Protocols # P. Chenna Reddy , Dr. P. ChandraSekhar Reddy ' Asst. Prof in CSE, JNTU College ofEngg, Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh, INDIA, pcreddyl @rediffmail. com Professor Coordinator, INT University, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh,INDIA, pcreddy2l @rediffmail. com Abstract
1-4244-0731-1/06/$20.00 02006 IEEE.
Routing in adhoc networks is nontrivial due to highly
dynamic nature of the nodes. In recent years several routing protocols targeted at mobile adhoc networks are being proposed and prominent among them are DSD V, AOD V, TORA, and DSR. This paper does the comprehensive performance analysis of the routing protocols using ns2 simulator considering all the metrics as suggested by RFC 2501. Results indicate reactive routing protocols are more suitable for adhoc networks. Keywords Adhoc, DSDV, AODV, TORA, DSR, ns2
Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) [1] is a
Proactive routing protocol that solves the major problem associated with Distance Vector routing of wired networks i.e., Count-to-infinity, by using Destination sequence numbers. The DSDV protocol requires each mobile station to advertise, to each of its current neighbours, its own routing table. Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) [2] is a reactive protocol which uses source routing. It computes the routes when necessary explicitly lists this route in the packets header, identifying each forwarding hop by the address of the next node to which to transmit the packet on its way to the destination host. Adhoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV) [3] is essentially a combination of both DSR and DSDV. It borrows the basic on-demand mechanism of Route discovery and Route Maintenance from DSR, plus the use of hop-by-hop routing, sequence numbers from DSDV. The Temporally-Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA) [4] is an adaptive routing protocol for multihop networks that possesses the following attributes: Distributed execution, Multipath routing, both proactive and reactive, Minimization of communication overhead via localization of algorithmic reaction to topological changes. II. Simulation Our simulation environment consists of 50 wireless nodes forming an ad hoc network, moving about over a 670 X 670 flat space for 200 seconds of simulated time. Each run of the simulator accepts as input, a scenario file that describes the exact motion of each node and the exact sequence of packets
originated by each node, together with the exact time at which
each change in motion or packet origination is to occur. We pregenerated 45 different scenario files with varying movement patterns and traffic loads (Constant Bit Rate). The movement scenario files we used for each simulation are characterized by a pause time. Each node begins the simulation by remaining stationary for pause time seconds. It then selects a random destination and moves to that destination at a speed distributed uniformly between 0 and some maximum speed (20 mls). Upon reaching the destination, the node pauses again for pause time seconds, selects another destination, and proceeds as previously described, repeating this behaviour for the duration of the simulation. A.
B.
Path optimality' The difference between the number
of hops a packet took to reach its destination and the length of the shortest path that physically existed. Packets test' It is a measure of the number of packets dropped by the routers due to various reasons. Average Delay: Average amount of time taken by a packet to go from source to destination.
Simulation results
Metrics In comparing the protocols, we chose the following metrics
Throughput' It is defined as total number of packets
received by the destination. Sorting overhead: The ratio between the total number of routing packets transmitted to data packets.
Fig. : Total number of packets received at various levels of mobility
throughput of AODV and TORA. DSR outperforms all the
protocols as far as throughput is concerned. The descending order of performance when throughput is considered as metric is DSR, AODV, TORA, and DSDV. DSR, AODV, and TORA show little performance variation as the mobility increases. The impact of mobility on DSDV is significant and the performance of DSDV decreases drastically with increase in mobility. The routing overhead introduced by TORA as shown in Fig. 4 is significant which indicates poor utilization of the available bandwidth. The overhead of AODV decreases as the mobility decreases. The overhead of DSDV and DSR is negligible.
Fig. 2: Delay introduced by routing protocols with variation in mobility
DSDV drops more number of packets than any other protocol
as shown in Fig 3. The average delay introduced by AODV is very less and is nearly constant as shown in Fig 2. Similar is the case with DSDV. TORA introduces spikes in delay of packets as there is chance for short-lived and long-lived loops. DSR introduces high delay under high mobility conditions but significantly less than that of TORA. The path optimality characteristic of DSDV as shown in Fig. 5 is significantly better than other prococols. DSR has similar characteristic. TORA and AODV uses suboptimal path even under low mobility conditions. Fig. 3 : Total number of packets dropped with variation in mobility
In this paper, performance evaluation of four routing
protocols DSDV, AODV, TORA and DSR is done. proactive routing protocol DSDV performance is poor indicating that it is not suitable for adhoc networks. DSR with aggressive use of cache memory performs better than all the remaining protocols. TORAs performance is not stable particularly due to shortlived loops. There is only slight variation in performance between AODV and DSR. References
C.
[1] Charles E. Perkins and Pravin Bhagwat, Highly dynamic
Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector routing (DSDV) for mobile computers, Proc. SIGCOMM 94 Conference on Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications, pages 234244, August 1994. [2] David B. Johnson, David A. Maltz, and Yih-Chun Hu, The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (DSR), <draft-ietf-manet-dsr-10.txt> Internet-draft, 19 July 2004. [3] C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer, and S. Das, Ad hoc OnDemand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing, RFC 3561, July 2003. [4] V. Park and S. Corson, Temporally Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA) Version 1, Functional specification IETF Internet draft, http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf- manettora-spec-01.txt, 1998. [5] S. Corson, and J. Macker, Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET): Routing Protocol Performance Issues and Evaluation Considerations, RFC 2501, January 1999.
Simulation Analysis
The simulation results bring out some
important characteristic differences between the routing protocols. From Fig. 1 the following can be inferred: There is little difference in
Evaluation of Some Websites that Offer Virtual Phone Numbers for SMS Reception and Websites to Obtain Virtual Debit/Credit Cards for Online Accounts Verifications
Hacking: A Beginners Guide To Your First Computer Hack; Learn To Crack A Wireless Network, Basic Security Penetration Made Easy and Step By Step Kali Linux
Cybersecurity: A Simple Beginner’s Guide to Cybersecurity, Computer Networks and Protecting Oneself from Hacking in the Form of Phishing, Malware, Ransomware, and Social Engineering
Palo Alto Networks: The Ultimate Guide To Quickly Pass All The Exams And Getting Certified. Real Practice Test With Detailed Screenshots, Answers And Explanations