SHIVAJIRAO S. JONDHLE POLYTHECHNIC, ASANGAON.

Subject Name and Code: WMN (22622) Academic Year: 2024-2025

Course Name: IF-6I (Information Technology) Semester: SIXTH(6I)

A STUDY ON
MANET
MICRO PROJECT REPORT

SUBMITTED BY
SR. Roll No. Full name of Students Enrollment Seat No.
No. (Sem-4) No. (Sem-5)
2 34 Mayuresh Pawar 2209350323

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

Pro. Madhuri Gavat

IN 3 YEARS, DIPLOMA PROGRAMME IN ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY

MAHARASHTRA STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION
ISO 9001:2008(ISO/IEC-27001:2013)

1
 Institution

Maharashtra State
Board of Technical Education
Certificate

This is to certify that Mayuresh Pawar Roll No.34 of Sixth Semester of Diploma in Information
Technology at institute Shivajirao S Jondhle Polytechnic Asangaon (Code: -0935) has completed
the micro-project satisfactorily in subject WMN (22622) for the academic year 2024 to 2025 as
prescribed in the curriculum.

Place: Asangoan Enrollment No: - 2209350323

Date: /11/2024 Exam. Seat No: -

Madhuri Gawat Shweta Chanchlani Sneha

Jondhle
Subject Teacher Head of the Department Principal

Seal of
Institution

2
 INDEX
Sr.no Title
1 INTRODUCTION

2 WIRED V/S WIRELESS NETWORKS

3 FEATURES OF MANET

4 USES OF MOBILE AD HOC

NETWORKS

5 PROBLEMS IN MANET

6 ROUTING IN MANET

7 PRO-ACTIVE PROTOCOLS

8 REACTIVE PROTOCOLS

9 HYBRID PROTOCOLS

10 CONCLUSION

11 REFERENCES

3
 1.INTRODUCTION
A Network is defined as the group of people or systems or organizations who tend to share their
information collectively for their business purpose. In Computer terminology the definition for
networks is similar as a group of computers logically connected for the sharing of information or
services (like print services, multi-tasking, etc.). Initially Computer networks were started as a
necessity for sharing files and printers but later this has moved from that particular job of file and
printer sharing to application sharing and business logic sharing.These networks may be fixed
(cabled, permanent) or temporary.
A network can be characterized as wired or wireless. Wireless can be distinguished from wired as
no physical connectivity between nodes are needed.
A mobile ad-hoc network (MANET) is an autonomous system of mobile nodes, a kind of a
wireless network where the mobile nodes dynamically form a network to exchange information
without utilizing any pre-existing fixed network infrastructure.For a MANET to be constructed,
all needed is a node willing to send data to a node willing to accept data. Each mobile node of an
ad-hoc network operates as a host as well as a router, forwarding packets for other mobile nodes
in the network that may not be within the transmission range of the source mobile node. Each
node participates in an ad-hoc routing protocol that allows it to discover multi-hop paths through
the network to any other node.

4
 fig 1.1
MANET is the infrastructureless approach to WLANs and WLLs etc. It is a self-configuring
network of nodes and routers connected by wireless links, which in synchronization form a
dynamic topology. These networks operate in standalone manner where routers and nodes are
free to move and organize themselves randomly, causing a rapidly changing topology. This is
why, these networks are very flexible and suitable for several types of applications, as they allow
the establishment of temporary communication without any pre installed infrastructure.
The transmission range of a mobile node in the network is limited to a circular region around the
node, whose radius depends on the transmitted power, receiver sensitivity and propagation loss
model. If the destination node is not in the transmission range of the source node, then the mobile
ad hoc network works like a multi hop network with one or more node acting as routing node.
Due to the limited wireless transmission range of each node, data packets then may be forwarded
along multi-hops. The three types of traffic in MANETS are 1) Peer –to Peer: Communication
between two nodes with one hop
2) Remote to Remote: Communication beyond one hop but existence of stable route
3) Dynamic Traffic: Nodes are dynamic and routes are reconstructed frequently.

fig 1.2

5
2.WIRED V/S WIRELESS NETWORKS

The different types of networks available today are Wired and Wireless networks. Wired
are differentiated from wireless as being wired from point to point.

2.1 WIRED NETWORKS

These networks are generally connected with the help of wires and cables. Generally the
cables being used in this type of networks are CAT5 or CAT6 cables. The connection is
usually established with the help of physical devices like Switches and Hubs in between
to increase the strength of the connection. These networks are usually more efficient,
less expensive and much faster than wireless networks. Once the connection is set there
is a very little chance of getting disconnected.

2.1.1 ADVANTAGES

• A wired network offer connection speeds of 100Mbps to 1000Mbps

• Physical, fixed wired connections are not prone to interference and fluctuations in
• Available bandwidth, which can affect some wireless networking connections.

2.1.2 DISADVANTAGES OVER WIRELESS NETWORKS

• Expensive to maintain the network due to many cables between computer systems and
even if a failure in the cables occur then it will be very hard to replace that particular
cable as it involved more and more costs.
• When using a laptop which is required to be connected to the network, a wired network
will limit the logical reason of purchasing a laptop in the first place.

6
2.2 WIRELESS NETWORKS

Wireless networks use some sort of radio frequencies in air to transmit and receive data instead
of using some physical cables. The most admiring fact in these networks is that it eliminate the
need for laying out expensive cables and maintenance costs.

2.2.1 ADVANTAGES OF WIRELESS NETWORKS

• Mobile users are provided with access to real-time information even when they are away
from their home or office.
• Setting up a wireless system is easy and fast and it eliminates the need for pulling out the
cables through walls and ceilings.
• Network can be extended to places which can not be wired.

2.2.2 DISADVANTAGES OF WIRELESS NETWORKS

• Interference due to weather, other radio frequency devices , or obstructions like walls.
• The total Throughput is affected when multiple connections exists.

2.2.3 PROBLEMS IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION

Some of the problems related to wireless communication are multipath propagation, path loss,
interference, and limited frequency spectrum. Multipath Propagation is, when a signal travels
from its source to destination, in between there are obstacles which make the signal propagate in
paths beyond the direct line of sight due to reflections, refraction and diffraction and scattering.
Path loss is the attenuation of the transmitted signal strength as it propagates away from the
sender. Path loss can be determined as the ratio between the powers of the transmitted signal to
the receiver signal. This is mainly dependent on a number of factors such as radio frequency and
the nature of the terrain. It is sometimes important to estimate the path loss in wireless
communication networks.

7
 3.FEATURES OF MANET

3.1 Dynamic Topologies

3.2 Bandwidth-constrained, variable capacity links
3.3 Power-constrained operations
3.4 Limited physical security

3.1 DYNAMIC TOPOLOGIES

Nodes are free to move arbitrarily; thus network topology—which is typically multihop—may
change randomly and rapidly at unpredictable times. Adjustment of transmission and reception
parameters such as power may also impact the topology.

3.2 BANDWIDTH-CONSTRAINED, VARIABLE CAPACITY LINKS

Wireless links will continue to have significantly lower capacity than their hard-wired
counterparts. One effect of this relatively low to moderate link capacities is that congestion is
typically the norm rather than the exception; i.e. aggregate application demand is likely to exceed
network capacity frequently.

3.3 POWER-CONSTRAINED OPERATIONS

Some or all the nodes in a MANET rely on batteries for their energy. Thus, for these nodes, the
most important design criteria may be that of power conservation.

3.4 LIMITED PHYSICAL SECURITY

Mobile wireless networks are generally more prone to physical security threats than fixed,
hardwired networks. Existing link security techniques are often applied within wireless networks
to reduce security threats.

8
 4.USES OF MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKS

4.1 EXTENDING COVERAGE

Ad Hoc networks can be used for extending the coverage area of an access point. By this way, a
single access point where a few users are connected can provide a network access to out-of-range
machines. Figure 1-2 describes this implementation of Ad Hoc networks:

fig 4.1

This example shows how the Ad Hoc model can extend an infrastructure wireless network.
Without Ad Hoc, only station A could access the internet using the access point. But, if each
station is able to forward the packets to the Access Point, then, B can access the internet, as well
as C and the final user.

9
4.2 COMMUNICATING WHERE NO INFRASTRUCTURE EXISTS

Ad Hoc networks can also be used in an environment where no infrastructure exists. A good
example is when an army is deploying into a destroyed place or an empty space. In this case,
each station can be configured for forwarding communications to the appropriate destination.
This example also shows the mobility benefit of the Ad Hoc model. This case also applies in the
ocean, in the air or even in space (for satellites).

4.3 COMMUNITY NETWORKS

A community network is a network where everybody shares its connections with other people.
The most famous example of community network is FON. FON is a Spanish company,
sponsored by Skype and Google, who want to establish a world wide community network. FON
provide to every registered user with an internet connection and a wifi access point at low cost.
The user must connect this access point to his Internet connection and share his connection with
other FON users.

10
 5. PROBLEMS IN MANET

5.1 SECURITY

Because the signal is diffused in the air, everybody is able to receive it. This is a major problem
for security. If people have the correct equipment for a specific signal, they are able to use it (i.e.
radio, TV…). Using a wireless communication is equivalent to shouting information from the top
of a roof. One of the most effective ways for securing a wireless signal is to encrypt it
(encrypting data or even the signal).

5.2 BANDWIDTH

Wireless networks suffer from low and unreliable bandwidth. This problem is due to the radio
media. Many parameters can affect a radio liaison: interferences, obstacles, mobility…etc As the
number of frequencies is limited, and as the bandwidth is proportional to the frequency, the radio
frequency space is cut in channels. For Wifi, there are two main frequency spaces, 2.4 GHz
(802.11b/g) and 5 GHz (802.11a). 2.4 GHz is also the operating frequency of microwaves, so,
using both of these in a close space affects the link quality of the wifi connection, and
sometimes, the link is lost. Obstacles also affect radio waves. It first reduces the power of the
signal, and then, it can also reflect the signal, and destroy it in the same way. In a mobile
environment, radio waves are subject to the Doppler Effect, causing a frequency distortion. In
addition, bandwidth on a radio link is shared between every device using it. Access methods
must be designed for avoiding collisions and improve communication, but, these access methods
also reduce the availability of the bandwidth. It has been proved that on a wifi link, in practice,
only 50% of the theoretical bandwidth is available, and tests showed that latency is more
important than on wired networks.

11
5.3 ENERGY

A known problem of radio links is the amount of energy they require, not only for the amount of
calculation needed for modulation, but mainly for the power needed for the antenna. When a
device wants to communicate with a wire, it concentrates all the energy on this wire. For wireless
communication, antennas are usually omni-directional, as they need much more energy.

5.4 ASYMMETRIC CONNECTIONS

An asymmetric connection is a common problem in wireless telecommunications. There are

many causes for that. The radio propagation model is the main cause. In theory, connections are
symmetric, signal power reduces proportionally to the distance between the emitter and the
receptor. In practice, the antenna design and the environment can cause the device to be able to
receive from another device, but will not be able to send to this device. This problem can also
appear depending on the chipset design. Some chipsets can restore a low-power signal but will
not be able to provide enough power to the antenna for responding to this signal.

5.5 INTERFERENCE

This is the major problem with mobile ad-hoc networks as links come and go depending on the
transmission characteristics, one transmission might interfere with another one and node might
overhear transmissions of other nodes and can corrupt the total transmission.

5.6 DYNAMIC TOPOLOGY

This is also the major problem with ad-hoc routing since the topology is not constant. The mobile
node might move or medium characteristics might change. In ad-hoc networks, routing tables
must somehow reflect these changes in topology and routing algorithms have to be adapted. For
example in a fixed network routing table updating takes place for every 30sec. This updating
frequency might be very low for ad-hoc networks.

12
5.7 ROUTING OVERHEAD

In wireless ad-hoc networks, nodes often change their location within network. So, some stale
routes are generated in the routing table which leads to unnecessary routing overhead.

13
 6. ROUTING IN MANET

6.1 DEFINITION

Routing is the mechanism used in communications to find a path between two entities. This is
represented in the OSI model as the third layer (called Network). The role of routing a network is
similar to the role of a road map for a post office, in both cases; we need to locate the destination,
and more importantly, the best way to reach it. It especially has an important role, as the Internet
was first designed for military communications. Americans wanted a communication
infrastructure able to handle the fact that some part of a network core may be down. In this case,
a mechanism should redirect data to its destination. As an OSI layer, this mechanism receives
data “ready to send” from the upper layer, then calculates the best path for the destination, and
forwards it to layer 2. In the real world, this layer has a very limited role for computers, but, it is
the main role for routers, in a network core. For other kinds of network, there are similar
mechanisms. For mobile phones, a database centralises the base station where each mobile is
connected. This database is used for every call to a mobile phone, providing the end destination
to the network core.

6.2 ROUTING IN A WIRED ENVIRONMENT

Routing has been designed firstly for a routing environment, where there is a network core and
network clients. In this case, routers use routing protocol to logically locate themselves, and draw
a network topology. With this mechanism, routers are able to define a routing table. This routing
table contains the information for helping the router to make a decision on where to forward
received packets.
Routing protocols helps to build routing tables, as these protocols exchange data between routers,
containing information about the network. Each protocol acts a different way. The forwarding
decision can be taken only depending on the number of hops, the “shortest path”, or including
more data for judging the best route, such as latency, congestion…

14
RIP (Routing Information Protocol) One of the most basic and known
routing protocols. Takes its decisions
on the status of links (up or down)
and the shortest path.

IGRP (Interior Gateway Routing An evolution of RIP using bandwidth,

Protocol) load, delay, MTU, and reliability for
building routing tables.
EIGRP (Enhanced Interior Gateway An Evolution of IGRP, introducing
Routing Protocol) router status in addition of link status.

OSPF (Open Shortest Path First) A link stated and shortest path
protocol.
BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) Standard protocol for the Internet
core.
table 6.1
Routing protocols are often qualified depending on the size of information they have to exchange
in order to build a correct table. A routing protocol should not use by itself the entire bandwidth
available on a link. They are also qualified on how often they have to exchange data, and how
complex they are (just link state or using more information on the link).

6.3 ROUTING PROBLEMS IN AD HOC NETWORKS

In infrastructure mode, the routing part is handled by the access point and the distribution
system; every wireless device just has to forward all its traffic to this access point. But, in Ah
Hoc networks, there is no “referee” for connections, and, every device acts as a router. This
scenario is totally new. Adding to this, devices are not fixed, they can be mobile, contrary to the
Internet where every router has “fixed” neighbours (excepts if a link goes down).
For solving this problem, the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force), powerful standardisation
authority in the communication world, created the MANET work group. This group has a
mission to create and discuss routing protocols for Ad Hoc networks. This task is very important,
due to the complexity of routing on Ad Hoc networks. The work started in January 1999, with
the publication of the informational RFC 2501. This document presents the 4 main constraints
for routing on Ad Hoc networks, such as dynamics topology, bandwidth constraints, energy
15
constraints and low physical security. The group has then to comply with these constraints in
order to build an efficient algorithm of route calculation.

fig 6.1

6.4 AD-HOC ROUTING PROTOCOLS

There were different approaches, and then, different solutions. The three mains approaches are
proactive protocols, reactive protocols and hybrids.

6.4.1 PROACTIVE

Proactive protocols are close to wired routing protocols in the manner that the routing table is
built before the data has to be sent. That means these protocols are constantly making requests to
their neighbours (if any) in order to draw a network topology, and then, build the routing table.
The disadvantage of this principle is to not be reactive to topology changes, as the tables are
preestablished. At the time the data has to be sent, it is not certain that the gateway designed by
the routing table will still be there to forward the data.

16
6.4.2 REACTIVE

Reactive protocols are more specific to Ad Hoc networks. Contrary to the proactive algorithm,
they ask their neighbours for a route when they have data to send. If the neighbours do not have
any known route, they broadcast the request, and so on. Once the final destination has been
reached by these broadcasts, an answer is built and forwarded back to the source. This source can
then transmit the data on the newly discovered route. Each device used for forwarding the
routing packets has learned the route at the same time. The disadvantage of this design is the
amount of routing traffic exchanged between devices. In the case of a large topology, the traffic
will be spread on each link until the end node is found. It also can result in a high latency.

6.4.3 HYBRIDS

A Hybrid protocol will use the two above algorithms. The main goal is to reduce broadcasts and
latency, but improve the dynamism impact. The whole network will be separated into logical
zones, and each zone will have a gateway. Inside each zone, a reactive protocol will be used. For
inter-zone routing, a proactive protocol will be used.

17
 7. PRO-ACTIVE PROTOCOLS

As proactive protocols are constantly updating their routing tables in order to be ready when data
has to be sent, they are called table-driven protocols. This type of protocol is close to wired
networks where the same mechanisms are used in order to take routing decisions. These
mechanisms are used for finding the shortest path across the network topology; it can be the
“Link state” method or the “Distance Vector” method. With the “Link State” method, each node
has its own view of the network, including the states of its own channels. When an event on the
channel occurs, the node floods the network topology with its own new view of the topology.
Other nodes which receive this information use algorithms to reflect changes on the network
table. With the “Distance Vector” routing approach, each node transmits to its close nodes its
vision of the distance which separate it from all the hosts of the network. Based on the
information received by the neighbourhood, each node performs a calculation in order to define
routing tables with the shortest path to all destinations available in the network.

7.1 DESTINATION SEQUENCED DISTANCE VECTOR (DSDV)

DSDV was one of the first proactive routing protocols available for Ad Hoc networks. It was
developed by C. Perkins in 1994, 5 years before the informational RFC of the MANET group. It
has not been standardised by any regulation authorities but is still a reference.

7.1.1 ALGORITHM

DSDV is based on the Bellman-Ford algorithm. First designed for graph search applications, this
algorithm is also used for routing since it is the one used by RIP. With DSDV, each routing table
will contain all available destinations, with the associated next hop, the associated metric
(numbers of hops), and a sequence number originated by the destination node.
Tables are updated in the topology per exchange between nodes. Each node will broadcast to its
neighbours entries in its table. This exchange of entries can be made by dumping the whole
routing table, or by performing an incremental update, that means exchanging just recently
18
updated routes. Nodes who receive this data can then update their tables if they received a better
route, or a new one. Updates are performed on a regular basis, and are instantly scheduled if a
new event is detected in the topology. If there are frequent changes in topology, full table
exchange will be preferred whereas in a stable topology, incremental updates will cause less
traffic. The route selection is performed on the metric and sequence number criteria. The
sequence number is a time indication sent by the destination node. It allows the table update
process, as if two identical routes are known, the one with the best sequence number is kept and
used, while the other is destroyed (considered as a stale entry).

7.1.2 ILLUSTRATION

Let us consider the two following topologies (figure 2-1 and figure 2-2). At t=0, the network is
organized as shows figure 2-1. We suppose at this time the network is stable, each node has a
correct routing table of all destinations.

fig 7.1

Then, we suppose G is moving, and at t+1, the topology is as shown in figure 2-2.

fig 7.2
At this stage, the following events are detected, and actions are taken:

19
 • On node C: Link with G is broken, the route entry is deleted, and updates are sent to node
D.
• On node A and F: A new link is detected, the new entry is added to the routing table and
updates are sent to neighbours.
• On node G: Two new links are detected (to A and F), and one is broken (to C), the routing
table is updated and a full dump is sent to neighbours (as the routing table is entirely
changed, a full dump equals an incremental update).

7.1.3 PERFORMANCE

As with every table-driven protocol, DSDV reduces the latency by having a route when the data
has to be sent. But, DSDV presents a few problems, mainly in the route table update process.
One of the major problems is that data is exchanged only between neighbours, and then, a
change in the topology can take time to be spread in the whole topology. That introduces the
notion of route fluctuation. When a node disappears, it takes time for this change to be reflected
in the whole topology. So, if the topology is dynamic, the routing layer will be unstable until
changes are reflected everywhere.Updates are sent after events, links broken and new links. At
t+1, the routing protocol will transmit routing table updates according to the newly detected
events. But, once these updates are processed by nodes D, B and E, nodes C and D still have no
routes for G, and it will take two more updates until the entire topology will be updated on all
nodes.

7.2 OPTIMIZED LINKED STATE ROUTING (OLSR)

OLSR is another proactive protocol. Initiated by the INRIA (Institut Nationnal de Recherche en
Informatique et Automatique, national research institute in computer sciences and automatism)
It has been proposed for standardisation to the IETF with the RFC 3626 in October 2003. As a
proactive protocol, OLSR is table-driven. The change comparing to other proactive protocols is
in the route updating process.

20
7.2.1 ALGORITHM

OLSR is using a state link routing protocol. It takes decisions based on the shortest path, using
the Dijkstra algorithm for calculating this shortest path. This algorithm is the most used for state
link routing. Also, a particularity of OLSR is to use a mechanism of multipoint relays (MPR).
Multipoint relays for a specific node are the only ones to forward routing specific broadcasted
messages, in order to reduce the amount of traffic exchanged and duplicates data. As a proactive
protocol, OLSR defines two ways to maintain and update tables. First, OLSR acts for its
neighbourhood; it uses “HELLO” messages in order to inform its neighbours about its current
links states. These “HELLO” messages contain a timeout, a hold time, and information about
link status, such as symmetric, asymmetric or MPR. In opposition to DSDV, it is not the routing
table that is exchanged. OLSR will use this data base on all neighbours received packets to
modify and maintain the routing table. These “HELLO” packets are broadcasted on a regular
basis. OLSR also uses “TOPOLOGY CONTROL” packets. This type of packet is event
scheduled. Each node which detects a change in its direct neighbourhood will send this packet
containing its network address and a list of its MPR. This packet is used to inform other nodes of
topology changes. This will start a new route calculation process.

2.2.2 MULTIPOINT RELAY (MPR)

The multipoint relay selection algorithm is based on a very simple rule. Each node assigns a relay
to a few of its direct neighbours, for covering every node at a two-hop distance.

21
 fig 7.3
On figure 7.3, A has to choose relays for the network. Its direct neighbours are B, C, D and E.
The relay selection algorithm will check which one of these direct neighbours can cover the
twohop distance one (F, G, H, I, J, K). In this case, B and E are the only nodes able to cover these
two-hop nodes for A, so, A will select them as primary relays. In the end, the best neighbours are
qualified depending on how many nodes they can cover. That brings more effectiveness for the
routing protocol by avoiding duplicate traffic. One of the characteristics of this algorithm is that
depending on the source node, relays of this source can be different as soon as the multipoint rule
is respected. This leads to a good traffic distribution between each node. With OLSR, this relay
selection avoids unnecessary traffic, as only MPR can relay routing table updates.

fig 7.4

7.2.3 PERFORMANCE

OLSR increases performance comparing to DSDV, due to the multipoint relay mechanism. This
mechanism reduces the amount of data exchanged by avoiding useless transmissions such as
duplicates. MPR also reflects changes quicker in the topology by reducing the route fluctuation
impact in a mobile environment. So, compared to DSDV, OLSR is quicker and uses less control
traffic. But, on large topologies, OLSR is still vulnerable to quick network changes.

22
 8. REACTIVE PROTOCOLS

As covered in chapter 7, proactive protocols define a best path through the topology for every
available node. This route is saved even if not used. Permanently saving routes cause a high
traffic control on the topology, in particular in networks with a high number of nodes. Reactive
protocols are the most advanced design proposed for routing on Ad Hoc networks. They define
and maintain routes depending on needs. There are different approaches for that, but most are
using a backward learning mechanism or a source routing mechanism.

8.1 AD HOC ON-DEMAND DISTANCE VECTOR (AODV)

AODV was proposed to standardisation by the RFC 3561 in July 2003. It was designed by the
same people who designed DSDV. AODV is a distance vector routing protocol, which means
routing decisions will be taken depending on the number of hops to destination. A particularity of
this network is to support both multicast and unicast routing.

8.1.1 ALGORITHM

The AODV algorithm is inspired from the Bellman-Ford algorithm like DSDV. The principal
change is to be On Demand. The node will be silent while it does not have data to send. Then, if
the upper layer is requesting a route for a packet, a “ROUTE REQUEST” packet will be sent to
the direct neighbourhood. If a neighbour has a route corresponding to the request, a packet
“ROUTE REPLY” will be returned. This packet is like a “use me” answer. Otherwise, each
neighbour will forward the “ROUTE REQUEST” to their own neighbourhood, except for the
originator and increment the hop value in the packet data. They also use this packet for building a
reverse route entry (to the originator). This process occurs until a route has been found.
Another part of this algorithm is the route maintenance. While a neighbour is no longer available,
if it was a hop for a route, this route is not valid anymore. AODV uses “HELLO” packets on a
regular basis to check if they are active neighbours. Active neighbours are the ones used during a
previous route discovery process. If there is no response to the “HELLO” packet sent to a node,
23
then, the originator deletes all associated routes in its routing table. “HELLO” packets are similar
to ping requests. While transmitting, if a link is broken (a station did not receive
acknowledgment from the layer 2), a “ROUTE ERROR” packet is unicast to all previous
forwarders and to the sender of the packet.

8.1.2 ILLUSTRATION

fig 8.1

In the example illustrated by figure 8.1, A needs to send a packet to I. A “ROUTE REQUEST”
packet will be generated and sent to B and D (a). B and D add A in their routing table, as a
reverse route, and forward the “ROUTE REQUEST” packet to their neighbours (b). B and D
ignored the packet they exchanged each others (as duplicates). The forwarding process continues
while no route is known (c). Once I receives the “ROUTE REQUEST” from G (d), it generates
the “ROUTE REPLY” packet and sends it to the node it received from. Duplicate packets

24
continue to be ignored while the “ROUTE REPLY” packet goes on the shortest way to A, using
previously established reverse routes (e and f).
The reverse routes created by the other nodes that have not been used for the “ROUTE REPLY”
are deleted after a delay. G and D will add the route to I once they receive the “ROUTE REPLY”
packet.

8.2 DYNAMIC SOURCE ROUTING (DSR)

As a reactive protocol, DSR has some similitude with AODV. Thus, the difference with AODV is
that DSR focuses on the source routing rather than on exchanging tables.

8.2.1 ALGORITHM

DSR uses explicit source routing, which means that each time a data packet is sent, it contains
the list of nodes it will use to be forwarded. In other terms, a sent packet contains the route it will
use. This mechanism allows nodes on the route to cache new routes, and also, allows the
originator to specify the route it wants, depending on criteria such as load balancing, QoS… This
mechanism also avoids routing loops.
If a node has to send a packet to another one, and it has no route for that, it initiates a route
discovery process. This process is very similar to the AODV protocol as a route request is
broadcast to the initiator neighbourhood until a route is found. Thus, the difference is that every
node used for broadcasting this route request packet deduces the route to the originator, and
keeps it in cache. Also, there can be many route replies for a single request.

25
 fig 8.2

In figure 8.2, A wants a route to E. It broadcasts a route request to its neighbours with an
arbitrary chosen ID. Neighbours forward this broadcast, and at each node, the reverse route entry
is added into the route request packet. When E receives this route request, it can sent a route
reply to A using the reverse route included in the packet. The route reply packet contains the
request ID and the reverse route. Another difference with AODV is in the route maintenance
process. DSR does not use broadcasts such as AODV‟s “HELLO” packets. Instead, it uses layer
two built-in acknowledgments.

fig 8.3
In Figure 38.3, A is responsible for the flow between A and B, B is responsible for the flow
between B and C, and so on. If A is sending data to E, with a previously cached route, and C
didn‟t receive any acknowledgment from D, then, C deduces the link is broken and sends a
“ROUTE ERROR” packet to A and any other nodes who had previously used this link.
Concerned nodes will then remove this route from their table, and use another one if they had
other answers from their previous queries. Otherwise, the route discovery process is used in
order to find another path to E.

26
 9. HYBRID PROTOCOLS

A routing protocol is proactive when it continually maintains its routing table. By this way, routes
are available when needed. Reactive protocol starts a route discovery process when data has to be
sent. The advantage of a proactive protocol is that when a datagram must be sent, the route is
already available, so, the processing time to find a route in the routing table is not important.
Reactive protocols require much more time for finding a route as they are “On Demand”. But, in
an Ad Hoc environment, nodes are willing to move, and then, it reflects frequent changes in the
topology. In such an environment, reactive protocols are much more reliable and efficient as
proactive protocol will require exchanging a lot of data. Hybrid protocols tend to merge
advantages of reactive and proactive protocols. Their aim is to use an “On Demand” route
discovery system, but, with a limited research cost. This chapter will cover the Zone Routing
Protocol (ZRP), as it is known to be the main protocol in this category. Others protocols such as
the Hazy Sighted Link State Routing Protocol (HSLS) exist, but they are not as well
documentated and implemented as ZRP.

9.1 DEFINITION

The Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) is the reference in terms of hybrid protocol. Initiated by staff
of the Cornell University, it is a hybrid routing framework using both reactive and proactive ad
hoc routing protocol. Even if this proposition has been rejected by the MANET group, it still
stands as the most advanced hybrid routing project for Ad Hoc networks.
ZRP relies on the simple fact that nearest changes are the most important. So, in order to reduce
useless traffic on the topology, the approach is to define zones for each node. Inside each zone, a
proactive routing protocol will be used. This proactive protocol will be defined as IntrAzone
Routing Protocol (IARP) in the ZRP protocol, in opposition to the IntErzone Routing Protocol
(IERP) which will be used for finding a route outside the defined zone. This inter-zone routing
protocol will be a reactive protocol. ZRP did not define any specific protocol for IARP. In fact,
ZRP is more a framework than an entire solution, and then, IARP and IERP are free to be chosen.

27
In addition to this, two other protocols are defined in the framework; they are used for zoning
specific problems. These protocols are Neighbour Detection Protocol (NDP) and Border
Resolution Protocol (BRP).

fig 9.1

9.2 ZONE ROUTING, ZONE RADIUS AND BORDERCASTING NOTIONS

As ZRP uses two routing protocols, a zone has to be defined for each node. These zones are
defined on a metric distance, which means depending on the number of hops. Each node will use
the Neighbour Detection Protocol (NDP) in order to draw a table of their neighbour. The zone for
each node is then defined by peripheral nodes, these nodes are at a specific hop distance from the
central node. This number of hops is called the zone radius.

fig 9.2

Figure 9.2 shows an example for a zone with a radius of two. B is the central node; C, E and F
are the peripheral nodes, as they are two hops distance from B. As G is three hops distance from

28
B, it is out of the zone. Given the definition of ZRP, inside this zone, an IARP will be used. But,
for communicating outside of this zone, IERP will be used. An important mechanism for ZRP is
bordercasting. Bordercasting can be described as a multicast for peripheral nodes only. While
using IARP, data is sent using unicast (or multicast, depending on which protocol has been
implemented). Bordercasting is then used for IERP, as it is not concerning nodes within the zone.
So, in the example given with figure 9.2, if B uses a bordercast, data will be sent to F, E and C (D
and A will act as relays).

9.3 INTRAZONE ROUTING PROTOCOL (IARP)

The most reasonable choice for IRAP is to use a proactive protocol based on vector distance
algorithm. As every node must know the topology within its zone, this kind of protocol is the
most effective, as every route within the topology is known (see chapter 2). Also, as the zone is
range limited, there will not be any fluctuation problems, and traffic will also be limited to a
small amount of information (as there is a small amount of nodes, so, a small amount of routing
entries). The only restrictions to using any kind of proactive routing protocol such as IARP is to
do the following modifications, in order to work with IERP and BRP:
• Deactivating neighbourhood detection feature if any and replacing it with ZRP‟s specific
neighbourhood table.
• Replacing the direct routing table modification process with an update process of IERP
table.

9.4 INTERZONE ROUTING PROTOCOL (IERP)

For IERP, an “On Demand” protocol is more suitable as it is the most effective on large
topologies. Using a reactive protocol means that every time a packet has to be sent out of the
zone of the sender, a route discovery process will start. So, as the sender knows its neighbours
(using IARP), and has no route for the destination, it will bordercast its zone peripheral nodes
using IERP “ROUTE REQUEST”. As these peripheral nodes are in their own zone, they know
using their own neighbourhood table if they have an appropriate route. If not, they will

29
bordercast the “ROUTE REQUEST” to their own peripheral nodes, except the one they received
from. The routing process continues as described by the implemented reactive protocol. As for
IARP, any kind of reactive protocol can be used, but, the following modification should be made
before implementation:
• Deactivating neighbourhood detection feature and use ZRP built-in table
• Manage importing IARP routing tables
• Replace broadcasts with BRP bordercasts

9.5 BORDER RESOLUTION PROTOCOL (BRP)

BRP is a delivery service working for the ZRP framework. It is a protocol used in order to
control IERP packets flooding and to improve its performance. As explained in chapter 3,
reactive protocols broadcast “ROUTE REQUEST” packets to the whole neighbourhood. Using
the ZRP framework, each node knows its neighbourhood within the zone radius. So, instead of
flooding whole zones, BRP is used for flooding only peripheral nodes. BRP introduces
mechanisms in order to make sure that a node is not duplicating any request, and also to check if
a node has already responded to the request. For controlling flooding, identifiers are defined in
each packet, so, forwarders can detect duplicates. They can also mark a zone as already covered.

9.6 NEIGHBOUR DETECTION PROTOCOL (NDP)

Neighbour detection is made on consulting lower layers, such as the layer two for retrieving the
MAC table. This process is possible as every node in an Ah Hoc network is broadcasting
wireless specific packets (called beacons). Layer 2 can then build a table containing MAC
addresses and then transmit it to the NDP. NDP also exchanges its tables with direct neighbours
(depending on the zone radius) in order to allow IARP to build a correct table of the
neighbourhood. NDP can also select nodes depending on criteria such as low power, blacklist,
QoS…

30
 10. CONCLUSION

We discovered during this report the problems associated with Ad Hoc networks, more
specifically routing on Ad Hoc networks. We also discovered solutions for these problems. Five
routing protocols were covered. First, proactive protocols; table-driven as their peers in the wired
world, they have the disadvantage of not being really reactive to topology changes. DSDV in
particular is subject to route fluctuation, and brings a lot of instability. OLSR tends to correct this
problem. Then, we covered reactive protocols; a new approach for wireless networks, with the
“On Demand” routing mechanism. They have the advantage of not being vulnerable to
dynamism in topologies, but have the disadvantage of having higher delays than proactive
protocols. They can rely on old routing techniques, such as the vector distance that AODV adapts
to the “On Demand” approach, or can use less current mechanisms, such as the source routing
characterising DSR. The last protocol covered was ZRP, taking the advantage of both proactive
and reactive protocols. Even by testing protocols, there is no perfect solution. The test carried out
shows that protocol efficiency depends on the context. On large and dynamic topologies, reactive
protocols will have an advantage, while on small and relatively fixed topologies; proactive
protocols will be more efficient. Nevertheless, hybrid protocols have a slight advantage on both
approaches, as they use a proactive protocol for small distances and a reactive protocol for longer
distances.

31
11. REFERENCES

[1] http://www.crhc.uiuc.edu/~nhv/
[2] http://www.adhoc.6ants.net/~paul/
[4] Computer Networks by Tanenbaum

32