International Journal of Control and Automation

Vol. 12, No. 3, (2019), pp. 58-64

Reviewing the Inherent Limitations of the Adaptive Route

Yielding Algorithm and its Relevance to deployment in IPv6
domains
Aniket Deshpande* and Dr Azad Kumar Shrivastava

Abstract
Feedback-based adaptive speedy transmission control protocol, end to end methods,
adaptive back-off method, feedback scheme, and TCP-DOOR are the basic approaches
that are used to enhance TCP performance over Ad Hoc Networks as de. Based on their
analysis, it has been suggested that the combination of Feedback Scheme and ABRA in
tandem with HS-TCP usually provides for the most optimal performance in Ad-Hoc
Networks. This works looks into the limitations and constraints in the Adaptive Route
Yielding Algorithm that is based on Feedback-based Adaptive Speedy TCP in real world
scenarios and the feasibility of adopting this algorithm for IPv6.

Keywords:TCP, IPv4, IPv6, Ad-Hoc Networks, Adaptive Route Yielding Algorithm

(ARYA), Feedback-based Adaptive Speedy Transmission Control Protocol (FAST-CP).

1. INTRODUCTION
The current paper based on the earlier published works of the author titled "Feedback-
based Adaptive Speedy Transmission (FAST) Control Protocol to Improve the
Performance of TCP over Ad-Hoc Networks" and “Improving the Performance of
MANETs using the Feedback Based Adaptive Speedy TCP applied with Adept Route
Yielding Algorithm (ARYA)”[1][2]. The paper analyzes the various approaches that were
proposed by various researchers regarding the improvement of TCP performance over Ad
Hoc Networks. The analysis focused on end to end methods, adaptive backoff method,
feedback scheme, and TCP-DOOR as protocols that widen the knowledge about how TCP
performance can be enhanced over Ad Hoc Network. Besides, the paper also highlights
how variant maximum speed TCP or high-speed TCP can relate to shifts in standard
transmission control protocol to enhance the overall performance of TCP over ad hoc
networks. Most significantly, the selection of either variant maximum speed TCP or high-
speed TCP is dependent on the condition of the system under consideration. More so,
networks may be faced with limitations in the form of throughputs, node and route
failures, delays, power constraints and mobility of the nodes that can significantly affect
the performance of TCP over Ad Hoc Networks [1]. Therefore, the following discussion
is focused on the limitation in the current work regarding approaches that were analyzed
to depict how the performance of TCP can be enhanced over Ad Hoc Networks.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Current work identifies route breakages, hidden terminals, and random access collision
as the main factors that hinder the performance of transmission control protocol over Ad
Hoc Networks. Moreover, TCP performance over Ad Hoc Networks is significantly
affected by several other factors, namely; power constraints and throughputs. From the
current work, the researchers assert that route breakages arise from node mobility and the
nature of Ad Hoc Networks. Therefore, the network links of the devices in the loops
varies from one device to another. Even though the movement of a node does not have
units of measurement, changes in links of devices in Ad Hoc Network greatly impact the
performance of TCP over such networks. Besides, hidden terminals within Ad Hoc
Networks significantly increase the degree of vulnerability of media that is shared across
devices that are within the Ad Hoc Network [3]. Also, random access collision occurs

ISSN: 2005-4297 IJCA

Copyright ⓒ 2019 SERSC
International Journal of Control and Automation
Vol. 12, No. 3, (2019)

because Ad Hoc Networks are associated with multimedia traffic that arises from the
assignment of radio resources to vast volumes of users. As discussed in the current work,
the above factors significantly impact the performance of TCP over Ad Hoc Networks.
However, the works did not take into considerations other factors such as power
constraints and throughputs that also significantly impact TCP performance over Ad Hoc
Networks. Power constraints arise from the fact that devices that are interconnected in Ad
Hoc Networks make use of rechargeable batteries that may blackout in case of power
scarcities. As such, some devices within the Ad Hoc Network may stay connected while
others may have no power to facilitate data transfer and communications due to power
constraints.
Moreover, an Ad Hoc Network is a set up several devices that are interconnected
without the central devices implying that all devices are interdependent. As such, a failure
in one of the devices dramatically affects the flow of instructions from the transmission
control protocol to other devices in the Ad Hoc Network [4]. Therefore, the overall
performance of TCP over Ad Hoc Networks is affected when power scarcities are
paramount. The above disconnect the devices from each other, mainly when batteries fall
short of power.
Also, the current work does not take into consideration the role that throughput plays in
hindering the performance of TCP over Ad Hoc Networks. In general, throughput refers
to the number of information units that can be processed by a system in a specified period.
Performance can be measured by response time and the rate at which a given workload
can be accomplished. In regards to Ad Hoc Networks, performance can be exhibited in
the form of changes in network conditions say from the fourth generation to the third
generation depending on the location of interconnected devices. In such a case, the rate at
which data instructions by TCP can be moved across the interlinked devices can be
significantly reduced, implying that communications over the network are to be slowing
down. Moreover, usage of TCP over Ad Hoc Network is aimed at ensuring that data
transfer and disclosure is executed in the shortest time possible to avoid resource wastage
[5].
Furthermore, current work took into account shifts in standard transmission control
protocol about variant maximum speed TCP or high-speed TCP as a way of enhancing the
overall performance of TCP over ad hoc networks. However, other feasible approaches
can be as well used to improve the performance of TCP over Ad Hoc Networks, namely;
signal power and link layer protocol. Signal power remedy is essential in ensuring that
reductions in the TCP performance over Ad Hoc Network arising from the mobility of the
nodes are effectively suppressed. The above role is achieved when the amount of packet
losses is reduced when the signal power is measured at physical layers of the Ad Hoc
Networks. As such, the strength of the signal can identify the use of Media Access
Control (MAC) layer to identify the primary factor that is leading to the failure of
effective communications between the nodes in a network. More so, congestion and
incidences of some nodes in the network may be out of reach are the main forces that
hinder communications between the nodes. As a result, TCP performance over Ad Hoc
Networks is significantly affected when the conditions mentioned above take place in the
Ad Hoc network systems. In this case, signal power can be used to determine whether
communication failures among the nodes in a network are due to congestion or
inaccessibility of some nodes [6].
Having identified and determined the cause of communication failure between the
nodes, signal power utilizes the MAC layer to address the concerns to facilitate the flow
of data instruction of TCP over Ad Hoc Network. In case, the MAC layer determines that
a neighboring device in an Ad Hoc Network is inaccessible, it incites the physical layer to
temporarily raise transmitting strength and attempts to maintain the active link of the
nearby devices in a network system. Most significantly, the MAC layer can as well push a
network layer to identify a newer route [7]. As such, a decrease in the power of the signal

59
 International Journal of Control and Automation
Vol. 12, No. 3, (2019)

is an indicator that links in a network system is likely to break down whereby a new route
may be searched before the order can break down. As a result, the flow of TCP
instructions over Ad Hoc Networks will be maintained as a breakdown in communication
between the nodes will be addressed by the power signal mechanism. Therefore, the
expected and desirable performance of TCP is enhanced when the signal power approach
is utilized because it helps to maintain communications between the nodes as it reduces
node mobility. Besides, MAC layer can help to address congestion concerns in the
network system by estimating the location of the neighboring device while attempting to
re-establish a connection with a device that is inaccessible for more extended periods [8].
Additionally, link layer protocol is an element that was not addressed in the current
work as far as enhancement of TCP performance over Ad Hoc Networks is concerned.
Moreover, the above protocol can be utilized to ensure that TCP becomes more adaptive
to characteristics of Ad Hoc Networks as it eliminates inefficiencies in wireless network
systems. Most significantly, the link-layer protocol helps to ensure that retransmission of
TCP instructions over a network system is executed in the shortest time possible to avoid
communication distortions between interconnected devices. Retransmission of TCP
instructions can take place when disruptions in a network system arise from shifts in
network say from the fourth generation to the third generation. Moreover, changes in the
network significantly slow down the rate at which data instructions are shared among
devices in an Ad Hoc system. As a MAC layer protocol, link layer protocol interacts with
transmission control protocol to facilitate faster retransmission which enhances end to end
performance of TCP over Ad Hoc Networks [9]. From this point of view, it can be
implied that link-layer protocol creates awareness to TCP about traits that define an Ad
Hoc Networks that improves its overall performance.

3. CHALLENGES IN ADOPTING ARYA & FAS-TCP TO IPv6

The current design of ARYA &FAST-Control Protocol is limited to IPv4 and not
designed for IPv6 as exhibited in four approaches that were used to depict how TCP
performance is enhanced over Ad Hoc Networks. These approaches include; high-speed
TCP, maximum speed TCP, feedback scheme approach protocol, and adaptive backoff
the scheme. Most significantly, comparisons that were made on the approaches mentioned
above revealed that they enhance TCP performance over Ad Hoc Network through the
utilization of bandwidth and throughput [2]. Therefore, the following discussion is on
how IPv4 has been applied to the approaches mentioned above in a way that does not
support IPv6.

3.1. The HS-TCP Protocol

High-speed transmission control protocol (HSTCP) approach utilizes the merits
associated with the availability of vast volumes of bandwidth to depict performance of
TCP. In this regard, the above method uses IPv4 protocol to offer support to the
congestion window by modifying how a window is released and locked in times of
congestion in a network. In case the magnitude of the window is small, HSTCP executes
its functions in a network just generally like a transmission control protocol. However, a
massive scope of the window stimulates HSTCP to enlarge the magnitude of the window
by choosing its volume basing on the reliable value of the functioning window [10]. The
above modifications help to eliminate lag time associated with standard transmission
control protocol. Besides, HSTCP also facilitates unlimited usage of multi-gigabit links
and high delay to establish connections of transmission control protocol to large-sized
windows that are in congestion. Such a factor has helped TCP to have control over
congestion limits in highly practical situations of windows. As such, HSTCP has utilized
a magnitude factor to achieve faster progress over ordinary TCP by significantly
increasing the size of windows through IPv4 rather than IPv6 [1]. As a result, usage of
IPv4 in HSTCP facilitates high speed in full utilization of Ad Hoc links that avoid

60
International Journal of Control and Automation
Vol. 12, No. 3, (2019)

misplacement of ordinary but vital merits of transmission of the transmission control

protocol.

3.2. The MX-TCP Protocol

Maximum speed transmission control protocol (MX-TCP) enables devices to realize
the enormous possible throughput for critical situations that are associated with
congestion. As such, IPv4 saturates Ad Hoc Network links through the elimination of
algorithms for congestion control within internal connections of the conventional
transmission control protocol. In due course, prospects of underutilization of Ad Hoc
Network are eliminated through MX-TCP that encompasses Ad Hoc Network
connections, particularly those associated with significant levels of packet losses [2]. As
such, have sufficient control over concerns regarding congestion in Ad Hoc Networks and
offers network traffic support at the highest possible rate of operation. Round Trip Time
(RTT) is another element that depicts the utilization of IPv4 in the current work. RTT is
gauged based on the acquisition of the acknowledgment packet by the source node after
sending transmission control protocol version 4 data. Also, the transmission control
protocol model is clarified for under or full utilization based on the class value. In cases
where TCP model is full utilization, the buffer magnitude rises above its average level
that facilitates the execution of the recovery process [11].
On the other hand, underutilization of the TCP model gives rise to traffic to boost
utilization. In case, there is a need for optimization, IPv4 makes it easy to validate the
frameset based on changing circumstances. Alternatively, the present frame setting can be
adjusted to the initial magnitude of the window with an anticipated probability. However,
adjustments cannot be made when the framesets are availed in a hint mode, implying that
the window magnitude is only adaptable to original window size [12].

3.3. Feedback Based Scheme Protocol

Feedback scheme method protocol is centered on feedback that is derived from failures
in handling route challenges in Ad Hoc Networks. The above approach utilizes IPv4 to
allow differentiation between losses that arise from route failures and congestion in Ad
Hoc Networks by using transmission control protocol transmitter. As such, a notification
on route failure is delivered to the source when routing agents make use of a given node
utilize IPv4 to identify disruptions in the route. IPv4 router is also used under the
feedback scheme method to recognize delays in propagation of data instructions
associated with each Ad Hoc Network that can be used to determine bandwidth available
in each flow. Most significantly, the suspension is computed between any two close nodes
by transmitting data instructions during times of light loads. Also, gauging throughput in
Ad Hoc Network links during busy schedules of information flow helps to compute the
bandwidth of the outgoing connection. Addition of delays in links both in forward and
backward paths reveals delays in round trip propagation [13].

3.4. Adaptive Back-off Response Approach Protocol

Bandwidth estimation in the application layer, priority streaming, and evaluation of
TCP bandwidth basing on the stack values are the main techniques that reveal the
application of IPv4 under adaptive back-off the scheme. In regards to the bandwidth
estimation in the application layer, gauging of the present bandwidth is based on the
period that is used to send a given volume of media. Most significantly, media data is
written in blocking socket in transmission control protocol, and it is used as a measure of
actual rate of bit delivery. Having obtained the value of available bandwidth, adaptation
processes utilize it to configure the media's transcoder. The whole process is dependent on
the blocking socket of the application programming interface.

61
 International Journal of Control and Automation
Vol. 12, No. 3, (2019)

Furthermore, priority streaming is focused on adapting prevailing network conditions to

facilitate video encoding processes by using the transmission control parameters. On the
other hand, estimation of TCP bandwidth basing on the stack values adopts RTT in TCP
connection and current window in congestion to estimate the current bandwidth [14].
Besides, estimation of packets latency that is transmitted with transmission control
protocol of Reno helps to reveal information regarding estimated distortions.

4. ADOPTING the ARYA &FAS-TCP to IPv6 DOMAIN

4.1. Potential benefits
Adaptation of IPv4 approaches into IPv6 domain is likely to enhance routing processes
within network systems. The above merit can be attributed to the fact that IPv6 minimizes
the magnitude of routing tables which makes the routing process more hierarchical and
efficient. As such, IPv6 would allow internet service providers to combine prefixes of
client networks into a unit prefix. Furthermore, adaptation of IPv4 approaches into IPv6
domain may enhance packet processing through the use of a simplified packet header. The
above merit is likely to be derived from the fact that IPv6 does not have IP-level
checksum that will address errors within network systems [15].

4.2. Possible Challenges

Adopting the above strategies to the IPv6 domain is likely to complicate measurements
for the volume of active flows. The above challenge will arise from the fact that there
exists a different kind of data traffic in old fashioned networks. These data traffic may
result from old fashioned backup tools, malware infections as well as software updates.
More so, old fashioned networks may require regular system updates that may reduce the
available main memory of the system [16]. Also, malware infections in the form of
viruses are so paramount in old fashioned networks that may significantly affect the well
functioning of the system as delays in data instructions flow may be so predominant. Also,
old fashioned networks are characterized by a considerable number of connections that
can function for a short period.
Moreover, several long-lived links turn out to be greedy in terms of bandwidth, while
others may need less bandwidth magnitude as far as the fair share is concerned. From this
point of view, it can be implied that adaptation to IPv6 domain cannot be successfully
made on old fashioned Ad Hoc Network systems as they are associated with several
malfunctions [17]. As a result, an adaptation of IPv4approaches like high-speed TCP,
maximum speed TCP, feedback scheme approach protocol and adaptive backoff scheme
into IPv6 domain cannot yield desirable data flow outcomes across the Ad Hoc networks.
Furthermore, there is likely to be difficulty in adaptive video streaming requirements
when the IPv4 approaches are adapted into IPv6 domain. The above challenge is
attributed to the fact that a bit rate of videos can only be adjusted basing on the server,
implying changing of protocols from IPv4 to IPv6 may not yield any desirable video
streaming outcomes. In other words, the quality of the videos is likely to be poor as the
encoding of the bitstream for video may not contain any bitstreams due to adaption of the
IPv4 approaches into IPv6. As a result, derivation of dropping packets from more
significant videos may significantly minimize the bandwidth that can be needed for video
streaming [18]. Also, the costs of computation will increase when IPv4 approaches are
adapted into IPv6. Computation costs may be incurred while computing round trip time
and packet losses that involve more complicated procedures and processes. Evidentially,
coding inefficiencies are likely to increase computation costs. The above is explained by
the fact that IPv4 and IPv6 have distinct addressing approaches. For example, IPv4 has
numeric addresses whereby its binary bits are differentiated by the use of a dot, whereas
IPv6 has alphanumeric addresses whereby a colon separates its binary digits. As a result,
it may be difficult and costly to compute round trip time and packet losses of a given Ad

62
International Journal of Control and Automation
Vol. 12, No. 3, (2019)

Hoc Network [15].

4.3. Overcoming the potential challenges

To address the problem of complex measurement of active flows, all interconnected
devices in the Ad Hoc Networks should be kept up to date. The intention is to ensure that
the vast volumes of main memory can be maintained to allow adaptations of IPv4
approaches into IPv6 domain. Therefore, devices that are deemed to be old fashioned in a
network system should be replaced by new and up to date devices. The above is to have
uniform data traffic within the network and to avoid adverse effects of malware infections.
Also, scalable video coding should be adapted to address difficulties associated with
adaptive video streaming requirements when IPv4 approaches are to be changed into the
IPv6 domain [19]. As a result, high video bitstream quality is likely to be realized since
scalable video coding standardizes all processes involved in encoding through the creation
of additional subset bitstreams.

4.4. Proposed method to adapt FAS-TCP to IPv6

Dual stack approach is the recommended technique that may be used to implement
IPv4 procedures in IPv6. The above procedure allows all devices within a network system
to interoperate whereby IPv6 devices can use IPv6 packets and IPv4 devices can use IPv4
packets. As such, all the devices within the network can communicate freely over both
IPv4 and IPv6 protocols. As such the level of flexibility in devices like routers as well as
connections within Ad Hoc Networks is likely to be enhanced through the adoption of
dual-stack approach while implementing IPv4 strategies in IPv6 [20].

5. CONCLUSION
This paper discusses the constraints and the current limitations in adopting the ARYA
and FAS-TCP protocols in general while implementing in real world scenarios.
Furthermore, the inherent design factors limiting the use of these algorithms for IPv4 only
and not for IPv6 are discussed in details. Finally, the possible approach of overcoming
these limitations by making use of IPv4-IPv6 Dual Stack approach is proposed as a
possible scope for future work.

REFERENCES
1. A. Deshpande and A. Kaushal, “Feedback-based adaptive speedy transmission
(FAST) control protocol to improve the performance of TCP over Ad-Hoc
networks,” in 2016 International Conference on Advances in Computing,
Communications and Informatics (ICACCI), 2016, pp. 2047–2054.
2. A. Deshpande and A. Kaushal, “Improving the Performance of MANETs using
the Feedback Based Adaptive Speedy TCP applied with Adept Route Yielding
Algorithm,” Int. J. Appl. Eng. Res., vol. 12, no. 24, pp. 15699–15708, 2017.
3. T. Salman and R. Jain, “A Survey of Protocols and Standards for the Internet of
Things,” Adv. Comput. Commun., vol. 1, no. 1.
4. J. I. Katuka, Y. S. Daniel, and B. S. Samuel, “TCP ISSUES IN MOBILE
ADHOC NETWORKS: Challenges and Solutions,” Int. J. Mod. Eng. Res., vol. 3,
no. 1, pp. 439–446, 2013.
5. N. Shukla, N. Gupta, N. Parveen, and M. Scholor, “Survey Of Cross Layer Based
TCP Congestion Control Techniques in MANET,” Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv.
Eng. Website www.ijetae.com ISO Certif. J., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 446–452, 2014.
6. S. A. Karuppusamy and K. Batri, “Improving the performance of TCP inAd hoc

63
 International Journal of Control and Automation
Vol. 12, No. 3, (2019)

networks based on signal strength and buffering system,” J. Appl. Sci. Res., vol. 8,
no. 5, pp. 2554–2563, 2012.
7. K. Davis, “Opportunities and Challenges for Internet Protocol Version 6
Adoption in Jamaica and the Caribbean,” 2012. [Online]. Available:
http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/profiles/blogs/opportunities-and-
challenges-for-internet-protocol-version-6. [Accessed: 18-Sep-2019].
8. A. M. Al-Jubari, M. Othman, B. Mohd Ali, and N. A. W. Abdul Hamid, “TCP
performance in multi-hop wireless ad hoc networks: challenges and solution,”
EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw., no. 1, p. 198, Dec. 2011.
9. Y. Douga and M. Bourenane, “Improve Performance of TCP over Mobile Ad-
Hoc Network using a cross-layer solution,” Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res., vol. 5, no. 7, pp.
1400–1408, 2014.
10. M. Bradley, “What Is an IP Address Conflict?,” 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://www.lifewire.com/what-is-ip-address-conflict-818381. [Accessed: 18-
Sep-2019].
11. F. Gont and T. Chown, “https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-opsec-ipv6-host-
scanning-02,” 2012.
12. J. V. Maisuria and R. M. Patel, “Overview of Techniques for Improving QoS of
TCP over Wireless Links,” in 2012 International Conference on Communication
Systems and Network Technologies, 2012, pp. 366–370.
13. P. Dalal, M. Sarkar, K. Dasgupta, and N. Kothari, “Adaptive TCP: A Sender Side
Mechanism with Dynamic Adjustment of Congestion Control Parameters for
Performance Improvement in WLAN,” Int. J. Commun. Netw. Syst. Sci., vol. 08,
no. 05, pp. 130–145, 2015.
14. G. S. Sreedhar and D. A. Dr., “MALMR: Medium Access Level Multicast
Routing for Congestion Avoidance in Multicast Mobile Ad Hoc Routing Protocol
MALMR Medium Access Level Multicast Routing for Congestion Avoidance in
Multicast Mobile Ad Hoc Routing Protocol,” Glob. J. Comput. Sci. Technol.
Network, Web Secur., vol. 12, no. 13, pp. 22–30, 2012.
15. S. Deering and R. Hinden, “Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification -
RFC 8200,” 2017.
16. G. (APNIC) Huston, “Transitional Myths,” Internet Protoc. J., vol. 14, no. 1,
2011.
17. Sridevi, “Transition from IPv4 to IPv6 and their Security Challenges,” Int. J. Sci.
Res., vol. 4, no. 12, pp. 1837–1841, 2013.
18. “Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) on IPv6 adoption and IPv4 exhaustion |
Internet Society.” [Online]. Available:
https://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/ipv6/faq/. [Accessed: 18-Sep-2019].
19. A. Singh, M. Mei Xiang, A. Konsgen, C. Goerg, and Y. Zaki, “Enhancing
fairness and congestion control in multipath TCP,” in 6th Joint IFIP Wireless and
Mobile Networking Conference (WMNC), 2013, pp. 1–8.
20. “IPv4 vs IPv6: What’s the Difference?” [Online]. Available:
https://www.guru99.com/difference-ipv4-vs-ipv6.html. [Accessed: 18-Sep-2019].

64