Abstract
Ad hoc networks are characterized by multihop wireless connectivity, frequently changing network topology and the need for efficient dynamic routing protocols plays an important role. We compare the performance of two prominent on‐demand routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks: dynamic source routing (DSR), ad hoc on‐demand distance vector routing (AODV). A detailed simulation model with medium access control (MAC) and physical layer models is used to study the interlayer interactions and their performance implications. We demonstrate that even though DSR and AODV share similar on‐demand behavior, the differences in the protocol mechanisms can lead to significant performance differentials. In this paper, we examine both on‐demand routing protocols AODV and DSR based on packet delivery ratio, normalized routing load, normalized MAC load, average end‐to‐end delay by varying the node density, network loading, and mobility variations for reference point group mobility and random waypoint models. This framework aims to evaluate the effect of mobility models on the performance of mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) routing protocols. Our results show that the protocol performance may vary drastically across mobility models and performance rankings of protocols may vary with the mobility models used. This effect can be explained by the interaction of the mobility characteristics with the connectivity graph properties.
Highlights
Wireless technologies are without any doubt shaping the beginning of the new millennium
Numerous ad hoc routing protocols have been proposed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) working group mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs)
Several additional optimizations have been proposed and have been evaluated to be very effective by the authors of the protocol [14], as described in the following. (i) Salvaging: an intermediate node can use an alternate route from its own cache, when a data packet meets a failed link on its source route. (ii) Gratuitous route repair: a source node receiving an route error (RERR) packet piggybacks the RERR in the following route request (RREQ)
Summary
Wireless technologies are without any doubt shaping the beginning of the new millennium. In the RWP model, the nodes, that is, mobile users, move along a zigzag path consisting of straight legs from one waypoint to the [8]. Mobility model such as RWP model is described on graphs based on road maps [9]. For this purpose, numerous ad hoc routing protocols have been proposed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) working group MANET. Numerous ad hoc routing protocols have been proposed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) working group MANET These protocols have been evaluated through simulations in network simulators like NS-2
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
