IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

COMPARISON OF DYMO, AODV, DSR AND DSDV MANET ROUTING PROTOCOLS OVER VARYING TRAFFIC
Anuj K. Gupta* Jatinder Kaur** Sandeep Kaur***

ABSTRACT
Routing in a MANET is challenging because of the dynamic topology and the lack of an existing fixed infrastructure. In such a scenario a mobile host can act as both a host and a router forwarding packets for other mobile nodes in the network. Routing protocols used in mobile ad hoc networks (MANET) must adapt to frequent or continual changes of topology, while simultaneously limiting the impact of tracking these changes on wireless resources. The DYMO protocol intended for the use by mobile nodes in wireless multihop ad hoc networks. It can adapt to the changing network topology and determine unicast routes between nodes within the network. This paper presents a comprehensive summarization and a comparative study of newly proposed Dynamic MANET On-demand (DYMO) protocol for MANET and simulation analysis of existing protocols AODV, DSR and DSDV. The comparison is done among these protocols under varying number of nodes over TCP traffic as well as CBR traffic which are randomly generated with CMU generators and having all nodes mobile. Comparative study shows that DYMO is a good choice than other three protocols i.e. AODV, DSR and DSDV if all nodes are mobile and wireless multihop over TCP & CBR traffic generated by CMUs generator.

Keywords - MANET, DYMO, DSDV, AODV, DSR, NS2.

*Associate Professor, Dept. Of Computer Science, RIMT-IET, Punjab **Research Scholars, Dept. Of Computer Science, RIMT-IET, Punjab *** Research Scholars, Dept. Of Computer Science, RIMT-IET, Punjab International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org

71

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

INTRODUCTION
Research has gained a significant advance in the development of routing protocols for wireless ad hoc networks [1], [2]. A manet consists of a number of mobile devices that come together to form a network as needed, without any support from any existing Internet infrastructure or any other kind of fixed stations. Formally, a manet can be defined as an autonomous system of nodes or MSs also serving as routers connected by wireless links, the union of which forms a communication network modeled in the form of an arbitrary communication graph. In such environment, Neighbor nodes communicate directly with each others while communication between non-neighbor nodes performed via the intermediate nodes which act as routers. As the network topology changes frequently because of node mobility and power limitations, efficient routing protocols are necessary to organize and maintain communication between the nodes. Routing protocols for ad hoc networks can be categorized as proactive and reactive routing protocols. In proactive routing protocols [4], routing information about every possible destination is stored at each node. Any change in network topology trigger propagating updates throughout the network in order to maintain a consistent network view (heavy bandwidth utilization). On the other hand, reactive routing protocols [3], [5] try to utilize network bandwidth by creating routes only when desired by the source node. Once a route has been established, it is maintained by some route maintenance mechanism as long as it is needed by the source node. When a source node needs to send data packets to some destination, it checks its route table to determine whether it has a valid route. If no route exists, it performs a route discovery procedure to find a path to the destination. Hence, route discovery becomes on-demand. These routing approaches are well known as Reactive routing. Examples of reactive (also called on-demand) ad hoc network routing protocols include ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV), temporally ordered routing algorithm (TORA), dynamic source routing (DSR)[6].

A. AODV Ad Hoc on-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) [6], [7], [8] routing protocol is a reactive protocol.

1) Route Discovery When a node wants to send a packet to some destination node and does not have a valid route in its routing table for that destination, it initiates a route discovery process. Source node broadcasts a route request (RREQ) packet to its neighbors, which then forwards the request to International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org 72

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

their neighbors and so on as shown in Fig.1. Each node has a unique sequence no. and a broadcast ID which is incremented each time the node initiates a RREQ. The broadcast ID, together with the nodes IP address, uniquely identifies every RREQ. The initiator node includes in the RREQ the following: - Its own sequence number. - The broadcast ID. - The most recent sequence number the initiator has for the destination.

When the RREQ is received by a node that is either the destination node or an intermediate node with a fresh enough route to the destination, it replies by unicasting the route reply (RREP) towards the source node. As the RREP is routed back along the reverse path, intermediate nodes along this path set up forward path entries to the destination in its route table and when the RREP reaches the source node, a route from source to the destination established. Figure 1 indicates the path of the RREP from the destination node to the source node.

2) Route Maintenance A route established between source and destination pair is maintained as long as needed by the source. When a link break in an active route is detected, the broken link is invalid and a RERR message is sent to other nodes. These nodes in turn propagate the RERR to their precursor nodes, and so on until the source node is reached. The affected source node may then choose to either stop sending data or reinitiate route discovery for that destination by sending out a new RREQ message.

B. DSR Dynamic source routing (DSR) is based on source routing where the source specifies the complete path to the destination in the packet header. All intermediary nodes along the path simply forwards the packet to the next node as specified in the packet header [9]. This means that intermediate nodes only need to keep track of their neighboring nodes to forward data packets. The source on the other hand, needs to know the complete hop sequence to the destination. This eliminates the need for maintaining latest routing information by the intermediate nodes as in DSDV. In DSR, all nodes in a network cache the latest routing information. When more than one route to the destination is found, the nodes cache all the International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org 73

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

route information so that in case of a route failure, the source node can look up their cache for other possible routes to the destination. If an alternative route is found, the source node uses that route; else the source node will initiate route discovery operations to determine possible routes to the destination. During route discovery operation, the source node floods the network with query packets. Only the destination or a node which already knows the route to destination can reply to it, hence avoiding the further propagation of query packets from it. If a broken link is detected by a node, it sends route error messages to the source node. The source node on receiving error messages will initiate route discovery operations. Unlike DSDV, there are no periodically triggered route updates.

Fig 1: Propagation of Route Request (RREQ) packet & Route Reply (RREP) packet.

C.

DYMO Routing Protocol

The Dynamic MANET On-demand DYMO routing protocol is a newly proposed protocol currently defined in an IETF Internet-Draft in its sixth revision and is still work in progress. DYMO is a successor of the AODV routing protocol [10]. It operates similarly to AODV. DYMO does not add extra features or extend the AODV protocol, but rather simplifies it, while retaining the basic mode of operation. As is the case with all reactive ad hoc routing protocols, DYMO consists of two protocol operations: route discovery and route maintenance. Routes are discovered on-demand when a node needs to send a packet to a destination currently not in its routing table. A route request message is flooded in the network using broadcast and if the packet reaches its destination, a reply message is sent back containing the discovered, accumulated path. Each entry in the routing table consists of the following fields: Destination Address, Sequence Number, Hop Count, Next Hop Address, Next Hop Interface, Is Gateway, Prefix, Valid Timeout, Route Delete Timeout.

1) Route Discovery International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org 74

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

When a node S wishes to communicate with a node T, it initiates a RREQ message. The RREQ message and the RM. The sequence number maintained by the node is incremented before it is added to the RREQ. We illustrate the route discovery process using Fig. 2(a) as an example. In the figure, node 2 wants to communicate with node 9 and thus, node 2 is S, the source, and node 9 is T, the target destination. In the RREQ message, the node 2 includes its own address and its sequence number, which is incremented before it is added to the RREQ. Finally, a hop count for the originator is added with the value 1. Then information about the target destination 9 is added. The most important part is the address of the target. If the originating node knows a sequence number and hop count for the target, these values are also included. The message is flooded using broadcast, in a controlled manner, throughout the network, i.e., a node only forwards an RREQ if it has not done so before. The sequence number is used to detect this. Each node forwarding an RREQ may append its own address, sequence number, prefix, and gateway information to the RREQ, similar to the originator node.

Fig 2(a): The DYMO route discovery process. Upon sending the RREQ, the originating node will await the reception of an RREP message from the target. If no RREP is received within RREQ WAIT TIME, the node may again try to discover a route by issuing another RREQ. RREQ WAIT TIME is a constant defined in the DYMO specification and the default value is 1000 milliseconds. In figure-2(a), the nodes 4 and 6 append information to the RREQ when they propagate the RREQ from node 2. When a node receives an RREQ, it processes the addresses and associated information found in the message. An RREP message is then created as a response to the RREQ, containing information about node 9, i.e., address, sequence number, prefix, and gateway information, and the RREP message is sent back along the reverse path using unicast. Since replies are sent on the reverse path, DYMO does not support asymmetric links. The packet processing done by nodes forwarding the RREP is identical to the processing that nodes forwarding an

International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org

75

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

RREQ perform, i.e., the information found in the RREP can be used to create forward routes to nodes that have added their address block to the RREP. The summary of the route discovery process depicted in figure-2(a) is as: Node 2 wants to communicate with node 9 and floods an RREQ message in the network. As can be seen in the figure, when node 2 begins route discovery, the RREQ initially contains the address of the originator and target destination. When node 4 receives the RREQ, it installs a route to node 2. After node 4 has forwarded the RREQ, it has added its own address to the RREQ, which means it now contains three addresses. Identical processing occurs at node 6 and it installs a route to node 2 with a hop count of 2 and node 4 as the next hop node. When node 9 receives the RREQ, it contains four addresses and has travelled three hops. Node 9 processes the RREQ and install routes using the accumulated information and as it is the target of the RREQ, it furthermore creates an RREP as a response. The RREP is sent back along the reverse route. Similar to the RREQ dissemination, every node forwarding the RREP adds its own address to the RREP and installs routes to node 9.

2) Route Maintenance Route maintenance is the process of responding to changes in topology that happens after a route has initially been created. To maintain paths, nodes continuously monitor the active links and update the Valid Timeout field of entries in its routing table when receiving and sending data packets. If a node receives a data packet for a destination it does not have a valid route for, it must respond with a Route Error (RERR) message. When creating the RERR message, the node makes a list containing the address and sequence number of the unreachable node. In addition, the node adds all entries in the routing table that is dependent on the unreachable destination as next hop entry. The purpose is to notify about additional routes that are no longer available [9]. The node sends the list in the RERR packet. The RERR message is broadcasted.

D. DSDV Destination-Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) [9] is a hop-by-hop distance vector protocol based on the classical Bellman-Ford mechanism. In DSDV, each node maintains a routing table which contains an entry for destination node in the network. The routing table contains entries such as the next hop address, metric or the number of hop counts, and the sequence number. Sequence numbers are assigned by destination node for identification of the routes. DSDV tags each route with a sequence number and considers a route X more favorable than International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org 76

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

Y if X has a greater sequence number, or if the two routes have equal sequence numbers but X has a lower metric. This was done so that the routing tables have the latest updated path. The sequence number for a route is updated every time a new route discovery is initiated. When a broken link is encountered, the sequence number is set to infinity and it is broadcasted to all the nodes so that the routing tables of the node containing the broken link can be updated to infinity and the link is discarded. The sequence number of every route is assigned by the destination and it is incremented for every route discovery operation. Thus in case of mobile ad-hoc networks, the sequence numbers enable DSDV to maintain up to date routing information at the nodes ensuring the consistency of routing data across all routing tables. Both periodic and triggered route updates are initiated by DSDV to maintain consistency of routing information. In case of periodic updates, fresh route discovery operations are initiated after the elapse of fixed interval of time. Triggered route updates are initiated whenever a node encounters a broken link which can be a result of sudden network topology change or communication link failure.

PERFORMANCE METRICS
Design and performance analysis of routing protocols used for mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is currently an active area of research. To judge the merit of a routing protocol, one needs metricsboth qualitative and quantitative--with which to measure its suitability and performance. Specifically, this paper evaluates the performance comparison of AODV, DSR, DYMO and DSDV routing protocols. The following performance metrics are used to compare the performance of these routing protocols in the simulation:

A. Packet Delivery Ratio: Ratio of number of packets generated by sources to that received by sinks at destination. B. End to End Delay: The end to end delay of a packet is defined as the time a packet takes to travel from the source to destination. C. Control Packet Ratio: Ratio of number of control packets sent per data packet sent.

SIMULATION AND RESULTS

77

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

protocols. We have installed Dymoum-0.3 version of DYMO protocol on NS-2.34.Two scenarios by varying no. of nodes as follows for simulation:-

1) Test Scenario 1 In the first scenario, we have chosen the TCP traffic with varying no. of nodes in 500X500 square meter area. Parameters of this scenario are summarized in table I.

2) Test Scenario 2 In the second scenario, the traffic as well as the scenario file is generated in the similar manner. Parameters of this scenario are summarized in table II. In this scenario, no. of nodes are varied by taking CBR traffic. The pause time is kept constant as shown in table 2.

TABLE I SIMULATION PARAMETERS

Parameters Number of nodes Maximum Speed Simulation time Pause time Environment size Traffic Type

Value 10,20,30,40,50

30 m/s 150 sec 50 ms 500x 500

TCP(Transmission Control Protocol) Randomly generated with CMU generators

Maximum Connections Mobility Mac Type

Random Mac/802_11

International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org

78

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

TABLE II SIMULATION PARAMETERS Parameters Number of nodes Maximum Speed Simulation time Pause time Environment size Traffic Type CBR (Constant Bit Rate) Randomly generated with CMU generators Maximum Connections Mobility Mac Type Random Mac/802_11 8 30 m/s 150 sec 50 ms 500x 500 Value 10,20,30,40,50

Packet Delivery Ratio v/s No. of Nodes for TCP Traffic: Simulation results of Figure-3(a) shows that varying no. of nodes: Packet delivery ratio for all four protocol with varying no. of nodes is stable. It can also be seen that DYMO has more packet delivery ratio than AODV. DSR and DSDV have slightly more packet delivery ratio than AODV and DYMO.

Average End To End Delay v/s no. of Nodes for TCP Traffic: For scenario-1 Fig. 3(b) shows that: DSDV has highest end-to-end delay. AODV, DSR and DYMO Routing protocol has similar end to end delay. DSR is having more end to end delay than AODV and DYMO.

Control Packet Ratio v/s no. of Nodes for TCP Traffic: International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org

79

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

For scenario of TCP traffic by varying no. of nodes, graph in Fig. 3(c) simulation results shows that: Control Packet Ratio of DSR is highest among all the four protocols. AODV, DYMO and DSDV protocols has similar control packet ratio.

Packet Delivery Ratio v/s No. of Nodes for CBR Traffic: For scenario-2 graph generated in Fig. 3(d) shows that: Packet Delivery ratio of three protocols DYMO, DSR, AODV is similar. Comparatively DSDV has less packet delivery ratio.

Average End To End Delay v/s no. of Nodes for CBR Traffic: Simulation results of the four protocols in case of end-to-end delay shown in Fig. 3(e) concludes that: Two protocols DYMO & DSDV shows best results. Whereas DSR & AODV have high end-to-end delay for small no. of nodes but for large no. of nodes they also shows less delay.

Control Packet Ratio v/s no. of Nodes for CBR Traffic: Graph in Fig. 3(f) shows that: Control Packet Ratio of DSR is highest among all the four protocols. AODV, DYMO and DSDV protocols has similar control packet ratio.

100

98

Packet Delivery Ratio

96

94

AODV DSDV DYMO DSR

92

90 0 10 20 30 No. of Nodes 40 50 60

Fig 3(a): Packet Delivery Ratio v/s No. of Nodes for TCP Traffic.

International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org

80

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

Avg. end to end delay

1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 10 20 30 No. of Nodes 40 50 60 AODV DSDV DYMO DSR

Fig 3(b): Average End-to-End Delay v/s No. of Nodes for TCP Traffic.

0.7

Control Packet Ratio

0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 10 20 30 No. of Nodes 40 50 60 AODV DSDV DYMO DSR

Fig 3(c): Control Packet Ratio v/s No. of Nodes for TCP Traffic.

CBR Traffic 120

Packet delivery ratio

100 80 60 40 20 0 0 20 40 No. of nodes 60

Fig 3(d): Packet Delivery Ratio v/s No. of Nodes for CBR Traffic.

International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org

81

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

End to End Delay

0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 20 40 No. of Nodes 60

Fig 3(e): Average End-to-End Delay v/s No. of Nodes for CBR Traffic.
CBR Traffic
Control Packet Ratio

0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 0 20 40 No. of Nodes 60

Fig 3(f): Control Packet Ratio v/s No. of Nodes for CBR Traffic.

CONCLUSION
This study was conducted to evaluate the performance of four MANET protocols i.e. DYMO, AODV, DSR and DSDV based on CMUs generated TCP & CBR traffic. These routing protocols were compared in terms of Packet delivery ratio, Average end-to-end delay, Control Packet Ratio when subjected to change in no. of nodes & traffic type. The Simulation results show that DYMO performs better in terms of all these than AODV. It has also less end to end delay than DSR and DSDV in both scenarios. But these two protocols have slightly more packet delivery ratio than DYMO.

REFERENCES
[1] C. E. Perkins and E. M. Royer. The ad hoc on-demand distance vector protocol, Ad Hoc Networking, Addison-Wesley, pp. 173-219, 2001. [2] D. B. Johnson, D. A. Maltz, and J. Broch, DSR: the dynamic source routing protocol for multi-hop wireless ad hoc networks, in Ad Hoc Networking, Addison-Wesley, 2001, pp. 139-172. [3] Johnson, D. B., Maltz, D. A., Hu, Y. C. and Jetcheva, J. G. 2002. The dynamic source routing protocol for mobile ad hoc networks (DSR). Draft-ietf-manet-dsr-07.txt. International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org 82

IJREAS

Volume 1, Issue 2 (October, 2011)

ISSN: 2294-3905

[4] Perkins, C. E and Bhagvat, P. 1994. Highly dynamic destination-sequenced distancevector routing (DSDV) for mobile computers. Conference on Communications architectures, protocols and applications (SIGCOMM '94), 24, 4 (October 1994), 234244. [5] Perkins, C. E., Royer, E. M. and Das, S. R. 1999. Ad Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing. IETF Internet Draft. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manetaodv03.txt. [6] Anuj K. Gupta, Dr. Harsh Sadawarti, Dr. Anil K. Verma, Performance analysis of AODV, DSR and TORA Routing Protocols, International Journal of Engineering & Technology (IJET), ISSN: 1793-8236, Article No. 125, Vol.2 No.2, April 2010, pp. 226-231 [7] Gautam Barua and Manish Agarwal,Caching of Routes in Ad hoc On-Demand Networks, International

Distance Vector (AODV) Routing for Mobile Ad hoc Conference on Computer Communications, November 2002 .

[8] M. Tamilarasi and T.G. Palanivelu, ADAPTIVE LINK TIMEOUT WITH ENERGY AWARE MECHANISM FOR ON-DEMAND ROUTING IN MANETS, UbiCC Journal - Volume 4 Number 4. [9] Narendran Sivakumar, Satish Kumar Jaiswal, Comparison of DYMO protocol with respect to various quantitative performance metrics, ircse 2009 [10] Ian D. Chakeres and Charles E. Perkins. Dynamic MANET on demand (DYMO) routing protocol. Internet-Draft Version 17, IETF, October 2006, (Work in Progress). http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-dymo-17 [11] NS-2, The ns Manual (formally known as NS Documentation) available at http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/doc.NAM [12] http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/nam/

International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Science http://www.euroasiapub.org

83