European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.39 No.4 (2010), pp.577-588 © EuroJournals Publishing, Inc.

2010 http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.htm

Optimum Density Based Model for Probabilistic Flooding Protocol in Mobile Ad Hoc Network
N. Karthikeyan Research Scholar, Department of Computer Application SNS College of Technology, Coimbatore-641035, Tamilnadu, India Tel: +91-422-2669118, Mobile: +91-98427 90907 E-mail: kaartheekeyan@rediffmail.com V. Palanisamy Principal, Info Institute of Engineering, Sathy Main Road, Coimbatore-641107 K. Duraiswamy Dean, K.S.Rangasamy College of Technology, Tiruchengode – 637215 Abstract Mobile Ad hoc NETworks (MANETs) are wireless networks which are characterized by dynamic topologies and no fixed infrastructure. Each node in a MANET is a computer that may be required to act as both a host and a router and, as such, may be required to forward packets between nodes which cannot directly communicate with one another. Network wide broadcasting, simply referred to as “broadcasting” is the process in which one node sends a packet to all other nodes in the MANET. Broadcasting used by MANET unicast or multicast routing protocols to disseminate control information for establishing the routes. For designing broadcast protocols for ad hoc networks, one of the primary goal is to reduce the overhead (redundancy, contention and collision) while reaching all the nodes in network. There are many approaches in network wide broadcasting namely flooding, probability based, area based and cluster based broadcasting methods. In this study, a novel density based flooding scheme has been proposed for more reliable network broadcast in MANET and the metrics namely broadcast overhead(MAC load), power consumption and collision are evaluated. The proposed method, density based flooding guarantees to deliver the packets from a source node to all the nodes of the network with minimum routing load, MAC load, less power consumption of a node and collision. The performance evaluation of the proposed algorithm is compared with a single source broadcasting techniques such as simple flooding algorithm and probability based flooding algorithm using NS2 simulation. The proposed method, density based flooding for probabilistic flooding limit the probability of collisions by limiting the number of rebroadcasts in the network and prove that the broadcast overhead, power consumption and collision of this method is very minimum compared with simple flooding and probabilistic flooding methods. Keywords: Mobile Ad-Hoc Network, Broadcast Methods, Simple Flooding, Probability Flooding, Density Based Probability Flooding

To reduce the number of redundant message relays. an optimal probability for one topology may be suboptimal for other topologies. Ad hoc wireless networks are dynamic in nature. and contention. Efficient broadcasting in a MANET focuses on selecting a small forward node set while ensuring broadcast coverage. Currently. Sasson et al. or as an efficient mechanism for reliable multicast in a fast moving MANET. as well as inefficient use of node resources. 1998) use broadcasting to establish routes. Perkins et al. Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) (Z. where N is the total number of mobile host. many such relays are redundant and waste the channel bandwidth. 2003. In MANETs with the promiscuous receiving node. Hedetniemi et al. 1999 categorized the Broadcasting techniques into the following five groups: simple flooding. They analyzed the additional coverage of each rebroadcast after receiving n copies of the same packet. 2. these protocols all rely on a simplistic form of broadcasting called Flooding. counter-based. The main problems with Flooding are that it typically causes unproductive and often harmful bandwidth congestion. and there is no existing method for estimating Pc. the maximum additional . 1999 introduced a counter-based approach. area-based. For example. 2001 analyzed the phase transition phenomena in wireless ad hoc networks. is the process in which one node sends a packet to all other nodes in the network. It shows for n=1. Routing protocols built on this approach may be unable to find the optimal route between a given source and destination node pair. while there is no much improvement on reachability for p > Pc. N. Johnson et al. in which each node (or all nodes in a localized area) retransmits each received unique packet exactly one time. 2003. 1998 Probabilistic methods such as gossiping have long been adopted to address the broadcast/multicast problem on wired networks Recent research work attempts to apply these methods to wireless networks. Spencer and Ten. Due to this dynamic nature. global information/infrastructure such as minimal spanning tree is no longer suitable to support broadcasting in ad hoc networks. the average total number of message relays will be p * N. Introduction Network wide broadcasting. In MANET.Karthikeyan et al. such that by using Pc as the rebroadcast probability. the traditional blind flooding incurs significant redundancy. 2009). Haas and M. 2002 applied random graphs J. when advising an error message to erase invalid routes from the routing table. many unicast routing protocols such as Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) (D. 1992 to mobile ad hoc networks. many probabilistic approaches use a predefined value for Pc. both probabilistic and deterministic methods are proposed. Aharony. N. However. They claim that there exists a threshold Pc < 1. 2001) and Location Aided Routing (LAR)(Y. Ko and N. 1987 and percolation theory D. Assuming the total number of mobile hosts is N. Hu et al. simply referred to as “broadcasting”. Stauffer and A. collision.Optimum Density Based Model for Probabilistic Flooding Protocol in Mobile Ad Hoc Network 578 1. the total number of message relays is N −1 if the network is not partitioned. 2003). Because every mobile host relays broadcasting messages just once. The advantage of this method is its simplicity. almost all nodes can receive a broadcast packet. In the simplest approach of flooding. which is known as the broadcast storm problem (Tseng et al. Ni et al. Pearlman. Since Pc is different in various MANET topologies. 2003 introduced some schemes by using directional antennas and discussed other methods to relieve broadcast storm problem are also proposed in the literature. however. Let the rebroadcast probability be p. and records them for later references. On the other hand. broadcasting is used in the route discovery process in several routing protocols. Ad Hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV) (C. and neighbor-knowledge-based. each mobile host rebroadcasts received broadcasting messages that are received for the first time. In most cases. not all routes are assessed by this approach. Krishnamachari et al. probabilistic.Karthikeyan et al. Vaidya. 2009). Broadcasting may be used to disseminate data to all other nodes in the network or may be used by MANET unicast or multicast routing protocols to disseminate control information. Previous Research Ni et al.

which means the more copies a node receives. the packet is dropped. In location-based approach. Another approach of scalable broadcast algorithm (SBA) embeds neighbor list in HELLO messages from which it constructs a 2-hop neighbor list at each host. Otherwise. the HELLO messages themselves consume channel bandwidth. resulting in the broadcast storm problem. Otherwise. Simple Flooding A source node broadcasts it s packet to all neighbors.579 N. In their follow-on work. They showed many rebroadcasts could be saved when choosing C equal to 3 or 4. However. they showed that if choosing C > 6. The value decreases dramatically as n increases. Each cluster has one cluster head and a number of gateways. Ni et al. The calculation of the additional coverage becomes complicated when several copies of the same packet are received. The cluster based broadcasting partitions the ad hoc network into a number of clusters or sub-sets of mobile nodes. The cluster head is a representative of the cluster whose rebroadcast can cover all hosts in that cluster. It rebroadcasts the packet if the value exceeds the threshold when the RAD expires. few rebroadcasts can be saved in sparser networks. In this paper we attempt to combine the counter-based approach with the probabilistic approach so that both low bandwidth consumption and low latency can be achieved simultaneously. Duraiswamy coverage is 61% of the original area and. a mobile node initiates a random assessment delay (RAD) and counts the number of received copies of the current packet. the average additional coverage is 41%. Figure. including distance-based and locationbased approaches. One such method. In distance-based approach. If the value is below a threshold. Redundant packets are simply dropped. . 3. and calculates the additional coverage for the rebroadcast. The predefined threshold C is the key parameter in this approach. 2009 discussed and implemented the cluster based broadcasting method in mobile ad hoc network. and the more likely is a rebroadcast redundant. the rebroadcast is dropped. only neighbors far away from the current node rebroadcast packets. each neighbor compares its neighbor list with the list recorded in the packets. the node will rebroadcast the packet only if the counter does not exceed a threshold value C. When the packets reach the neighbors of the current host. blind flooding produces high overhead in the network. This approach exhibits good performance. 2000 proposed two different neighbor-knowledge-based approaches. The neighbor list at the current host is added to every broadcast packet. flooding with self-pruning. the node starts a RAD. It is obvious that this approach is not suitable for delay-sensitive applications. each node receiving a packet compares its location with that of the previous-hop node. but it introduces packet delay at each hop. These approaches require mobile hosts to periodically exchange HELLO messages between neighbors. thus affecting the overall performance. It rebroadcasts the packets if not all of its own neighbors are included in the list recorded in the packets. However. constructs a 1-hop neighbor list at each host from the HELLO messages. When the RAD expires. Each of those neighbors in turn rebroadcast the packet first time it receives the packet.1 illustrates the performance of simple flooding. Palanisamy and K. Karthikeyan. Neighbor-knowledge-based approaches make rebroadcast decisions based on the precise neighborhood information. In their approach. The Broadcasting Algorithms under Evaluation 3. Only gateways can communicate with other clusters and have responsibilities to disseminate the broadcast message to other cluster heads. This behavior continues until all reachable network nodes have received. Karthikeyan et al. It recalculates the additional coverage whenever a new copy is received during the delay. Otherwise the packet is dropped.1. We use this result to set the threshold in our approach. higher is the chance of its neighbors having already received the same packet. Therefore. Peng et al. the number of rebroadcasts maybe near optimal. before transmitting a rebroadcast. V. 2000 and Lim et al. 1999 also discussed area-based algorithms.

Algorithm III In this work. in a sparse network. power consumption and collision is implemented in Algorithm I using NS2 Simulation.Algorithm II The probability based flooding algorithm (Karthikeyan et al. there is a great broadcast redundancy as a result of simple flooding. randomly. every node has the same probability to rebroadcast the packet. w and x then forward the packet and lastly y also broadcasts the packet. there is much less shared coverage. The algorithm for Simple Flooding starts with a source node broadcasting a packet to all neighbors.Density Based Flooding Algorithm . we propose a innovative algorithm for reducing broadcast overhead in flooding based message delivery. The proposed algorithm will try to avoid that situation by giving low priority at that point. if a node is having high density of neighbors. The steps are as follows: • The algorithm for simple flooding starts with a source node broadcasting a packet to all neighbors. w and x receive the packet. nodes u. Transmitting the broadcast packet only by nodes v and u is enough for the broadcast operation. 3. then there will be lot of chance for packet collision at that point. the rebroadcast probability should be set differently from one node to another according to their local topological characteristics. If a cluster of nodes loosely connected with few intermediate nodes. The proposed algorithm will try to avoid that situation by giving high priority at that point. On the other hand. The problem comes from the uniformity of the algorithm. do not forward the broadcast packet. The probabilistic scheme has poor reachability. 3. u. Each of those neighbors in turn may rebroadcast the packet exactly one time with respect to some random condition. this scheme is identical to Flooding.Algorithm I The simple flooding algorithm (Karthikeyan et al. 2009) with respect to MAC load. When the probability is 100%. • Each of those neighbors in turn rebroadcast the packet exactly one time and • This continues until all reachable network nodes have received the packet. then there will be a chance of failure of forwarding the message at that point. The Probabilistic scheme is similar to simple flooding. power consumption and collision is implemented in Algorithm-II using NS2 Simulation. Similarly.3.4. thus some nodes might not receive the broadcast packet unless the rebroadcast probability is set high enough. Probability Based Flooding Algorithm . And this continues until all reachable network nodes have received the packet. 3. 2009) with respect to MAC load.Optimum Density Based Model for Probabilistic Flooding Protocol in Mobile Ad Hoc Network Figure 1: Mobile Ad Hoc Network 580 When node v broadcasts a packet. each node will forward a message based on its neighbor density and the previous node’s neighbor density and the present. each node will decide to forward or drop the received message based on the neighbor densities. That is. these could save resources without degrading the delivery effectiveness. Consequently. Clearly. if some nodes. Simple Flooding Algorithm . regardless of its number of neighbors. In a dense network. except that nodes only rebroadcast with a predetermined probability. In this algorithm. The Proposed Algorithm . multiple nodes may share similar transmission coverage. . Therefore.2.

Duraiswamy Figure 2: MANET scenario Loosely connected point cluster of nodes Let us consider the above MANET scenario (Karthikeyan et al. • On receiving any type of message from any kind of node. On receiving a packet. V. } . Karthikeyan. Similarly. Palanisamy and K.)The node will add that packet ID I0 in its ‘MessageSeen List’ L1 to avoid forwarding it again. 2009) The nodes are considered as α node β node based on number of neighbors they are having under their broadcast coverage area. 2. the α node will wait up to time duration d before re-broadcasting it. all the message packets broadcasted or forwarded by β node will by marked as β type packet. } Else Forward the Packet with probability 1. This will give the neighboring β nodes or other node which may receive the same message to process it and forward it. • If a “β type” message packet is broadcasted from or received at a β node then it is treated with higher priority. Further this will minimize the α node broadcasts and reduce the unnecessary overhead and collisions. Algorithm-III: The Density Based Flooding Algorithm 1. a neighboring node will add that packet ID I0 in its ‘MessageSeen List” L2 and then update its Neighbor count η2 and marks its type using the condition (1) if I0 ∉ L2 then { if ti != β and tpi = α then if λ < ρ2 then Forward the Packet.581 N. • If a message marked as “β type” is received by a β node (from another β node) then it is rebroadcasted at 100% probability without delay. The node n1 which starts the broadcast resolves it neighbors and updates it Neighbor count η1 and marks it type as. β nodes ← η1 <= τ α nodes ← η1 > τ (1) and then mark the message with its type and then broadcast it to all its neighbors which are listening at a specific port (by assuming ρ1 = 1. • If the neighbor node count of a node is less than or equal to the threshold τ then the node is considered as β node If the neighbor node count of a node is greater than the threshold τ then the node is considered as α node • All the message packets broadcasted or forwarded by α node will by marked as α type packet.

1819 watts 0. as well as an 802.Optimum Density Based Model for Probabilistic Flooding Protocol in Mobile Ad Hoc Network 582 Else It is a previously seen message. . Most MANET routing protocols are available for NS-2.11 MAC layer implementation. Simulation Results and Analysis NS-2 (Marc Greis) is a discrete event network simulator that has begun in 1989 as a variant of the REAL network simulator. MAC load. probabilistic flooding and density based flooding methods with respect to routing load. Table 1: Simulation Parameters 50 1000m X 1000m 1Mbps Simple DropTail/PriQueue 50 OmniAntenna DumbAgent 42 -1 50m/sec Random 1000 Joules 0. the Monarch Group at CMU have extended NS-2 to support wireless networking such as MANET and wireless LANs as well. an object oriented version of TCL for configuration and simulation scripts. So drop it } (2) Where ti ← type of the current node tpi ← type of the previous node λ← probability (randomly chosen between 0 and 1) ρ 2 = 1 / η1 * τ (3) ρ2 is the probability in which it should re-broadcast the packet.030 watts Number of Nodes Topological area Bandwidth MAC Type Queue Type Queue Length Antenna Type 1 hop Routing Agent MESSAGE_PORT BROADCAST_ADDR Node Velocity Mobility Model Initial Node Energy Tx Power Rx Power Idle Power The following results shows the comparison of simple flooding. NS-2's code source is split between C++ for its core engine and OTcl. All the remaining nodes of the network will forward the packet based on the condition (2). power consumption and collision.049 watts 0. Initially intended for wired networks. 4. This will stop until all the nodes of the network receive at least one copy of the packet with same ID I0.

Karthikeyan. Palanisamy and K. Because in density based flooding. V. The density based flooding method consumes less power than simple flooding and probabilistic flooding. a node determines the broadcast based on neighbors density of the network i.3 shows the Comparison of three methods with respect to power consumption of mobile node in a MANET. high priority is given for beta type node and low priority is given for alpha type node. Duraiswamy Figure 3: Average consumed power Figure. .e. The average battery power of mobile node consumes very less in density based flooding comparing with other two methods.583 N. since minimum number of broadcast is taken place in the high density based networks (alpha node).4 shows the comparison of three methods with respect to time versus power consumption of mobile node in a MANET. Figure 4: Time Vs Power consumption Figure.

Optimum Density Based Model for Probabilistic Flooding Protocol in Mobile Ad Hoc Network Figure 5: Comparison of routing load 584 As shown in the Figure.6. we have used a one hop routing agent or protocol called Dumb Agent. . Figure 6: Comparison of MAC load In Figure. the proposed density based flooding has very low routing overhead than other two algorithms. Here all the nodes are not involved in broadcasting. the node will forward a message based on its neighbor density as well as the previous node’s neighbor density. the proposed density based flooding algorithm has very low MAC layer over head than other two methods.5. it will also consume network resources. Even though.

Duraiswamy Figure 7: Comparison of dropped packets due to collision As shown in the above graph (Figure. If a node is having high density of neighbors. Figure 8: Time Vs MAC load . the proposed density based flooding algorithm has very low failure rates at MAC layer transmissions.585 N. Palanisamy and K. Karthikeyan.7). then there will be lot of chance for packet collision at that point. The proposed algorithm will try to avoid that situation by giving low priority at that point. V.

power consumption and collision of the network compared with other two broadcasting methods namely simple and probability based flooding.Optimum Density Based Model for Probabilistic Flooding Protocol in Mobile Ad Hoc Network Figure 9: Time Vs Dropped MAC packets 586 As shown in the above graphs (Figure.8 and Figure. It concludes that simple flooding requires each node to rebroadcast all packets. each node determines rebroadcast probability or forward a message based on it’s neighbor density as well as the previous node’s neighbor density. the re broadcast of a message will be done based on the node density at that particular transmitting node. Summary and Concluding Remarks In this study. . MAC load. In several previous works. particularly in probability based flooding schemes.9) the density based flooding method decreases the MAC load and number of dropped packets with respect to time. The simple flooding method and probability based flooding method increases the broadcast overhead and as well as the number of dropped packets due to more collision. in this algorithm. That is. we have evaluated the performance of density based flooding and its metrics are compared with a single source broadcasting techniques such as simple flooding algorithm and probability flooding algorithm. Probability based methods use some basic understanding of the network topology to assign a probability to a node to rebroadcast. This algorithm guarantees to deliver the packets from a source node to all the nodes of the network and decreases the routing load. But. each node will decide to forward or drop the received message based on more than one condition.

txt C. 2000. Stauffer and A. “A randomized error recovery algorithm for reliable multicast”. Hu. and E. New York. 2003 “Adaptive Approaches to Relieving Broadcast Storms in a Wireless Multihop Mobile Ad Hoc Network. pp. in: Proceedings of the First ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad hoc Networking and Computing. EPFL Technical Report IC/2002/54. MA. 1987. Tseng. Z. Sheu. vol. Anchorage. IEEE Computer Society. Camp. 5. Sheu. Y.587 N. Y. “On the reduction of broadcast redundancy in mobile ad hoc networks”. 2001. Beldig-Royer and S. B. pp. in: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications.P. Karthikeyan. “A survey of gossiping and broadcasting in communication networks”. TX. Birman. IEEE Computer Society. Shih.L.. 61–68. 2002. no. Anchorage. H. 1988. and C. Pearlman. Tseng. “Phase transition phenomena in wireless ad-hoc networks”. Y. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences”. Chen. Kim. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL). 1992.-C. Y. Lu and Poster. Networks 18. X. 151–162. Hedetniemi. Boston. 52 (5) 545–557. August 1999. 2003. Hong. Y. Ni. “Adaptive approaches to relieving broadcast storms in a wireless multihop mobile ad hoc network”. Cavin. S. 194–205. Y. “Multicast tree construction and flooding in wireless ad hoc networks”. in: Proceedings of the 1999 Fifth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking. AMS and MAA D. in: Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM. and A. E. Hedetniemi. ICC 2003. 2001.B. Regional Conference Series. Vaidya. in: Proceedings of the ACM International Workshop on Modeling. C. “On mitigating the broadcast storm problem in MANET with directional antennas”. Ni. 545-557 S. References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] . 2001. Schiper. Tseng. Comput. Lim and C. “Ten Lectures on the Probabilistic Method. 2003. T. second ed. 1992. Chen and J. 1999. D. 319–349. IEEE Computer Society. Ni. “Comparison of broadcasting techniques for mobile ad hoc networks”. “The broadcast storm problem in a mobile ad hoc network”. 2002. Das. MOBIHOC. in: Proceedings of the 1999 Fifth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking. Maltz and Y. pp. in: Proceedings of the Symposium on Ad-Hoc Wireless Networks. Perkins.P. IEEE Computer Society. 9(4):427–438 Y. Ni. “The Performance of Query Control Schemes for the Zone Routing Protocol” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking. Xiao and K. IEEE Trans. pp. Alaska S.S. Krishnamachari. and A. Peng.-Y. Palanisamy and K. V. Boston. 129–130.Y. “The broadcast storm problem in a mobile ad hoc network”. Liestman. S. Hou. Williams and T. “Location-aided Routing (LAR) in Mobile Ad hoc Networks” Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MOBICOM). W. Alaska B. and J. pp. Duraiswamy D. Aharony. and R. Johnson. Tseng. Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems (MSWIM 2000). Bejar. Hu. S. 151–162. Shih. 52. pp. Y. 2003 “Ad hoc on Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing”. Wicker. in: Proceedings of the ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (MOBIHOC 2002). Haas and M.S. “Introduction to Percolation Theory”. 1998. Sasson. Computers. London. J.Y. S. San Antonio. IEEE Computer Society.P. GlobeCom2001.-Y. and E. “The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad hoc Networks” Internet Draft: draft-ietf-manet-dsr-09. 1999. 2000.C. Ko and N. Request for Comments 3561 Z. Taylor & Francis. 66-75. “Probabilistic broadcast for flooding in wireless mobile ad hoc networks”. Y. D. Spencer. 2003.C.” IEEE Trans. New York.M.

2. Palanisamy and K. 2009.Karthikeyan. II. 47-58 Marc Greis.Palanisamy. International Journal of Engineering.Optimum Density Based Model for Probabilistic Flooding Protocol in Mobile Ad Hoc Network [19] [20] [21] [22] 588 N. V. Vol. Dr.NS2 Tutorial presentation in the website. ISSN 0974-1518. “Reducing Broadcast Overhead Using Clustering Based Broadcast Mechanism in Mobile Ad Hoc Network”. 548-556 N. June.V.K. .Duraiswamy.Duraiswamy. and Dr. “Performance Comparison of Broadcasting methods in Mobile Ad Hoc Network” International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking.www.K. “A performance evaluation of proactive and reactive protocols using ns2 simulation”.edu/nsnam/ns/tutorial/ nsindex. No.2.isi. pp 309-326.Duraiswamy.Palanisamy. Journal of Computer Science 5(8): 548-556. No. Karthikeyan. 2009 ISSN 1549-3636 © Science Publications. pp. Karthikeyan. pp. 2009. Research & Industrial Applications (IJERIA). ASCENT Publications.html N.V. and Dr. 2009. Dr. 2. 2009. Vol.