MANET SIMULATION

An overview

1
Dr. A. K. Aggarwal Supervisor Faisal Mahmood Graduate Student Nov. 10, 2009

TYPES OF NETWORK
1) Wired networks 2) Wireless networks 2.1) Infrastructure networks 2.2) Infrastructure less network Infrastructure less network is known as Ad hoc Networks Types of Ad hoc Networks 2.2.1) Static Ad hoc Network 2.2.2) Mobile ad hoc Network (MANET)
2

MANET is flexible and deployment is very easy MANET is suitable for emergency situations

Devices in range can communicate in a point-topoint fashion. 3 In addition to that. Need of an efficient routing protocol. . Topologies changes are very frequent.DIFFICULTIES IN MANET Difficult to handle the operations. these devices are generally mobile. Each node is independent. Networks composed of a set of communicating devices able to spontaneously interconnect without any pre-existing infrastructure.

DIFFICULTIES IN MANET TCP « TCP performances are very poor in MANET 1) Tahoe No congestion control mechanism Slow start Congestion Avoidance Fast Retransmit 2) Reno TCP-Reno added the algorithm of Fast Recovery 3) New Reno TCP Reno recovers only one lost packet during the recovery process 4 .

Destination Sequence Distance Vector (DSDV) routing protocol. Least Resistance Routing (LRR). Then some new protocols were proposed to modify and enhance the distance vector algorithm.) do not give a good result in mobile networks because of some limitation. Routing Internet Protocol (RIP). 5 . Distributed Bellman Ford. and the protocol by Lin and Liu.g. Protocols such as Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP).AD HOC NETWORK ROUTING PROTOCOL 1) Pure distance vector algorithms (e. etc..

Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) protocol. 6 . and Source Tree Adaptive Routing (STAR) protocol. Theses protocols include Global State Routing (GSR).AD HOC NETWORK ROUTING PROTOCOL 2) The protocols which are based on link state algorithms. Landmark Ad Hoc Routing (LANMAR) protocol. Fisheye State Routing (FSR) protocol. Adaptive Link-State Protocol (ALP).

Then route reply packet is sent to the source through new best route. The source floods a route request packet to construct a route when it needed. The destination use route selection algorithm and select the best route for which destination receives request. Several protocols of this type have been propose d. 7 . The source establishes routes on demand. Route to every destination of the networks on a regular basis is not maintained by on-demand routing protocols.AD HOC NETWORK ROUTING PROTOCOL 3) The third one is on-demand routing protocols which are planned only for ad hoc network. There is no requirements of periodic exchange of route tables and control traffic overhead is greatly reduce by on-demand routing protocols.

Relative Distance Micro-discovery Ad Hoc Routing (RDMAR) protocol. Signal Stability-Based Adaptive (SSA) routing. Dynamic Source Routing (DSR). Temporarily Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA). Lightweight Mobile Routing (LMR). and Routing On demand Acyclic Multipath (ROAM) algorithm are on demand routing protocol. 8 . RouteLifetime Assessment Based Routing (RABR). Multipath Dynamic Source Routing (MDSR).AD HOC NETWORK ROUTING PROTOCOL Ad-Hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing. Associatively-Based Routing (ABR).

9 . Grid Location Service (GLS). Flow Oriented Routing Protocol (FORP). Distance Routing Effect Algorithm for Mobility (DREAM). routing can require more cost to exchange location information. GPS routing protocols are Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR).AD HOC NETWORK ROUTING PROTOCOL 4) The fourth category is GPS (Global Positioning System) In the early stages protocols was using node location information while building routes have been proposed recently. Location-Aided Routing (LAR). Through information node position. and Zone-Based Hierarchical Link State (ZHLS).

1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) The accuracy of MANETs simulators The impact of granularity Mobility models Radio propagation models Simulation size Simulation acceleration techniques Parallelism and distribution Staged simulation 10 . their simulation is a very challenging issue.MANETS SIMULATION TECHNIQUES Because of the complex nature of the MANETs.

Name ns-2 DIANEmu Glomosim GTNets J-Sim Jane NAB OMNet++ 11 Granularity Finest Application-level Fine Fine Fine Application-level Medium Medium Fine Finer Medium Metropolitan mobility Support No Support No Support Native Native No Support Support ------------ OPNet QualNet SWANS .ELEMENTS OF DEPENDABILITY: GRANULARITY AND MOBILITY.

HOW SIMULATORS ARE PARALLELIZED HOW THEY CAN BE PROGRAMMED Name ns-2 DIANEmu Glomosim GTNets J-Sim Jane NAB OMNet++ 12 Parallelism No No SMP SMP RMI-based No No MPI/PVM Yes SMP No Interface C++/OTCL Java Parsec (C-based) C++ Java Java Native C++ C Parsec (C-based) Java OPNet QualNet SWANS .

1% 0.49% 0.48% 1.8% < 0.04% 2.45% < 0.MANET SIMULATORS CURRENTLY IN USE Name ns-2 DIANEmu Glomosim GTNets J-Sim Jane NAB OMNet++ 13 Popularity 88.1% 4% 0.3% Licence Open source Free Open source Open source Open source Free Open source Free for academic and educational use OPNet QualNet SWANS Commercial Commercial Open source .13% 0.61% 2.

MANETS SIMULATION STUDY COMMON SIMULATION PITFALLS 1) Simulation Setup Simulation Type Model Validation and Verification Variable Definition 2) Simulation Execution Setting the PRNG Seed Scenario Initialization Metric Collection Generating Sufficient Runs 3) Output Analysis Single Set of Data Initialization Bias Statistical Analysis Confidence Intervals 14 .

84 of 111 75.SIMULATOR AND ENVIRONMENT Totals 0 of 84 21 of 84 63 of 84 28 of 63 7 of 63 4 of 63 4 of 63 2 of 63 2 of 63 16 of 63 15 Percentage 0.3% 6. Addressed the type of simulation.7% Stated which simulator was used Used the NS-2 simulator.4% 87.6% 7.1% 46.2% 97. Used self-developed or custom simulators 41 of 47 82 of 84 6 of 84 39 of 84 0 of 84 Did not state version public simulator Did not state operating system used Addressed initialization bias.1% 6. .2% 25.0% 75. Used the GloMoSim simulator Used the QualNet simulator Used the OPNET simulator Used the CSIM simulator Used the MATLAB/Mathematica.3% 3. Did not state which simulator was used.0% 44.2% 3.4% 11. Addressed the PRNG used.4% 0% Description Used simulation in the research. Code was available to others.0% 25.

8% 9. 2000-2004.PLOTS/CHARTS/GRAPHS Totals 82 of 84 2 of 84 72 of 82 8 of 82 20 of 82 Percentage 97.7% 24.3% Description Used plots to illustrate the simulation results. Did not use plots to illustrate the simulation results Did not place confidence intervals on the plots Did not have legends on the plots. Did not have units on the data or labels Survey results for 111 published simulation papers in ACM·s MobiHoc conference. 16 .4% 87.6% 2.

Power range GloMoSim OPNET 17 NS-2 .MANETS SIMULATION COMPARISON 1) Success rate vs.

MANETS SIMULATION COMPARISON 2) Success rate vs. Mobility OPNET GolMoSim OPNET 18 NS-2 .

Mobility OPNET OPNET OPNET NS-2 GolMoSim 19 NS-2 GloMoSim .MANETS SIMULATION COMPARISON 3) Overhead vs.

VA 22102.REFERENCES [1] PAPER An Overview of MANETs Simulation Laboratoire d·Informatique Universit´e du Havre France [2] PAPER TRASMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL (TCP) PERFORMANCE EVALUATION IN MANET BLEKINGE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MARCH 2009 [3] PAPER A MANET SIMULATION TOOL TO STUDY ALGORITHMS FOR GENERATING PROPAGATION MAPS The MITRE Corporation McLean.A. 20 . U.S.

Thoppian. Prakash The University of Texas at Dallas Richardson. and Michael Colagrosso Department of Math. Golden. Venkatesan. Colorado. Michael Colagrosso MCS Department. A.REFERENCES [4] PAPER MANET Simulation Studies The Current State and New Simulation Tools Stuart Kurkowski. S. Tracy Camp. Thoppian. Vu. Vu. M. Mehdian. and Computer Sciences [5] PAPER Real-time simulations of Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANET) in Opnet Modeler H. Colorado School of Mines. R. S.Tracy Camp. M. USA . TX 75083 21 [6] PAPER MANET Simulation Studies: The Incredibles Stuart Kurkowski . A. Mehdian.T.

REFERENCES [7] PAPER On the Accuracy of MANET Simulators David Cavin Yoav Sasson & André Schiper 22 .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful