Count
DSR is based on source routing, whichmeans that the originator of nodes through whichthe packet must pass while travelling to thedestination. The DSR protocol consists of two basicmechanisms: Route Discovery and RouteMaintenance.a) Route DiscoveryRoute discovery is used only when asource node attempts to send a packet to adestination node and does already know a route toit. To initiate the Route Discovery, the source nodetransmits a “Route Request” with a unique ID as asingle local broad cast packet. When comeintermediate mode receives this route request, atfirst it determines whether it has seen the routerequest or not. If the node is already seen the routerequest earlier, it will discard the packet.Otherwise, it will check its Route Cache whetherthere is a route to the destination of the packet. If ithas the route to the target in its routing cache, itreturns a “route reply” to the initiator of the routediscovery, giving a copy of the accumulated routerecord from the route request. Otherwise, ittransmits the route request until the route request isreceived by the target.b) Route MaintenanceDSR protocol implements the routemaintenance mechanisms while communicating thepackets from source node to the destination node.In this scenario, DSR protocols uses the routemechanisms, to detect any other possible knownroute towards the destination to transmit data. If theroute maintenance fails to find an alternativeknown route to establish the communication then itwill invoke the route discovery to find the newroute to the destination.
International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies
Volume 01 – No.1, Issue: 01 JULY 2012
Page 3
International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies
It is table driven routing protocol based onBellman-Ford routing algorithm with certainimprovements. Every mobile station maintains arouting table that lists all available destinations, thenumber of hops to reach the destination and thesequence assigned by the destination node. Thesequence number is used to distinguish stale routesfrom new ones and thus avoid the formation of loops. The stations periodically transmit theirrouting tables to their immediate neighbors. Astation also transmits its routing table if asignificant change has occurred in its routing tablefrom the last update sent. So, the update is bothtime-driven and event driven.
a) Comparison of Delay
Simulations were run for varying numberof packets with constant packet size. The resultsshows that the delay of DSR is slightly less thanAODV and DSDV for increasing number of packets, the delay is more for DSDV for lowernumber of packets. According to the above result, itcan be said that AODV outperforms DSR for morenumber of sources or for more network traffic andDSR performs better even though increasingnumber of packet in terms of delay
. Fig.1. Average End-to-End Delay Vs Numberof Nodesb) Packet Drop
DSR packet drop very low whencompared to DSDV and AODV. Drop rate is moreat less number of sources in the case of DSDV.Drop rate is almost constant in AODV irrespectiveof varying load. Hence DSR outperforms DSDV &AODV.
Fig.2. Total Packet Drop Vs Number of Nodes

You're Reading a Free Preview

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