This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Lee, UCLA, USA- Uichin Lee, UCLA, USA - Mario Gerla, UCLA, USA ) By Danish Mahmood (First paragraph is copy of paper; rest is written/ compiled by myself) Due to the rapid increase of traffic on roads, driving has not stopped from being more challenging and dangerous. This thought provokes Leading car manufacturers to decide to jointly work with national government agencies to developed solutions aimed at helping drivers on roads by anticipating hazardous events or avoiding bad traffic areas. One of the outcomes has been a novel type wireless access called WAVE, Wireless Access for Vehicular Environment, dedicated to vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-toroadside communications. While the major objective has clearly been to improve the overall safety of vehicular traffic, promising traffic management solutions and on-board entertainment applications are also expected by the different bodies. When equipped with WAVE communication devices, cars and roadside units form a highly dynamic network called a Vehicular Ad Hoc Network (VANET), a special kind of Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks (MANETs). While safety applications mostly need local broadcast connectivity, it is expected that some emerging scenarios (Lee, 2009) developed for intelligent transportation systems (ITS) would benefit from uni cast communication over a multi-hop connectivity. Moreover, it is conceivable that applications that deliver contents and disseminate useful information can flourish with the support of multi-hop connectivity in VANET’s. NETWORK ARCHITECTURE According to Figure, the architecture of VANETs falls within three categories: pure cellular/WLAN, pure ad hoc, and hybrid. In pure cellular/WLAN architecture, the network uses cellular gateways and WLAN access points to connect to the Internet and facilitate vehicular applications. Vehicles communicate with the Internet by driving by either a cellular tower or a wireless access point.
it includes the procedure in establishing a route. Apart from these characteristics. thereby exchanging and sharing information like peers. nodes may only engage in communication with each other. nodes are mobile. driving assistance. Moreover. and action in maintaining the route or recovering from routing failure. s A routing protocol governs the way that two communication entities exchange information. Various applications in areas of urban monitoring. safety. 2006) have used infrastructure communicating units to access dynamic and rich information outside their network context and share this information in a peer-to-peer fashion through ad hoc. VANETs possess a few distinguishing characteristics. In this type of network. infrastructure less communication. vehicles can take advantage of the infrastructure in communicating with each other. . Similar to mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs).Since the infrastructure of cellular towers and wireless access points are not necessarily widely deployed due to costs or geographic limitations. nodes engage themselves as servers and/or clients. The infrastructure-less network architecture is in the pure ad hoc category where nodes perform vehicle-to-vehicle communication with each other. The hybrid architecture of cellular/WLAN and ad hoc approaches provides richer contents and greater flexibility in content sharing. presenting itself a particular challenging class of MANETs. nodes in VANETs self-organize and selfmanage information in a distributed fashion without a centralized authority or a server dictating the communication. Taxonomy of routing protocols in VANET. decision in forwarding. Information collected from sensors on a vehicle can become valuable in notifying other vehicles about traffic condition and helping the police solve crimes (Lee. thus making data transmission less reliable and suboptimal. When there are roadside communication units such as a cellular tower and an access point and vehicles are equipped with wireless networking devices. 2006). and entertainment (Lee.
as destination is maintained in background and is always available on look up. • Features of Proactive Routing: – No route discovery time delay. (Hence low latency for real time app. In such protocols. Routing info of next hop is maintained in background regardless of Communication Requests. In this way. Control packets are constantly flooded among nodes to maintain the paths or link states. they form a table on each node describing the paths to/from each node.Topology based Routing Protocols: Topology based routing protocols are as follows: • Proactive (table driven) – Fisheye state Routing (FSR) • Reactive (On Demand) – AdHoc on Demand Vector (AODV) • AODV+PGB (Preferred Group Broadcasting) – Temporary Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA) – Dynamic source routing (DSR) Proactive Routing Protocols: These protocols are Table driven routing protocols popular amongst dense nodes.) .
(High freq. Features: • • • • Broadcasting overhead is reduces Imprecision in routing occurs at far away nodes (that is of not that much problem) Efficient link state routing protocol Proficient in handling large networks . = far node) The routing table is accurate for nodes close by. but approximate for nodes far away. When a packet is sent to a node. the route will become more precise when the packet closes in on the destination. FISH EYE STATE ROUTING: Fisheye routing is based on the assumption that routes to nodes which are far away do not have to be precise. = nearby node. Low freq.– Maintenance of unused paths occupies significant part of bandwidth. especially in high mobile environments. It maintains a topology map at each node and propagates link state updates with only immediate neighbors. Link states are propagated at different frequencies depending upon the distance.
Destination transmits back the reply packet RREP only to sender using backward learning property establishing a forward path. Broadcast is used for route request commonly termed as RREQ. It maintains only those routes which are in use. This routing basically has a route discovery phase where packets are flooded into network in search of path. In such protocols. it opens a node only when it is necessary to communicate contrary to proactive protocols that start searching routes even with no need of data transmission. This procedure of recording previous node is called backward learning. some of most widely used are described. Nodes record the address of sending node in their routing table.Reactive Routing Protocols: These Routing protocols are also known as On Demand Routing protocols and their specialty is to deal with high mobility. AODV Routing Protocol It is built on DSDV algorithm and the improvement is on minimizing the number of required broadcasts by creating routes on an on-demand basis (not maintaining a complete list of routes). . There are numerous reactive routing protocols.
ensures loop free routing Nodes use the routing caches to reply to route queries. Result: “uncontrolled” replies and repetitive updates in hosts’ caches The Problem: a RREQ packet may reach destination via several paths.Features: Bandwidth efficient. resulting reply packet RREP to reach back via multiple paths causing over use of bandwidth AODV/PGB AODV/ Preferred group broadcast reduces broadcast overhead associated with AODV’s route discovery.e. There are two major phases in DSR protocol. Route discovery – uses route request and route reply packets (Hello Packets) . i. Only one node is allowed to broadcast at a time. In This way the source can establish a path to destination. node can determine whether it is in preferred group or not. responsive to changes in topology. The Source initiates a HELLO packet that contains the headers of every passing node. It is Based on the received signal strength of broadcast. And preferred group is thought to have more chances to transmit to destination Dynamic Source Routing It is based on the concept of source routing instead of relying on routing table at each intermediate device.
Route maintenance – uses route error packets and acknowledgments .
amount of over head in data packet will continue to increase. The common feature on all these Algorithms/ protocols is that performance degrades as network densities increase reflecting their scalability problem. DSR and TORA respectively in terms of performance. Temporally-Ordered Routing Algorithm TORA is based upon link reversal algorithm. As TORA gives a route to all the nodes in a network. other is readily available. DSR Vs AODV AODV data packets carry destination address where as DSR data packets carry full routing information. forwarding decision by a node is made based on the position of a packet’s destination and position of node’s one hop neighbors. If a node has a downward link to destination. Geographic (Position Based) Routing In this routing.Features: Can establish multiple routes. It establishes routes quickly so that they may be used before the topology changes. A node constructs DAG by broadcasting a query packet. Good in a network with low mobility This is a big advantage of having an alternate route without again broadcasting as in AODV. As the network diameter increases. especially in highly dynamic VANET’s. hence maintenance of these routed can be extremely heavy. it is shown that AODV has the best performance and lowest control overhead. The position of the destination is stored in header of packet by the source. it will further broadcast the packet otherwise drop it. DSR hence has more routing overheads than that of AODV. Simulation results for topology based protocols From Simulation Results done by different scientists. Features: It provides multiple routes so that if one path is not available. and can use any as alternative. Geographic routing don’t exchange link state info neither maintain established route . Same is vice versa as for reply packet. This routing assumes that each node knows its location and the sending node knows the receiving node’s location by GPS. AODV is than followed by FSR. The nodes use height metric and no three nodes may have the same height and information may flow from nodes with higher heights to nodes with lower heights. A directed acyclic graph (DAG) towards the destination is built based on the height of tree rooted at source.
. Routing strategy aimed at improving routing in disconnected VANETS by idea of Carry and forward strategy by using predictable vehicle mobility. During the travel is there is another vehicle that has shorter estimated arrival time. This process repeats until the packet reaches its destination. This is called carry and forward strategy. average vehicle velocity and road distances. hence they are more robust and promising to the highly dynamic environments. they forward the packet based on some metric. the packet will be forwarded to that vehicle/ node as well. Nodes are highly mobile hence they suffer frequent disconnectivity To over come this. And so there is no need of link state or route setup. Where as a path is simply a branched road from an intersection. There are three main types of position based routing protocols. Notable routing protocols in DTN are VADD (Vehicle assisted Data delivery) GeOpps (Geographical Opportunistic Routing) Vehicle-Assisted Data Delivery (VADD) This routing protocol is designed mainly for mobile vehicle to a fixed/static station and vice versa.like topology based routing protocols. It calculates the shortest distances from packet’s destination to nearest point or node and than it establishes an arrival time of a packet to destination. The expected packet delivery delay of a path can be modeled and expressed by some parameters such as road density. some of most commonly used are described as follows: Delay Tolerant Network (DTN) Non Overlaying protocols Hybrid Protocols Delay Tolerant Network (DTN) These VANET Routing Protocols are designed or treated as a form of Delay Tolerant Networks (DTN). packet delivery is augmented by allowing nodes to store the packets when there is no contact with other nodes to carry packets for some distance until meeting with other nodes. several protocols have been built. Geographical Opportunistic Routing (GeOpps) It takes the advantage of suggested routes of vehicle’s navigation system to select vehicles what are likely to move closer to final destination of a packet. The VADD assumes that vehicles are equipped with pre loaded digital maps providing street level mapping. Under these three main theories. Route is determined on the basis of geographical location of neighboring nodes as the packet is forwarded. Node/ vehicle make a decision at junction and select the next forwarding path with the smallest packet delivery delay. When these nodes meet other nodes. The minimum delay can be solved by a set of linear system equations.
Non-DTN are Based on Greedy Approach (send packets to the node which is closest to destination) Greedy approach fails if there is no neighbor closer than its own self to the destination. Hence it requires navigation information to be exposed to the network thus privacy (vehicles where about) can be an issue. And is Connection sensitive as well.The minimum VADD is indirectly obtained by selection next forwarding node whose path’s nearest point is closest to destination. a node’s neighbor may contain outdated information due to high mobility and Destination’s location within packet is never updated. Some of most widely used are: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR) As the name indicates. GPSR+ advanced Greedy Forwarding (GPSR+AGF) There are Two Problems in GPSR. it uses greedy Approach. It is well suited for highways and longer distances as there is minimum chance of local maximum problem at longer distances or in highways. It incorporates the speed and direction of a node in the beacon packet and the total travel time. speed plus direction. This routing protocol recovers with the problem of local maximum by using perimeter mode which than apply face routing to reach destination. i. as it can also be mobile. Non Delay tolerant Network Routing These protocols are Practical in highly dense VANETS.e. To solve these problems. Advanced Greedy Forwarding (AGF) is the solution. With the velocity vector. including time to process the packet up to current forwarding node. This scene is termed ad local maximum Numerous ways are designed to over come this problem. each node can filter out the outdated .
Thus overlay routing protocols must have to do something with nodes at junctions Greedy perimeter coordinate routing (GPCR) It is useful for urban environment and Well suited for highly dynamic environments such as inter vehicle communication on highways or cities. each forwarding node can better determine the deviation of destination. GPCR traverses the junctions by a restricted greedy forwarding procedure and adjusts the routing path by the repair strategy which is based on topology of streets. Otherwise it bypasses the junction node and forwards the packet to its furthest neighboring node. It removes the UN necessary stop at a junction while keeping the efficient planarity of topological maps. node determines if it is closer to destination than sender node. It uses two hop neighbors beaconing to predict which road segment its neighboring junction node will take. If prediction indicates that is neighboring junction will forward the packet onto a road with different direction. destination location. The figure below shows the advantanges of GprsJ+ over GPCR . it forwards to junction node. And with the help of total travel time. than it records the node from which it receives the request packet (as in backward learning) and rebroadcast it. The Results show three times better performance than simple GPSR protocol. The node at local maximum broadcast a request packet in which is the node’s position. On receiving such packet.nodes in its neighbor table. it is not hard to observe that decisions are made at junctions as these are the places where packets make turns onto a different road segment. Non DTN-Overlaying protocols An overlay routing has the characteristic that the routing protocol operates on a set of representative nodes overlaid on top of the existing network. Position Based Routing with Distance Vector Recovery (PBR-DV) It Uses AODV style recovery when packets fall into a local maximum. The main disadvantage of this routing protocol is additional flooding which is a must to discover the non greedy part of route. If not closer than destination. In the urban environment.
Receiver of the broadcast data would compare their distance to destination to the last hop’s distance to the destination. Data packets are broadcasted to all neighbor and neighbors decide if they should forward the packet. perimeter mode and DTN mode. GSR does not consider the connectivity between two junctions. The actual forwarder is selected by a distributed timer based contention process which allows the most suitable node to forward the packet and to suppress other potential forwarders. It moves from DTN mode to NonDTN mode by estimating the connectivity of network based on number of hops a packet has travelled so far. The bigger the distance. therefore route might not be connected rough.Dashed Arrows are GpsrJ+ and solid arrows are GPCR Geographic Source Routing It Relies on availability of map and computes a shortest path on overlaid graph. In that graph vertices are junctions nodes and edges are streets that connect those vertices. The sequence of junctions establishes a route to the destination. neighbor’s delivery quality and neighbor’s direction with . Hybrid Protocol Geo DTN+Nav As the name indicates. it is Hybrid of non DTN and DTN approaches. It includes greedy mode. Contention based Forwarding This routing technique does not require proactive transmission of beacon messages. the larger is the progress and shorter is the timer.
VANET’s Routing is growing and research is getting mature day by day. Virtual navigation interface gives the delivery quality of neighbors which abstracts information from underlying hardware such as navigation systems etc. In Short. Yet. DTN etc. s all designed for a specific environment. there is no bench mark or agreed upon standard to validate their performances Though till now GPSR is widely accepted but yet no comparison with other sub areas as overlay.respect to destination. Comparison of Routing Protocols Conclusion There is a plethora of routing protocols of VANET. .
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.