CAPACITY OF AD-HOC

WIRELESS NETWORKS

MUKUL SHARMA 269/CO/O6

SAHIL TANEJA 295/CO/O6
SIDDHARTH RAJKONWAR 304/CO/O6
 The Wireless Networking World
Infrastructure Mode
Ad-Hoc Mode
 Infrastructure Mode
 Using the wireless for the end user loop, which means between
the user terminal and a “radio terminal” which describes a Base
station (for GSM), or an access point (for Wi-Fi).
 Its role is basically to serve as a gateway between a wired network
(called distribution system) and its wireless zone.
 Radio terminal spreads a signal around, creating a coverage zone.
 Each client is able to communicate within this zone, but then,
has to renegotiate with another “radio terminal” if available.
 The “radio terminal” has the key role of referee in this kind of
network, as each station has to communicate only with its radio
terminal.
 Mobility is then limited to a coverage zone, and so, has a limited
impact on this implementation.
 Ad Hoc
 This design has the main advantage to be independent of any
distribution system, or any hierarchy such as an access point.
 If A wants to communicate with B, then, they just have to
connect to each other and exchange data. But, this design also
extends coverage and mobility possibilities.
 If A wants to communicate with C, but C is out of range, B, a
station in both A and C radio zones, can forward packets. Also, if
A is moving closer to C, A and C can stop using B as a relay.

Example of range extension with Ad Hoc

 Usage of Ad Hoc Networks
Extending Coverage
• Single access point where a few users are connected can provide a network
access to out-of-range machines.

Communicating where no infrastructure exists

• Army deployed into destroyed place.
• Each station can be configured for forwarding communications to the
appropriate destination

Community Networks
• Extending coverage of Access Points eg FON promoted by Skype &
Google
• OLPC
 Issues in Wireless Communication
Security- Need for Encryption

Bandwidth- Low & Unreliable due to Radio Media

Energy- More amount is required & Absorption in Air

an important factor

Asymmetric Connections-Due to Radio Propagation

 Routing
Routing is the mechanism used in communications to find a path between
two entities (in a wired/wireless network).
In Wired Mode-routers use routing protocol to logically locate themselves,
and draw a network topology. Routers are able to define a routing table which
contains information on where to forward received packets.
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
In Infrastructure Mode- handled by the access point and the distribution
system; every wireless device just has to forward all its traffic to this access
point
In Ad Hoc networks- there is no “referee” for connections, and, every device
acts as a router.
 Constraints for Routing in Ad-Hoc Networks
4 Main Constraints:
1. Dynamics Topology
2. Bandwidth Constraints
3. Energy Constraints
4. Low Physical Security

 MANET Workgroup- to create and discuss routing

protocols for Ad Hoc networks & comply with these
constraints in order to build an efficient algorithm of route
calculation
Ad Hoc Routing Protocols Design
 Ad Hoc Routing Protocol Approaches
Proactive- 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.

Reactive- 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.

Hybrid- 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 proactive protocol will be used. For inter-zone routing, a reactive protocol
will be used.
 PRO-ACTIVE PROTOCOLS
Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV)
a. One of the first protocols for ad-hoc networks
b. Based on Bellman Ford Algorithm
c. Each routing table contains all available destinations, with the
associated next hop, the associated metric (numbers of hops), and a
sequence number originated by the destination node.
d. The route selection is performed on the metric and sequence
number criteria.
e. 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 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.
 Illustration of DSDV
 Consider two following topologies. At t=0, the network is organized as shown. We
suppose at this time the network is stable, each node has a correct routing table of all
destinations.

 Then, we suppose G is moving, and at t+1, the topology is as shown

 DSDV (continued)
 At this stage, the following events are detected, and actions are
taken:

 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).
 Problem faced in DSDV
Route Fluctuation
• 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.
Example as in the illustration
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.
 PRO-ACTIVE PROTOCOLS (continued)
Optimized Linked State Routing (OLSR)
a. As a proactive protocol, OLSR is table-driven.
b. The change comparing to other proactive protocols is in the route
updating process.
 Algorithm - OLSR is using a state link routing protocol.

 It takes decisions based on the shortest path, using the Dijkstra’s

algorithm.
 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.
 OLSR(continued)
 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.
 Multipoint Relay (MPR)
 It is a selection algorithm.

 Each node assigns a relay to a few of its direct neighbours, for covering every node at a two-
hop distance.

 Relay Selection Mechanism :

 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
two-hop 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.
 MPR (continued)
 In the end, the best neighbours are qualified depending on how many
nodes they can cover.
 It brings more effectiveness for the routing protocol by avoiding
duplicate traffic.
 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.
 Reactive Protocols
Ad hoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV)
a. It is a distance vector routing protocol, which means routing decisions will be taken depending on the
number of hops to destination.

b. A particularity of this network is to support both multicast and unicast routing.

 Algorithm:
a. Inspired from the Bellman-Ford algorithm like DSDV.

b. The principal change is to be On Demand.

c. 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.

d. 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.

e. 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.
 AODV (continued)
 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, then, the originator deletes all the 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.
 Example of AODV Route Discovery
 In the example, A needs to send a packet to I. A “ROUTE REQUEST” packet will be generated and
sent to B and D:

 B and D add A in their routing table, as a reverse route, and forward the “ROUTE REQUEST” packet to
their neighbours.
 B and D ignored the packet they exchanged each other (as duplicates). The forwarding process continues
while no route is known.
 I receives the “ROUTE REQUEST” from G.
 It generates the “ROUTE REPLY” packet and sends it to the node it received from. Duplicate packets
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.
 Reactive Protocols (continued)
Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)

a. As a reactive protocol, DSR has some similitude with AODV.

b. The difference with AODV is that DSR focuses on the source routing rather than on exchanging
tables.

 Algorithm:

a. 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.

b. 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.

c. 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.

d. 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.
 DSR (continued)
 DSR Route Delivery Process
a. In figure A wants a route to E. It broadcasts a route request to its neighbours with an
arbitrary chosen ID.
b. Neighbours forward this broadcast, and at each node, the reverse route entry is added
into the route request packet.
c. 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.

 DSR Route Maintenance Process

a. DSR does not use broadcasts such as AODV’s “HELLO” packets. Instead, it uses layer
two built-in acknowledgments.
b. 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.
c. 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.
 Hybrid Protocols
 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.

 Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP), is the main protocol in this category.

 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.

 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).
 ZRP (continued)

Structure of ZRP Protocol:

 ZRP (continued)
 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.
 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 B, it is out of the zone.
 ZRP (continued)
IntrAzone Routing Protocol (IARP)

IntErzone Routing Protocol (IERP)

Border Resolution Protocol (BRP)

Neighbour Detection Protocol (NDP)

 IntrAzone Routing Protocol (IARP)
 The most reasonable choice for IARP 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.
 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).

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 bordercast the “ROUTE REQUEST” to
their own peripheral nodes, except the one they received from.
 Border Resolution Protocol (BRP)
 Protocol used in order to control IERP packets flooding and to improve its
performance.
 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.

Network 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 Ad 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.
Simulation System
Simulation Software Design
 Why two languages(TCL and C++)
C++: Detailed protocol simulations require systems
programming language
 byte manipulation, packet processing, algorithm
implementation
 Run time speed is important
 Turn around time (run simulation, find bug, fix bug, recompile,
re-run) is slower

Tcl: Simulation of slightly varying parameters or

configurations
 quickly exploring a number of scenarios
 iteration time (change the model and re -run) is more important
 SQL Table Used
Field Type Field Type
Sim_id double
Nodes int(1) index double
Duration float
Topology double sim_id double
Speed varchar(5)
event char(1)
Protocol varchar(4)
Filename varchar(100) time float
dropped_packets double
dropped_size double node int
routing_packet double
routing_size double layer varchar(3)
traffic_packet double
traffic_size double type varchar(4)
Moves Double
size Double

“simulation” Table Structure “traces” Table Structure

Application Traffic vs Routing Traffic
Amount of Packets vs No. of Nodes
No. of Bytes vs No. of nodes
Impact Of Mobility
Impact of Mobility
 Conclusion
 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.

 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.

 ZRP takes the advantage of both proactive and reactive 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.
 YO U
A N K
TH