Efficient route selection by using link failure factor in MANET

Abstract Designing of Routing protocol is an

important issue for a mobile ad hoc network. Due to
frequent changes in network topology is a
challenging task for current cenerio. Node failures
and link breakages cause data loss and loss of the
network resources. On consideration of signal
strength based AODV protocol, we will initially
measure the signal strength between the nodes and
then compare it with RSSI threshold values if this
value is greater than threshold value then it is
consider for further processing otherwise it is
discarded, incase if there is not find any route
between source and destination then it goes for
processing of normal AODV, due to their movement
toward normal AODV protocol we have proposed a
new technique, In this paper we proposed a method,
in which node calculate RSSI value of the neighbour
node if it is less than threshold value then it increase
link failure factor by 1 and calculate the LFF up to
destination node with the help of this method link
failure factor of every route is calculated, and those
route have minimum link failure factor is selected as
primary route between sender and destination this
selection is done on the basis of minimum hop count .
The benefit of this scheme is by selecting a strong
route to the destination this shows a sufficient
increment in the lifetime of the network. Simulation
results of LFAODV and SEAODV shows that
LFAODV have much better performance in terms of
parameters like Packets delivery ratio, throughput,
Routing overhead.
I. INTRODUCTION
Infrastructure less networks of mobile
comes under the category of Mobile ad-hoc networks
(MANETs) that communicate with each other in
wireless mode [1]. Several routing schemes have
already been proposed and almost all of these have
been extensively simulated or implemented as well
[2]. There are many applications where we use such
networks such as in disaster relief operations,
conferencing and environment sensingand in military
use.Alot of ad hoc routing algorithms are working,
that utilizetopology information to make routing
decisions at each node [3].A mobile adhoc network
(MANET) are collection of wirelessmobile devices,
which can communicate with each other withoutany
infrastructure support .it use radio frequency
technology thatallows more mobility to the user

because the absence ofcable.manet is a network,

which does not require infrastructureor central
administration to suddenly establish a temporary
network. A MANET is install easily in such condition
whererequiring quick set up and modification, such
as militarybattlefields or accident recovery areas. All
MANET applications require the dissemination of
packets, from node to node, ontime-varying channels
and time-varying topologies.
Communication, between non-neighboring nodes,
requires a routing protocol, so a stable and efficient
routing method is required for longer live
transmission. Ad hoc networks consist of mobile
nodes which suffer from deployment in an
unorganized way. Since all nodes in MANET move
randomly so topology ofthe network is constantly
changing which lead to frequent disconnection
between source and destination nodes. there are two
type of routing protocol one is reactive or on demand
routing protocol ,and another one is proactive or
table- driven routing protocol Proactive routing (such
as DSDV [4]) create routing table which contains an
entry of every node in thenetwork. They update the
route table periodically and re calculate the distance
to all nodes. In reactive method (such as DSR [5] and
AODV [6]), whenever route is required it calculate
the route between source and destination. A stable
route is defined as routes which provide connectivity
inhighly mobile network and not disconnect for any
acceptable period of data transfer.
II. RELATED WORK
It is very challenging issue in highly mobile
network to finding a stable route between source and
destination. Various approaches have been proposed
to deal with node mobility.
(a). Proactive (Table-Driven) routing protocols
These routing protocol are similar to and come as a
natural extension of those for the wired networks. In
proactive routing, each node has one or more tables
that contain the latest information of the routes to any
node in the network .Each node has the next hop for
reaching to a node subnet and the cost of this route.
Various table-driven protocols differ in the way the
information about change in topology is propagated
through all nodes in the network. The two kinds of
table updating in proactive protocols are the periodic
update and the triggered update [9]. In periodic
update, each node periodically broadcasts its table in

the network. Each node just arriving in the network

receives that table. In triggered update, as soon as a
node detects a change in its neighborhood, it
broadcasts entries in its routing table that have
changed as a result. Examples of this class of Ad-hoc
routing protocols are the Destination-Sequenced
Distance-Vector (DSDV)[10] and the Wireless
Routing Protocol(WRP). Proactive routing tends to
waste bandwidth and power in the network because
of the need to broadcast the routing tables/updates
.Furthermore, as the number of nodes in the MANET
increases the size of the Network increases.
(b) Reactive (on-demand) routing protocols
Reactive routing protocols [11] take a lazy approach
to routing. They do not maintain or constantly update
their route tables with the latest route topology.
Instead, when a source node wants to transmit a
message, it floods a query into the network to
discover the route to the destination. This discovery
packet is called the Route Request (RREQ) packet
and the mechanism is called Route Discovery. The
destination replies with a Route Reply (RREP)
packet. As a result, the source dynamically finds the
route to the destination. The discovered route is
maintained until the destination node becomes in
accessible or until the route is no longer desired.
The protocols in this class differ in handling cache
routes and in the way route discoveries and route
replies are handled. Reactive protocols are generally
considere deficient when the route discovery is
employed rather infrequently in comparison to the
data transfer. Although the network topology changes
dynamically, the network traffic caused by the route
discovery step is low compared to the total
communication bandwidth. Examples of Reactive
routing protocols are the Dynamic Source Routing
(DSR)[12], the Ad-hoc on-demand Distance Vector
Routing (AODV) and the Temporally-Ordered
Routing Algorithm (TORA). Since the route to
destination will have to be acquired just before
communication can begin, the latency period for
most applications is likely to increase drastically.
(C) Hybrid routing protocols
Both the proactive and reactive protocols work well
fornet works with a small number of nodes. As the
number of nodes increases, hybrid reactive/proactive
protocols are used to achieve higher performance
.Hybrid protocols attempt to assimilate the advantages
of purely proactive and reactive protocols. The key
idea isto use are active routing procedure at the

global network level while employing proactive

routing procedure in a nodes local neighborhood
.Zone Routing Protocol(ZRP) [9] is an exampleof the
hybrid routing protocols.
(d) Destination-Sequence-Distance-Vector (DSDV)
routing protocol
DSDV is a hop-by-hop distance vector routing
protocol. Each mobile node maintains a routing table
that stores for all reachable destinations the next-hop
and number of hops to reach that destination, and
these quence number assigned by the destination.
The routing tables updates are time-driven and
event-driven, in which each mobile node transmits
periodically its tables to its neighbors, periodically
broadcasting routing updates. This transmission takes
place also in topology change cases. DSDV applies
two types of routing updates: full dump or
incremental update. Full dump carries the full table
with all available routing information and this issui
table for fast changing networks. Incremental dump
carries only the update dentries since last dump,
which must fit in a packet and is suitable when
network is stable.
DSDV possesses routes availability to all destinations
at all times ,which involves much less delay in the
route setup process. The use of sequence number
distinguishesstale routes from new ones, wherer out
es with higher sequence number are favorable.
However the updates due to broken links lead to a
heavy control overhead during high mobility,
proportional to the number of nodes in the network
and therefore affecting scalability.
(e) Ad-hoc on-demand distance vector routing
(aodv)
The Ad-hoc On- Demand Distance Vector routing
protocol as described in is a modified version of the
DSDV described in Section 3.2.4.2 and aims at
reducing system-wide broadcasts that .Routes are
discovered on an as-needed basis and are maintained
only as long as they are necessary. Each node
maintains monotonically increasing
sequence
numbers and this number increases a sitlearns about a
change in the topology of its neighborhood. This
sequence number ensures that the most recent route is
selected whenever route discovery is initiated.
AODV uses routing table. This route table Is used to
store the destination and next- hop IP addresses as
well as the destination sequence number. Associated

with each routing table entry is life time ,which is

updated whenever route is used.
III . PROPOSED WORK
In this approach node calculate RSSI value of the
neighbour node if it is less than threshold value then
it increase link failure factor by 1 and calculate the
LFF up to destination node with the help of this
method link failure factor of every route is calculated
those route have min link failure facture is selected as
primary route between sender and destination. And
sender sends data through this route, with the help of
this method we can select most stable path among all
route.
ALGORITHM :
This method work in two phase
a) Route Discovery
b) Route maintenance
Route Discovery:Threshold values: SIGNAL THRESHOLD for
calculating link failure factor for route.
(SIGNAL THRESHOLD,ENERGY THRESHOLD
(10% of initial energy) , LFF(Link failure factor)
initially value is zero for all route)
If S (source) wants to communicate with the D
(destination) then
{
AODV protocol () // finds route between S &D{
For (each node between S and R)
{
Calculate signal strength between two consecutive
nodes
If
(Signal
Strength
<=
SIGNAL_THRESHOLD)
{
Accept RREQ packet
LFF=LFF+1;
Save LFF in RREQ PACKET and
forward to next node till to the destination
}
At Destination node
After receiving RREQ of different route with
calculated link failure factor Destination Node
unicast Route Reply to Source.
At Source node
After receiving all route reply source select those
route which have minimum link failure factor among
all route

Before sending data packet to next hop energy node

checks his energy
If
(node
energy
>=
ENERGY_THRESHOLD) then
{
Process data packet.
}
Else (Send RERR message to
Source node)
{
Select alternative route for data
transmission.
}
IV SIMULATION PARAMETERS
The simulation parameter has shown in Table 1.
Here, we designed and implemented our test bed
using Network Simulator (NS-2.34) to test the
performance of both Routing algorithms.The data
transmission rate is 4 packets/sec. The total
simulation time is 200 second.
Table 1: Simulation Parameters

P a r a m e t e r

Simulation duration
Topology Are a
Number of Nodes
Mobility Speed
Pause time
Mobilit y Mode l
Packet rate
Packet size
Propagation Model
Routing Protocol
T r a f f i c T yp e

Valu e

200 s
1000*1000
50
10 m/s
2-30s
Random Waypoint
4
packets/s
512 b
Two Ray Ground
SEAODV,LFAODV
CBR

W simulated LFAODV (along with SEAODV) using NS2.

In this section, we present the simulation results and
compare LFAODV with SEAODV. In this scenario we
change the pause time of node Fig.1 shows that as the
pause time increases throughput also increases.

Figure1 Throughputvs Pause Time

Figure 4 Normalized Routing Load Vs Pause Time

Figure 2 End2end Delay Vs Pause Time

Figure 5 Average Energy Consumption Vs Pause time

V. CONCLUSION
Proposed LFAODV technique reduces link and node
failure problem, also packet loss or drop problem will
be minimized and provides a reliable and stable route
for communication that lasts for a longer time in
mobile networks. And also help us for finding
shortest path as compare to SEAODV and provides
better connectivity degree between the nodes. Also
reduces the problem of node failure due to signal
strength and provides path maintenance because
LFAODV improves node mobility which results less
the failure of path might also affect the entire
network.
Figure 3 Packet Delivery Ratio Vs Pause Time

VI REFERENCES
[1] C. E. Perkins, Ad Hoc Networking, Addison
Wesley, 2000.
[2] C.-K. Toh, Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks:
Protocols and Systems,Prentice Hall, 2002.
[3] Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Mobile
Ad Hoc Networks(MANET) Working Group Charter,
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/manet-charter.html,
2008.
[4] Charles E. Perkins, PravinBhagwat, Highly
dynamic Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector
routing
(DSDV)
for
mobile
computers,
in:Proceedings of the SIGCOMM' 94 Conference on
CommunicationsArchitectures,
Protocols
and
Applications,
August
1994,
pp.234-244.
doi:10.1109/TENCON.2008.4766808J.
Clerk
Maxwell, ATreatise onElectricity and Magnetism, 3rd
ed., vol. 2. Oxford: Clarendon, 1892,pp.6873.
[5] D. B. Johnson, D. A. Maltz, and Josh Broch,
DSR: The Dynamic SourceRouting Protocol for
Multi-Hop Wireless Ad Hoc Networks, in Ad
HocNetworking, edited by Charles E. Perkins,
Chapter 5, pp. 139-172,
Addison-Wesley, 2001.
[6] G.S. Tomar, Position Based Routing algorithm
For Mobile Ad HocNetworks, International Journal
of Simulation- Systems, Science andTechnology, Vol.
10, No.1, pp 10-15, Jan 2009.
[7] C. E. Perkins, Ad hoc On Demand Distance
Vector (AODV)Routing,Internet Draft, draftietfmanet-aodv-01.txt, 1998.
[8] San-Yuan Wang,Jia-Yu Liu, Chun-Chien Huang,
Mao-Yuan Kao, Yi-HoLi , "Signal strength-based

routing
protocol
for
mobile
ad
hoc
networks,"Advanced Information Networking and
Applications, 2005. AINA 2005. 19th International
Conference on ,vol.2, no.,pp.17-20, vol.2, 2830March2005 doi: 10.1109/AINA.2005.311
.
[9] JiwonPark,Moh, S,Ilyong Chung , "A multipath
AODV routingprotocol in mobile ad hoc networks
with
SINR-based
route
selection,"Wireless
Communication Systems. 2008. ISWCS '08. IEEE
InternationalSymposium, vol., no., pp.682-686, 21-24
Oct. 2008doi:10.1109/
ISWCS.2008.4726143.
[10] Choi, L., Sang Hoon Lee,Hyohyun Choi; ,"MMAC: Mobility-BasedLink Management Protocol for
Mobile
Sensor
Networks,"FutureDependable
Distributed Systems, 2009 Software Technologies for
, vol.,no., pp.210-214, 17-17 March2009doi:
10.1109/STFSSD.2009.47
[11] Nitin Manjhi; Nilesh Patel ; , Signal Strength
Based Route Selection inMANETs International
Journal
Of
Computer
Science
andTelecommunications, Vol. 3,Issue 7, pp.27-30,
July 2012.
[12] LaxmiShrivastava, G.S. Tomar&SaritaBhadoria,
PerformanceEvaluation of Reactive Routing in
Mobile Grid Environment,
International Journal of Grid and High Performance,
IGI-GlobalPublishers, Vol.3, No.3, pp 45-53, Jul-Sep
2011.
[13] The Network Simulator
www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/, 2008.

NS-2,

http://

[14] CMU Monarch Project, http://www.monarch.

cs.cmu.edu/cmu-ns.html,2008.