Routing protocols for ad hoc networks can be classified as table-driven, on-demand, or hybrid. Table-driven protocols maintain fresh routing tables through periodic updates but generate high overhead. On-demand protocols discover routes only when needed via flooding but have high latency. Hybrid protocols combine the advantages of both approaches. Example protocols discussed include DSDV, DSR, AODV, and CGSR.
Performance Evaluation and Comparison of Ad-Hoc Source Routing ProtocolsNarendra Singh Yadav
Mobile ad hoc network is a reconfigurable network of mobile nodes connected by multi-hop wireless links and capable of operating without any fixed infrastructure support. In order to facilitate communication within such self-creating, self-organizing and self-administrating network, a dynamic routing protocol is needed. The primary goal of such an ad hoc network routing protocol is to discover and establish a correct and efficient route between a pair of nodes so that messages may be delivered in a timely manner. Route construction should be done with a minimum of overhead and bandwidth consumption. This paper examines two routing protocols, both on-demand source routing, for mobile ad hoc networks– the Dynamic Source Routing (DSR), an flat architecture based and the Cluster Based Routing Protocol (CBRP), a cluster architecture based and evaluates both routing protocols in terms of packet delivery fraction normalized routing load, average end to end delay by varying speed of nodes, traffic sources and mobility.
On the routing overhead in infrastructureless multihop wireless networksNarendra Singh Yadav
Routing in infrastructureless multihop wireless networks is a challenging task and has received a vast amount of attention from researchers. This has lead to development of many different routing protocols each having their own superiorities and pitfalls making it very difficult to decide on a better protocol under vulnerable scenarios in such networks. In this paper the performance of three routing protocols (DSR, AODV and CBRP) in terms of routing overhead in bytes and in packets is presented under growing density and varying mobility in different traffic conditions. The simulation results show that CBRP outperforms both DSR and AODV in all scenarios.
Issues in designing a routing and Transport Layer protocol for Ad hoc networks- proactive
routing, reactive routing (on-demand), hybrid routing- Classification of Transport Layer
solutions-TCP over Ad hoc wireless Networks
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
Influence of Clustering on the Performance of MobileAd Hoc Networks (MANETs)Narendra Singh Yadav
Clustering is an important research area for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) as it increases the capacity of network, reduces the routing overhead and makes the network more scalable in the presence of both high mobility and a large number of mobile nodes. Routing protocols based on flat topology are not scalable because of their built-in characteristics. However, clustering cause overhead which consumes considerable bandwidth, drain mobile nodes energy quickly, likely cause congestion, collision and data delay in larger networks. This paper uses an implementation of the Dynamic Source Routing (DSR), an flat architecture based and the Cluster Based Routing Protocol (CBRP), a cluster architecture based routing protocol to examine the influence of clustering on the performance of mobile ad hoc networks. This paper evaluates channel utilization and control overhead as a function of number of nodes per sq. km to show the effect of clustering. Simulation results show that in high mobility scenarios, CBRP outperforms DSR. CBRP scales well with increasing number of nodes.
This document discusses different types of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks. It begins by classifying routing protocols into four categories: proactive (table-driven), reactive (on-demand), hybrid, and geographic location-assisted. It then provides more details on proactive protocols like DSDV, and reactive protocols like DSR and AODV. For DSDV, it describes how routing tables are regularly exchanged and updated when link breaks occur. For DSR and AODV, it explains how routes are discovered on-demand via route requests and replies. Key differences between DSR and AODV are also summarized.
- Mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) are autonomous systems of wireless nodes that can dynamically change topology as nodes move. Routing must adapt to these changes.
- There are two main categories of routing protocols: table-driven protocols proactively maintain consistent, up-to-date routing tables whereas on-demand protocols only determine routes when needed.
- Examples of protocols include DSDV as a table-driven protocol and AODV as an on-demand protocol, with AODV using route requests and replies to discover routes only when transmitting data.
Comparing: Routing Protocols on Basis of sleep modeIJMER
The architecture of ad hoc wireless network consists of mobile nodes for communication
without the use of fixed-position routers. The communication between them takes place without
centralized control. Routing is a very crucial issue, so to deal with this routing algorithms must deliver
the packet in significant delay. There are different protocols for handling the mobile environment like
AODV, DSR and OLSR. But this paper will focus on performance of AODV and OLSR routing protocols.
The performance of these protocols is analyzed on two metrics: time and throughput
Performance Evaluation and Comparison of Ad-Hoc Source Routing ProtocolsNarendra Singh Yadav
Mobile ad hoc network is a reconfigurable network of mobile nodes connected by multi-hop wireless links and capable of operating without any fixed infrastructure support. In order to facilitate communication within such self-creating, self-organizing and self-administrating network, a dynamic routing protocol is needed. The primary goal of such an ad hoc network routing protocol is to discover and establish a correct and efficient route between a pair of nodes so that messages may be delivered in a timely manner. Route construction should be done with a minimum of overhead and bandwidth consumption. This paper examines two routing protocols, both on-demand source routing, for mobile ad hoc networks– the Dynamic Source Routing (DSR), an flat architecture based and the Cluster Based Routing Protocol (CBRP), a cluster architecture based and evaluates both routing protocols in terms of packet delivery fraction normalized routing load, average end to end delay by varying speed of nodes, traffic sources and mobility.
On the routing overhead in infrastructureless multihop wireless networksNarendra Singh Yadav
Routing in infrastructureless multihop wireless networks is a challenging task and has received a vast amount of attention from researchers. This has lead to development of many different routing protocols each having their own superiorities and pitfalls making it very difficult to decide on a better protocol under vulnerable scenarios in such networks. In this paper the performance of three routing protocols (DSR, AODV and CBRP) in terms of routing overhead in bytes and in packets is presented under growing density and varying mobility in different traffic conditions. The simulation results show that CBRP outperforms both DSR and AODV in all scenarios.
Issues in designing a routing and Transport Layer protocol for Ad hoc networks- proactive
routing, reactive routing (on-demand), hybrid routing- Classification of Transport Layer
solutions-TCP over Ad hoc wireless Networks
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
Influence of Clustering on the Performance of MobileAd Hoc Networks (MANETs)Narendra Singh Yadav
Clustering is an important research area for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) as it increases the capacity of network, reduces the routing overhead and makes the network more scalable in the presence of both high mobility and a large number of mobile nodes. Routing protocols based on flat topology are not scalable because of their built-in characteristics. However, clustering cause overhead which consumes considerable bandwidth, drain mobile nodes energy quickly, likely cause congestion, collision and data delay in larger networks. This paper uses an implementation of the Dynamic Source Routing (DSR), an flat architecture based and the Cluster Based Routing Protocol (CBRP), a cluster architecture based routing protocol to examine the influence of clustering on the performance of mobile ad hoc networks. This paper evaluates channel utilization and control overhead as a function of number of nodes per sq. km to show the effect of clustering. Simulation results show that in high mobility scenarios, CBRP outperforms DSR. CBRP scales well with increasing number of nodes.
This document discusses different types of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks. It begins by classifying routing protocols into four categories: proactive (table-driven), reactive (on-demand), hybrid, and geographic location-assisted. It then provides more details on proactive protocols like DSDV, and reactive protocols like DSR and AODV. For DSDV, it describes how routing tables are regularly exchanged and updated when link breaks occur. For DSR and AODV, it explains how routes are discovered on-demand via route requests and replies. Key differences between DSR and AODV are also summarized.
- Mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) are autonomous systems of wireless nodes that can dynamically change topology as nodes move. Routing must adapt to these changes.
- There are two main categories of routing protocols: table-driven protocols proactively maintain consistent, up-to-date routing tables whereas on-demand protocols only determine routes when needed.
- Examples of protocols include DSDV as a table-driven protocol and AODV as an on-demand protocol, with AODV using route requests and replies to discover routes only when transmitting data.
Comparing: Routing Protocols on Basis of sleep modeIJMER
The architecture of ad hoc wireless network consists of mobile nodes for communication
without the use of fixed-position routers. The communication between them takes place without
centralized control. Routing is a very crucial issue, so to deal with this routing algorithms must deliver
the packet in significant delay. There are different protocols for handling the mobile environment like
AODV, DSR and OLSR. But this paper will focus on performance of AODV and OLSR routing protocols.
The performance of these protocols is analyzed on two metrics: time and throughput
A New Theoretical Approach to Location Based Power Aware RoutingIOSR Journals
This document proposes a new theoretical approach to location based power aware routing in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It aims to extend the network lifetime by improving power utilization during routing. The approach uses nodes' location information, remaining battery power, and bandwidth status to assign link stability and select routes with lower "uptime values" and minimum bandwidth over time. This is hypothesized to better utilize nodes' power sources and bandwidth. The document outlines calculating a root up time factor for each node based on its power backup and required power, and only using nodes with maximum backup. It concludes future work will design and validate a new protocol based on this approach.
This document compares the performance of the AODV and DSR routing protocols under various network conditions through simulation. It finds that AODV performs better than DSR in terms of packet delivery ratio, with fewer packets lost over time. While DSR initially loses more packets, it is able to reduce packet loss over the course of the longer 20-second simulation compared to AODV.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
Quality of Service Routing in Mobile Ad hoc Networks Using Node Mobility and ...IJNSA Journal
Exceptionally dynamic networks are Mobile Ad hoc Networks. Quality of Service (QoS) routing in such
Networks are frequently limited by the network split due to either energy depletion or node mobility of the
mobile nodes. In addition, to fulfill specific quality parameters, existence of multiple node-disjoint paths
becomes essential. Such paths assist in the optimal traffic distribution and consistency in case of path
breakages. Thus, to accommodate such problem, we present a node-disjoint multipath protocol. The metric
system of measurement used to select the paths takes into account the stability of the nodes and the
equivalent links.
Quality of Service Routing in Mobile Ad hoc Networks Using Node Mobility and ...IJNSA Journal
Exceptionally dynamic networks are Mobile Ad hoc Networks. Quality of Service (QoS) routing in such Networks are frequently limited by the network split due to either energy depletion or node mobility of the mobile nodes. In addition, to fulfill specific quality parameters, existence of multiple node-disjoint paths becomes essential. Such paths assist in the optimal traffic distribution and consistency in case of path breakages. Thus, to accommodate such problem, we present a node-disjoint multipath protocol. The metric system of measurement used to select the paths takes into account the stability of the nodes and the equivalent links.
Comparative Analysis of MANET Routing Protocols and Cluster Head Selection Te...IJERA Editor
Mobile Ad-hoc Network is a kind of wireless network. It is a backbone of new generation advanced communication technology. MANET is an ideal applicant for rescue and emergency situation due to its independence of connected devices of fixed wires. This paper represents a work on trust based system in MANET cluster that can be used to improve the performance of the network even in the existence of not trusted nodes. In the cluster architecture, cluster head and gateway nodes form a communication for routing among neighbouring clusters. But selection of cluster head is the important problem in dynamic Ad-hoc network because cluster head work as coordinator in clustered architecture. In this work, some values have used correspond to the threshold values of forward packet and dropped packet of each node within the network cluster. These values have been used dynamically updated every time and the node is selected as cluster head. In this technique of selecting the node as cluster head, the node which has maximum trusted value is elected as cluster head and this information is updated in every node’s trusted table. After implementation of our desired work, the proposed Dynamic Trust Evaluation of Cluster Head (DTE-CH) technique is analysed with traditional routing protocols and traditional clustering technique viz. Highest Degree Algorithm. The simulation is done by using network simulator software on the basis of different performance metrics throughput, packet delivery ratio, routing overhead, packet drop, average end to end delay and remain energy. Simulation result presents that proposed DTE-CH technique improves the performance of network as compare to most suitable existing AODV MANET protocol based technique as well as traditional highest degree clustering technique.
Study of Attacks and Routing Protocol in Wireless Networkijsrd.com
Wireless mesh networks (WMNs) are attractive as a new communication paradigm. Ad hoc routing protocols for WMNs are classified into: (1) proactive, (2) reactive, and (3) hybrid approaches. In general, proactive routing is more suitable for a stationary network, while reactive routing is better for a mobile network with a high mobility. In many applications, a node in WMN is mobile but it can fluctuate between being mobile. Wireless mesh networks is an emergent research area, which is becoming important due to the growing amount of nodes in a network.
This document discusses mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs) and wireless sensor networks (WSNs). It defines a MANET as a network formed spontaneously by wireless mobile nodes without any preexisting infrastructure. Key characteristics of MANETs include dynamic topologies, energy-constrained operation, limited bandwidth, and security threats. Applications include collaborative work, crisis management, and personal area networks. The document also describes different routing protocols for MANETs including table-driven, source-initiated, and hybrid protocols. It then discusses challenges in WSNs such as ad-hoc deployment, limited resources, scalability, and fault tolerance and how these influence routing protocol design.
Load aware and load balancing using aomdv routing in manetijctet
1. The document discusses load aware and load balancing techniques using multipath routing in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs).
2. It notes that effective load balancing is challenging in MANETs due to their dynamic nature and topology changes. Nodes can differ significantly in communication and processing capabilities.
3. The paper proposes identifying multiple routing backbones from source to destination using intermediate nodes with better capabilities, to improve load balancing, quality of service, and congestion control based on network traffic levels and node loads.
Load aware and load balancing using aomdv routing in manetijctet
This document discusses load aware and load balancing techniques using multipath routing in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It proposes using a location aided routing (LAR) protocol with the Ad-hoc On-demand Multipath Distance Vector (AOMDV) routing protocol to identify multiple routing backbones from the source to destination nodes based on the intermediate nodes' communication and processing capabilities. This helps distribute traffic loads evenly across multiple paths to improve load balancing, reduce congestion, and enhance quality of service in the MANET.
Mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs) are self-configuring networks of mobile routers connected by wireless links. They form a random, changing topology as routers move freely and unpredictably. MANETs are suitable for emergency situations where infrastructure is not available. They use routing protocols that are either table-driven and proactively maintain routes, or on-demand driven where routes are created as needed. Examples of protocols discussed are DSDV, AODV, DSR, and TORA. MANETs face challenges from their changing topology, but enable communication in infrastructure-less scenarios.
IRJET- Optimum Routing Algorithm for MANETIRJET Journal
This document summarizes a research paper that proposes an efficient routing algorithm for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). The paper introduces MANETs and discusses two common routing protocols: Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) and Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector (DSDV). It then proposes an enhancement to AODV that differentiates between relaying and silent nodes to reduce congestion during route discovery. Simulations show the proposed AODV algorithm performs better than the standard AODV and DSR protocols in terms of packet delivery ratio, end-to-end delay, and throughput.
Improved routing scheme with ACO in WSN in comparison to DSDVijsrd.com
Routing is the process of selecting best paths in a network in terms of energy and distance. In adhoc it is critical to collect the information in an efficient manner as it has limitations in terms of centralized congestion. In such case to perform the effective communication there is the requirement of some such routing approach that can provide the routing with optimized path. In this work, ACO based routing approach is defined to generate the optimized path in comparison to DSDV over the network. The presented approach is implemented in matlab environment and obtained results shows the effective results in terms of optimized path.
Mobile ad-hoc networks have frequent host and topology changes with no cellular infrastructure and require multi-hop wireless links for data transmission between nodes. Routing protocols must discover routes between nodes that may not be directly connected. Table-driven protocols like Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) and Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP) maintain up-to-date routing tables through periodic broadcasts but generate significant control overhead. DSDV uses sequence numbers to distinguish stale routes and avoid loops while WRP maintains four tables for routing information.
Network Surveillance Based Data Transference in Cognitive Radio Network with ...IRJET Journal
The document compares different wireless routing protocols to find the most energy efficient for creating a cognitive radio network model with attacker nodes. It first describes cognitive radio networks and their ability to dynamically access unused radio spectrum. It then summarizes the characteristics of reactive, proactive, and hybrid routing protocols. Reactive protocols determine routes on demand through flooding, while proactive protocols constantly update routing tables. The document analyzes the ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) and dynamic source routing (DSR) reactive protocols as well as the destination sequenced distance vector (DSDV) and optimized link state (OLSR) proactive protocols. It aims to compare these protocols and determine the most energy efficient for the cognitive radio network model.
Network Surveillance Based Data Transference in Cognitive Radio Network with ...IRJET Journal
This document compares different wireless routing protocols to find the most energy efficient for creating a cognitive radio network model with attacker nodes. It analyzes reactive, proactive, and hybrid routing protocols including AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR, and a hybrid protocol. Simulation results show the hybrid protocol consumes the least energy compared to other protocols, making it well-suited for an energy efficient cognitive radio network model.
This document discusses wireless sensor network protocols. It covers multi-hop routing, where sensor nodes act as relays to propagate data to the base station. Common routing protocols are discussed, including reactive protocols like AODV that establish routes on demand and proactive protocols like DSDV that maintain routing tables with periodic updates. MAC protocols help manage access to the shared wireless medium and examples covered include S-MAC and B-MAC. The OSI model layers and responsibilities are also summarized.
Tree Based Proactive Source Routing Protocol for MANETspaperpublications3
bstract: A mobile adhoc network (MANET) is a wireless communication network and the node that does not lie within the direct transmission range of each other depends on the intermediate nodes to forward data. Opportunistic data forwarding has not been widely utilized in mobile adhoc networks (MANETs) and the main reason is the lack of an efficient lightweight proactive routing scheme with strong source routing capability. PSR protocol facilitates opportunistic data forwarding in MANETs. In PSR, each node maintains a breadth-first search spanning tree of the network rooted at it-self. This information is periodically exchanged among neighboring nodes for updated network topology information. Here added a Mobile sink to reduce the overhead in case of number of child node increases and also to reduce the delay.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
A SURVEY OF ENHANCED ROUTING PROTOCOLS FOR MANETspijans
This document summarizes and surveys several enhanced routing protocols that have been developed for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It begins by providing background on routing challenges in MANETs and classifications of routing protocols. It then describes several traditional and widely used routing protocols, including DSDV, OLSR, TORA, DSR, and AODV. The document focuses on summarizing several new routing protocols that have been proposed to improve upon existing protocols. It discusses protocols such as BAWB-DSR, CCSR, RAMP, AODV-SBA, CBRP-R, and CBTRP - noting techniques, advantages, and disadvantages of each. The overall purpose is to review
A New Theoretical Approach to Location Based Power Aware RoutingIOSR Journals
This document proposes a new theoretical approach to location based power aware routing in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It aims to extend the network lifetime by improving power utilization during routing. The approach uses nodes' location information, remaining battery power, and bandwidth status to assign link stability and select routes with lower "uptime values" and minimum bandwidth over time. This is hypothesized to better utilize nodes' power sources and bandwidth. The document outlines calculating a root up time factor for each node based on its power backup and required power, and only using nodes with maximum backup. It concludes future work will design and validate a new protocol based on this approach.
This document compares the performance of the AODV and DSR routing protocols under various network conditions through simulation. It finds that AODV performs better than DSR in terms of packet delivery ratio, with fewer packets lost over time. While DSR initially loses more packets, it is able to reduce packet loss over the course of the longer 20-second simulation compared to AODV.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
Quality of Service Routing in Mobile Ad hoc Networks Using Node Mobility and ...IJNSA Journal
Exceptionally dynamic networks are Mobile Ad hoc Networks. Quality of Service (QoS) routing in such
Networks are frequently limited by the network split due to either energy depletion or node mobility of the
mobile nodes. In addition, to fulfill specific quality parameters, existence of multiple node-disjoint paths
becomes essential. Such paths assist in the optimal traffic distribution and consistency in case of path
breakages. Thus, to accommodate such problem, we present a node-disjoint multipath protocol. The metric
system of measurement used to select the paths takes into account the stability of the nodes and the
equivalent links.
Quality of Service Routing in Mobile Ad hoc Networks Using Node Mobility and ...IJNSA Journal
Exceptionally dynamic networks are Mobile Ad hoc Networks. Quality of Service (QoS) routing in such Networks are frequently limited by the network split due to either energy depletion or node mobility of the mobile nodes. In addition, to fulfill specific quality parameters, existence of multiple node-disjoint paths becomes essential. Such paths assist in the optimal traffic distribution and consistency in case of path breakages. Thus, to accommodate such problem, we present a node-disjoint multipath protocol. The metric system of measurement used to select the paths takes into account the stability of the nodes and the equivalent links.
Comparative Analysis of MANET Routing Protocols and Cluster Head Selection Te...IJERA Editor
Mobile Ad-hoc Network is a kind of wireless network. It is a backbone of new generation advanced communication technology. MANET is an ideal applicant for rescue and emergency situation due to its independence of connected devices of fixed wires. This paper represents a work on trust based system in MANET cluster that can be used to improve the performance of the network even in the existence of not trusted nodes. In the cluster architecture, cluster head and gateway nodes form a communication for routing among neighbouring clusters. But selection of cluster head is the important problem in dynamic Ad-hoc network because cluster head work as coordinator in clustered architecture. In this work, some values have used correspond to the threshold values of forward packet and dropped packet of each node within the network cluster. These values have been used dynamically updated every time and the node is selected as cluster head. In this technique of selecting the node as cluster head, the node which has maximum trusted value is elected as cluster head and this information is updated in every node’s trusted table. After implementation of our desired work, the proposed Dynamic Trust Evaluation of Cluster Head (DTE-CH) technique is analysed with traditional routing protocols and traditional clustering technique viz. Highest Degree Algorithm. The simulation is done by using network simulator software on the basis of different performance metrics throughput, packet delivery ratio, routing overhead, packet drop, average end to end delay and remain energy. Simulation result presents that proposed DTE-CH technique improves the performance of network as compare to most suitable existing AODV MANET protocol based technique as well as traditional highest degree clustering technique.
Study of Attacks and Routing Protocol in Wireless Networkijsrd.com
Wireless mesh networks (WMNs) are attractive as a new communication paradigm. Ad hoc routing protocols for WMNs are classified into: (1) proactive, (2) reactive, and (3) hybrid approaches. In general, proactive routing is more suitable for a stationary network, while reactive routing is better for a mobile network with a high mobility. In many applications, a node in WMN is mobile but it can fluctuate between being mobile. Wireless mesh networks is an emergent research area, which is becoming important due to the growing amount of nodes in a network.
This document discusses mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs) and wireless sensor networks (WSNs). It defines a MANET as a network formed spontaneously by wireless mobile nodes without any preexisting infrastructure. Key characteristics of MANETs include dynamic topologies, energy-constrained operation, limited bandwidth, and security threats. Applications include collaborative work, crisis management, and personal area networks. The document also describes different routing protocols for MANETs including table-driven, source-initiated, and hybrid protocols. It then discusses challenges in WSNs such as ad-hoc deployment, limited resources, scalability, and fault tolerance and how these influence routing protocol design.
Load aware and load balancing using aomdv routing in manetijctet
1. The document discusses load aware and load balancing techniques using multipath routing in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs).
2. It notes that effective load balancing is challenging in MANETs due to their dynamic nature and topology changes. Nodes can differ significantly in communication and processing capabilities.
3. The paper proposes identifying multiple routing backbones from source to destination using intermediate nodes with better capabilities, to improve load balancing, quality of service, and congestion control based on network traffic levels and node loads.
Load aware and load balancing using aomdv routing in manetijctet
This document discusses load aware and load balancing techniques using multipath routing in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It proposes using a location aided routing (LAR) protocol with the Ad-hoc On-demand Multipath Distance Vector (AOMDV) routing protocol to identify multiple routing backbones from the source to destination nodes based on the intermediate nodes' communication and processing capabilities. This helps distribute traffic loads evenly across multiple paths to improve load balancing, reduce congestion, and enhance quality of service in the MANET.
Mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs) are self-configuring networks of mobile routers connected by wireless links. They form a random, changing topology as routers move freely and unpredictably. MANETs are suitable for emergency situations where infrastructure is not available. They use routing protocols that are either table-driven and proactively maintain routes, or on-demand driven where routes are created as needed. Examples of protocols discussed are DSDV, AODV, DSR, and TORA. MANETs face challenges from their changing topology, but enable communication in infrastructure-less scenarios.
IRJET- Optimum Routing Algorithm for MANETIRJET Journal
This document summarizes a research paper that proposes an efficient routing algorithm for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). The paper introduces MANETs and discusses two common routing protocols: Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) and Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector (DSDV). It then proposes an enhancement to AODV that differentiates between relaying and silent nodes to reduce congestion during route discovery. Simulations show the proposed AODV algorithm performs better than the standard AODV and DSR protocols in terms of packet delivery ratio, end-to-end delay, and throughput.
Improved routing scheme with ACO in WSN in comparison to DSDVijsrd.com
Routing is the process of selecting best paths in a network in terms of energy and distance. In adhoc it is critical to collect the information in an efficient manner as it has limitations in terms of centralized congestion. In such case to perform the effective communication there is the requirement of some such routing approach that can provide the routing with optimized path. In this work, ACO based routing approach is defined to generate the optimized path in comparison to DSDV over the network. The presented approach is implemented in matlab environment and obtained results shows the effective results in terms of optimized path.
Mobile ad-hoc networks have frequent host and topology changes with no cellular infrastructure and require multi-hop wireless links for data transmission between nodes. Routing protocols must discover routes between nodes that may not be directly connected. Table-driven protocols like Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) and Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP) maintain up-to-date routing tables through periodic broadcasts but generate significant control overhead. DSDV uses sequence numbers to distinguish stale routes and avoid loops while WRP maintains four tables for routing information.
Network Surveillance Based Data Transference in Cognitive Radio Network with ...IRJET Journal
The document compares different wireless routing protocols to find the most energy efficient for creating a cognitive radio network model with attacker nodes. It first describes cognitive radio networks and their ability to dynamically access unused radio spectrum. It then summarizes the characteristics of reactive, proactive, and hybrid routing protocols. Reactive protocols determine routes on demand through flooding, while proactive protocols constantly update routing tables. The document analyzes the ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) and dynamic source routing (DSR) reactive protocols as well as the destination sequenced distance vector (DSDV) and optimized link state (OLSR) proactive protocols. It aims to compare these protocols and determine the most energy efficient for the cognitive radio network model.
Network Surveillance Based Data Transference in Cognitive Radio Network with ...IRJET Journal
This document compares different wireless routing protocols to find the most energy efficient for creating a cognitive radio network model with attacker nodes. It analyzes reactive, proactive, and hybrid routing protocols including AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR, and a hybrid protocol. Simulation results show the hybrid protocol consumes the least energy compared to other protocols, making it well-suited for an energy efficient cognitive radio network model.
This document discusses wireless sensor network protocols. It covers multi-hop routing, where sensor nodes act as relays to propagate data to the base station. Common routing protocols are discussed, including reactive protocols like AODV that establish routes on demand and proactive protocols like DSDV that maintain routing tables with periodic updates. MAC protocols help manage access to the shared wireless medium and examples covered include S-MAC and B-MAC. The OSI model layers and responsibilities are also summarized.
Tree Based Proactive Source Routing Protocol for MANETspaperpublications3
bstract: A mobile adhoc network (MANET) is a wireless communication network and the node that does not lie within the direct transmission range of each other depends on the intermediate nodes to forward data. Opportunistic data forwarding has not been widely utilized in mobile adhoc networks (MANETs) and the main reason is the lack of an efficient lightweight proactive routing scheme with strong source routing capability. PSR protocol facilitates opportunistic data forwarding in MANETs. In PSR, each node maintains a breadth-first search spanning tree of the network rooted at it-self. This information is periodically exchanged among neighboring nodes for updated network topology information. Here added a Mobile sink to reduce the overhead in case of number of child node increases and also to reduce the delay.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
A SURVEY OF ENHANCED ROUTING PROTOCOLS FOR MANETspijans
This document summarizes and surveys several enhanced routing protocols that have been developed for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It begins by providing background on routing challenges in MANETs and classifications of routing protocols. It then describes several traditional and widely used routing protocols, including DSDV, OLSR, TORA, DSR, and AODV. The document focuses on summarizing several new routing protocols that have been proposed to improve upon existing protocols. It discusses protocols such as BAWB-DSR, CCSR, RAMP, AODV-SBA, CBRP-R, and CBTRP - noting techniques, advantages, and disadvantages of each. The overall purpose is to review
Amazon DocumentDB(MongoDB와 호환됨)는 빠르고 안정적이며 완전 관리형 데이터베이스 서비스입니다. Amazon DocumentDB를 사용하면 클라우드에서 MongoDB 호환 데이터베이스를 쉽게 설치, 운영 및 규모를 조정할 수 있습니다. Amazon DocumentDB를 사용하면 MongoDB에서 사용하는 것과 동일한 애플리케이션 코드를 실행하고 동일한 드라이버와 도구를 사용하는 것을 실습합니다.
Airline Satisfaction Project using Azure
This presentation is created as a foundation of understanding and comparing data science/machine learning solutions made in Python notebooks locally and on Azure cloud, as a part of Course DP-100 - Designing and Implementing a Data Science Solution on Azure.
How We Added Replication to QuestDB - JonTheBeachjavier ramirez
Building a database that can beat industry benchmarks is hard work, and we had to use every trick in the book to keep as close to the hardware as possible. In doing so, we initially decided QuestDB would scale only vertically, on a single instance.
A few years later, data replication —for horizontally scaling reads and for high availability— became one of the most demanded features, especially for enterprise and cloud environments. So, we rolled up our sleeves and made it happen.
Today, QuestDB supports an unbounded number of geographically distributed read-replicas without slowing down reads on the primary node, which can ingest data at over 4 million rows per second.
In this talk, I will tell you about the technical decisions we made, and their trade offs. You'll learn how we had to revamp the whole ingestion layer, and how we actually made the primary faster than before when we added multi-threaded Write Ahead Logs to deal with data replication. I'll also discuss how we are leveraging object storage as a central part of the process. And of course, I'll show you a live demo of high-performance multi-region replication in action.
❻❸❼⓿❽❻❷⓿⓿❼ SATTA MATKA DPBOSS KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART KALYAN MATKA MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA TIPS SATTA MATKA MATKA COM MATKA PANA JODI TODAY
Amazon Aurora 클러스터를 초당 수백만 건의 쓰기 트랜잭션으로 확장하고 페타바이트 규모의 데이터를 관리할 수 있으며, 사용자 지정 애플리케이션 로직을 생성하거나 여러 데이터베이스를 관리할 필요 없이 Aurora에서 관계형 데이터베이스 워크로드를 단일 Aurora 라이터 인스턴스의 한도 이상으로 확장할 수 있는 Amazon Aurora Limitless Database를 소개합니다.
3. Ad-hoc routing algorithms
Hottest routing algorithm categories:
Pro-active (table-driven) routing
Maintains fresh lists of destinations & their routes by periodically
distributing routing tables
Disadvantages:
1. Respective amount of data for maintenance
2. Slow reaction on restructuring and failures
(e.g. OSLR, DSDV)
Reactive (on-demand) routing
On demand route discovery by flooding the network with Route
Request packets
Disadvantages:
1. High latency time in route finding
2. Flooding can lead to network clogging
(e.g. AODV, DSR)
4. 3. Hybrid (both proactive and reactive) routing—
This type of protocol combines the advantages of proactive and
reactive routing. The routing is initially established with some
proactively prospected routes and then serves the demand from
additionally activated nodes through reactive flooding. The choice of
one or the other method requires predetermination for typical cases.
The main disadvantages of such algorithms are:
1.Advantage depends on number of other nodes activated.
2. Reaction to traffic demand depends on gradient of traffic volume.
Examples of hybrid algorithms are:
ZRP (Zone Routing Protocol) ZRP uses IARP as pro-active and
IERP as reactive component.
ZHLS (Zone-based Hierarchical Link State Routing Protocol)
5. 4. Hierarchical routing protocols—
With this type of protocol the choice of proactive and of reactive
routing depends on the hierarchic level in which a node resides.
The routing is initially established with some proactively prospected
routes and then serves the demand from additionally activated
nodes through reactive flooding on the lower levels. The choice for
one or the other method requires proper attributation for respective
levels.
The main disadvantages of such algorithms are:
1. Advantage depends on depth of nesting and addressing
scheme.
2. Reaction to traffic demand depends on meshing parameters.
Examples of hierarchical routing algorithms are:
CBRP (Cluster Based Routing Protocol)
FSR (Fisheye State Routing protocol)
Order One Network Protocol; Fast logarithm-of-2 maximum times
to contact nodes. Supports large groups.
ZHLS (Zone-based Hierarchical Link State Routing Protocol)
6. Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector Routing (DSDV) is a table-
driven routing scheme for ad hoc mobile networks based on the
Bellman–Ford algorithm. It was developed by C. Perkins and
P.Bhagwat in 1994.
The main contribution of the algorithm was to solve the routing loop
problem. Each entry in the routing table contains a sequence number,
the sequence numbers are generally even if a link is present; else, an
odd number is used. The number is generated by the destination, and
the emitter needs to send out the next update with this number.
Routing information is distributed between nodes by sending full
dumps infrequently and smaller incremental updates more frequently.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxJR_4NLB24
7. Cluster-head Gateway Switch Routing
(CGSR)
The cluster-head gateway switch routing (CGSR) is a
hierarchical routing protocol. It is a proactive protocol. When a
source routes the packets to destination, the routing tables are
already available at the nodes. A cluster higher in hierarchy
sends the packets to the cluster lower in hierarchy. Each cluster
can have several daughters I and forms a tree-like structure in
CGSR. CGSR forms a cluster structure. The nodes aggregate
into clusters using an appropriate algorithm. The algorithm
defines a cluster-head, the node used for connection to other
clusters. It also defines a gateway node which provides
switching (communication) between two or more cluster-heads.
8. There will thus be three types of nodes—
(i) internal nodes in a cluster which transmit and receive the
messages and packets through a cluster-head,
(ii) Cluster-head in each cluster such that there is a cluster-head
which dynamically schedules the route paths. It controls a group of
ad-hoc hosts, monitors broadcasting within the cluster, and
forwards the messages to another cluster-head, and
(iii) Gateway node to carry out transmission and reception of
messages and packets between cluster-heads of two clusters.
The cluster structure leads to a higher performance of the routing
protocol as compared to other protocols because it provides
gateway switch-type traffic redirections and clusters provide an
effective membership of nodes for connectivity.
9. CGSR works as follow:
Periodically, every node sends a hello message containing its ID
and a monotonically increasing sequence number
Using these messages, every cluster-head maintains a table
containing the IDs of nodes belonging to it and their most recent
sequence numbers.
Cluster-heads exchange these tables with each other through
gateways; eventually, each node will have an entry in the affiliation
table of each cluster-head. This entry shows the node’s ID & cluster-
head of that node.
Each cluster-head and each gateway maintains a routing table with
an entry for every cluster-head that shows the next gateway on the
shortest path to that cluster head.
Disadvantages:
The same disadvantage common to all hierarchal algorithms related
to cluster formation and maintenance.
11. On Demand routing protocol
ODR, or On Demand Routing, is a very simple way to share routes
in a basic hub and spoke network.
A topology like this will have a hub router, which may also run a
dynamic routing protocol. There will also be one or more spokes,
which must not run a dynamic routing protocol.
The spoke routers are assumed to be stub routers, meaning that
there are no other routers connected to them. However, they may
have several connected networks.
The spokes are directly connected to the hub. This may be a literal
connection, or a tunnel.
12. Why Use ODR?
For one, it’s simpler
than using static
routes everywhere.
Less overhead, and
it’s still dynamic.
However, it’s also
simpler than
configuring a full
dynamic routing
protocol. To do this,
we need to consider
summarization, and
may need additional
resources on the
router. This makes it
suitable for low-spec
routers.
13. With the help of CDP, it is possible to find the device type, the IP
address, the Cisco IOS version running on the neighbor Cisco
device, the capabilities of the neighbor device, and so on.
14. DYNAMIC SOURCE ROUTING (DSR)
The Dynamic Source Routing protocol (DSR) is a simple and
efficient routing protocol designed specifically for use in multi-hop
wireless ad hoc networks of mobile nodes.
DSR allows the network to be completely self-organizing and
self-configuring, without the need for any existing network
infrastructure or administration.
It is a reactive protocol and all aspects of the protocol operate
entirely on-demand basis. It works on the concept of source
routing.
Source routing is a routing technique in which-” the sender of a
packet determines the complete sequence of nodes through
which, the packets are forwarded.
15. The advantage of source routing is : intermediate nodes do not
need to maintain up to date routing information in order to route
the packets they forward.
The protocol is composed of the two main mechanisms of "Route
Discovery" and "Route Maintenance".
DSR requires each node to maintain a route – cache of all known
self – to – destination pairs. If a node has a packet to send, it
attempts to use this cache to deliver the packet.
16. If the destination does not exist in the cache, then a route discovery
phase is initiated to discover a route to destination, by sending a
route request.
This request includes the destination address, source address and
a unique identification number.
If a route is available from the route – cache, but is not valid
any more, a route maintenance procedure may be initiated.
A node processes the route request packet only if it has not
previously processes the packet and its address is not present in
the route cache.
A route reply is generated by the destination or by any of the
intermediate nodes when it knows about how to reach the
destination.
17. Example- In the following example, the route discovery procedure is
shown where S1 is the source node and S7 is the destination node.
The destination S7,
gets the request
through two paths. It
chooses one path
based on the route
records in the
incoming packet and
sends a reply using
the reverse path to
the source node. At
each hop, the best
route with minimum
hop is stored. In this
example, it is shown
the route record
status ate each hop
to reach the
destination from the
source node. Here,
the chosen route is
S1-S2-S4-S5-S7.
18. Advantages and Disadvantages:
a) DSR uses a reactive approach which eliminates the need to
periodically flood the network with table update messages which are
required in a table-driven approach. The intermediate nodes also
utilize the route cache information efficiently to reduce the control
overhead.
b) The disadvantage of DSR is that the route maintenance
mechanism does not locally repair a broken down link. The
connection setup delay is higher than in table- driven protocols. Even
though the protocol performs well in static and low-mobility
environments, the performance degrades rapidly with increasing
mobility. Also, considerable routing overhead is involved due to the
source- routing mechanism employed in DSR. This routing overhead
is directly proportional to the path length.
19. AODV
Reactive algorithms like AODV create routes on-
demand. They must however, reduce as much as
possible the acquisition time
We could largely eliminate the need of periodically
system-wide broadcasts
AODV uses symmetric links between neighboring
nodes. It does not attempt to follow paths
between nodes when one of the nodes can not hear
the other one
20. (AODV)
Nodes that have not participate yet in any packet
exchange (inactive nodes), they do not maintain
routing information
They do not participate in any periodic routing table
exchanges
21. (AODV)
Each node can become aware of other nodes in its
neighborhood by using local broadcasts known as
hello messages
neighbor routing tables organized to :
1. optimize response time to local movements
2. provide quick response time for new routes
requests
22. (AODV)
AODV main features:
Broadcast route discovery mechanism
Bandwidth efficiently (small header information)
Responsive to changes in network topology
Loop free routing
23. (AODV) Path Discovery
Initiated when a source node needs to
communicate with another node for which it has no
routing info
Every node maintains two counters:
node_sequence_number
broadcast_id
The source node broadcast to the neighbors a
route request packet (called RREQ)
24. (AODV) Path Discovery
RREQ structure
<src_addr, src_sequence_#, broadcast_id, dest_addr,
dest_sequence_#, hop_cnt>
src_addr and broadcast_id uniquely identifies a RREQ
broadcast_id is incremented whenever source node
issues a RREQ
Each neighbor either satisfy the RREQ, by sending
back a routing reply (RREP), or rebroadcast the RREQ
to its own neighbors after increasing the hop_count by
one.
25. (AODV) Path Discovery
If a node receives a RREQ that has the same
<src_addr, broadcast_id> with a previous RREQ it
drops it immediately
If a node cannot satisfy the RREQ, stores:
Destination IP
Source IP
broadcast_id
Expiration time (used for reverse path process)
src_sequence_#
26. (AODV) Path Discovery
1. Reverse Path Setup
In each RREQ there are:
src_sequence_#
the last dest_sequence_#
src_sequence_# used to maintain freshness
information about the reverse route to the source
dest_sequnece_# indicates how fresh a route must
be, before it can be accepted by the source
27. (AODV) Path Discovery
1.Reverse Path Setup (continue)
As RREQ travels from source to many destinations, it
automatically sets up the reverse path, from all nodes
back to the source.
But how does it work?
Each node records the address of the neighbor from which it
received the first copy of the RREQ
These entries are maintained for at least enough time, for the
RREQ to traverse the network and produce a reply
28. (AODV) Path Discovery
1.Reverse Path Setup (continue)
U
D
Z
Y
W
S
V
S
D
Z
W
Z
W
Source node
Destination node
Neighbor nodes
S sends RREQ
Figure 1
W, Y can not satisfy RREQ
i. Set up reverse path
ii. Rebroadcast RREQ to
neighbors
Z, V, U can not satisfy RREQ
i. Set up reverse path
ii. Rebroadcast RREQ to
neighbors
RREQ reached destination
Reversed path is fully set up
From which RREP can travel
back to S
29. (AODV) Path Discovery
2. Forward Path Setup
A node receiving a RREP propagates the first RREP
for a given source towards the source (using the
reverse path that has already established)
Nodes that are not in the path determined by the
RREP will time out after 3000 ms and will delete the
reverse pointers
30. (AODV) Path Discovery
2. Forward Path Setup (continue)
U
D
Z
Y
W
S
V
S
D
Z
W
W
Z
Source node
Destination node
Z has a reversed path to W
Figure 2
Z
W W has a forward path to Z
D replies with a
RREP to Z
Z receives RREP
and set up a
forward pointer
The same
for the
other
nodes
Time out
31. (AODV) Path Discovery
2. Forward Path Setup (Conclusion)
Minimum number of RREPs towards source
The source can begin data transmission as soon as
the first RREP received and update later its routing
information if it learns of a better route
32. (AODV) Path Maintenance
Movement of nodes not lying along an active path does NOT
affect the route to that path's destination
If the source node moves, it can simply re-initiate the route
discovery procedure
If the destination or some intermediate node moves, a
special RREP is sent to the affected nodes
To find out nodes movements periodic hello messages can be
used, or (LLACKS) link-layer acknowledgments (far less
latency)
33. (AODV) Path Maintenance
When a node is unreachable the special RREP that
is sent back towards the source, contains a new
sequence number and hop count of ∞
U
D
Z
Y
S
V
Z
W
Figure 3
Link between Z
and D fails
Z sents a
special RREP
So do W
So now source must find a new path. To do that, it sents a RREQ with a new greater
sequence number
34. (AODV) Local Connectivity
Maintenance
Nodes learn of their neighbors in one or two ways:
1. Whenever a node receives a broadcast from a
neighbor it update its local connectivity
information about this neighbor
2. If a neighbor has not sent any packets within
hello_interval it broadcasts a hello message,
containing its identity and its sequence number
35. (AODV) Local Connectivity
Maintenance
How hello messages work:
Hello messages do not broadcasted outside the
neighborhood because the contain a TTL (time to
leave) value of 1.
Neighbors that receive the hello message update
their local connectivity information to the node that
have broadcasted the hello message
36. (AODV) Local Connectivity
Maintenance
How hello messages work: (continue)
Receiving a hello from a new neighbor, or failing to
receive allowed_hello_loss (typically 2) consecutive
hello messages from a node previously in the
neighborhood, indicates that the local connectivity
has changed
37. (AODV) Conclusion
AODV main features:
Nodes store only the routes they need
Need for broadcast is minimized
Reduces memory requirements and needless
duplications
Quick response to link breakage in active routes
Loop-free routes maintained by use of destination
sequence numbers
Scalable to large populations of nodes
39. (DSR) General
Two main mechanisms that work together to allow the
discovery and maintainance of source routes:
Route discovery
Route maintainance
40. (DSR) General
Route discovery:
Is the mechanism by which a source node S, obtains
a route to a destination D
Used only when S attempt to send a packet to D and
does not already knows a route to D
41. (DSR) General
Route maintainance:
Is the mechanism by which source node S is able to
detect if the network topology has changed and can
no longer use its route to D
If S knows another route to D, use it
Else invoke route discovery process again to find a
new route
Used only when S wants to send a packet to D
42. (DSR) General
Each mechanism operate entirely on demand
DSR requires no periodic packets of any kind at any
level
Uni-directional and asymmetric routes support
(e.g. send a packet to a node D through a route and receive a
packet D from another route)
43. (DSR) Basic Route Discovery
When S wants to sent a packet to D:
it places in the header of the packet a source route
giving the sequence of hops that the packet should
follow on its way to D
S obtains a suitable source route by searching its route
table
If no route found for D, S initiate the Route Discovery
protocol to dynamically find a new route to D
44. (DSR) Basic Route Discovery
Sender
Broadcasts a Route Request Packet (RREQ)
RREQ contains a unique Request ID and the address of the
sender
Receiver
If this node is the destination node, or has route to the
destination send a Route Reply packet (RREP)
Else if is the source, drop the packet
Else if is already in the RREQ's route table,
drop the packet
Else append the node address in the RREQ's route table
and broadcast the updated RREQ
45. (DSR) Basic Route Discovery
U
D
Z
Y
W
S
V
S
D
Z
W
Z
W
Source node
Destination node
Neighbor nodes
S sends RREQ
Figure 4
RREQ packet
Id=2, {S}
Id=2, {S}
Id=2, {S, W}
Id=2, {S, Y}
Id=2, {S, Y}
Id=2, {S, W, Z}
46. (DSR) Basic Route Discovery
When a RREQ reaches the destination node, a RREP
must be sent back to source
The destination node:
Examine its own Route Cache for a route back to source
If found, it use this route to send back the RREP
Else, the destination node starts a new Route Discovery
process to find a route towards source node
In protocols that require bi-directional links like 802.11, the
reversed route list of the RREQ packet can be used, in order to
avoid the second Route Discovery
47. (DSR) Basic Route Maintenance
Each node transmitting a packet:
is responsible for confirming that the packet has been received
by the next hop along the source route
The confirmation it is done with a standard part of MAC layer
(e.g. Link-level ACKs in 802.11)
If none exists, a DSR-specific software takes the
responsibility to sent back an ACK
When retransmissions of a packet in a node reach a maximum
number, a Route Error Packet (RERR) is sent from the node back
to the source, identifying the broken link
48. (DSR) Basic Route Maintenance
The source:
Removes from the routing table the broken route
Retransmission of the original packet is a function of
upper layers (e.g. TCP)
It searches the routing table for another route, or start
a new Route Discovery process
49. (DSR) Basic Route Maintenance
U
D
Z
Y
W
S
V
S
D
Z
W
Z
W
Source node
Destination node
Neighbor nodes
Figure 5
RERR packet
Link fails
Intermediate
node sents a
RERR
RERR(Z, D)
RERR(Z, D)
Route Table
D: S, W, Z, D
V: S, Y, V
50. (DSR) Conclusion
Excellent performance for routing in multi-hop wireless
ad hoc networks
Very low routing overhead even with continuous rapid
motion, which scales to :
1. zero when nodes are stationary
2. the affected routes when nodes are moving
Completely self-organized & self-configuring network
Entirely on-demand operation. No periodic activity of any
kind at any level
52. Comparison of AODV and DSR
Main common features:
On-demand route requesting
Route discovery based on requesting and replying
control packets
Broadcast route discovery mechanism
53. Comparison of AODV and DSR
Main common features: (continue)
Route information is stored in all intermediate nodes
along the established path
Inform source node for a broken links
Loop-free routing
54. Comparison of AODV and DSR
Main differences:
DSR can handle uni and bi-directional links, AODV uses
only bi-directional
In DSR, using a single RREQ - RREP cycle, source and
intermediate nodes can learn routes to other nodes on
the route
DSR maintains many alternate routes to the destination,
instead of AODV that maintains at most one entry per
destination
55. Comparison of AODV and DSR
Main differences: (continue)
DSR doesn’t contain any explicit mechanism to expire
stale routes in the cache , In AODV if a routing table
entry is not recently used , the entry is expired
DSR can’t prefer “fresher” routes when faced multiple
choices for routes. In contrast, AODV always choose
the fresher route (based on destination sequence
numbers)
56. Comparison of AODV and DSR
Main differences: (continue)
DSR’s RREQ has variable length depending on the nodes
that the packet has traveled. AODV’s RREQ size is
constant
As a result DSR’s header overhead may increase as more
nodes become active, so we expect that AODV
throughput in those scenarios to be better
57. Comparison of AODV and DSR
Test bench set up:
100 nodes, some of them as sources
Nominal bit rate of 2 Mb/s
Nominal node range of 250 m
Continuously moving nodes
59. Comparison of AODV and DSR
Application and routing statistics for an example scenario for a network of 100
nodes with continuous mobility and 40 sources
Performance
metrics
DSR AODV
Packets delivered
/Packets sent (%)
56.88 83.66
Average delay (s) 1.36 0.26
Routing Packets DSR AODV
Route requests 37774 228094
Route replies 82710 17753
Route errors 26591 9808
Total 147075 255655
60. Conclusion
DSR outperforms AODV in less stressful situations
(i.e., smaller number of nodes and lower load and/or
mobility)
AODV outperforms DSR in more stressful situations
(e.g., more load, higher mobility)
DSR commonly generates less routing load than AODV
Poor delay and throughput of DSR due to lack of any
mechanism to expire stale routes or determine the
freshness of routes