Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Final - Mobile Adhoc Networks
Final - Mobile Adhoc Networks
ABSTRACT
Real time applications are characterized by their delay bounds. To satisfy the
Quality of Service (QoS) requirements of such flows over wireless
communications, we enhance the 802.11 protocol to support the Deadline
Monotonic (DM) scheduling policy. Then, we propose to evaluate the performance
of DM in terms of throughput, average medium access delay and medium access
delay distrbution. To evaluate the performance of the DM policy, we develop a
Markov chain based analytical model and derive expressions of the throughput,
average MAC layer service time and service time distribution. Therefore, we
validate the mathematical model and extend analytial results to a multi-hop
network by simulation using the ns-2 network simulator.
2.3 Real time scheduling over 802.11 3.1 Distributed Scheduling over 802.11
To realize a distributed scheduling over 802.11,
A distributed solution for the support of real- we introduce a priority broadcast mechanism similar
time sources over IEEE 802.11, called Blackburst, is to [18]. Indeed each station maintains a local
discussed in [8]. This scheme modifies the MAC scheduling table with entries for HOL packets of all
protocol to send short transmissions in order to gain other stations. Each entry in the scheduling table of
priority for real-time service. It is shown that this ( )
node S i comprises two fields S j , D j where S j is
approach is able to support bounded delays. The
main drawback of this scheme is that it requires the source node MAC address and D j is the
constant intervals for high priority traffic; otherwise deadline of the HOL packet of node S j . To
the performance degrades very much. broadcast the HOL packet deadlines, we propose to
use the DATA/ACK access mode.
In [18], the authors proposed a distributed
priority scheduling over 802.11 to support a class of
When a node S i transmits a DATA packet, it
dynamic priority schedulers such as Earliest
Deadline First (EDF) or Virtual Clock (VC). Indeed, piggybacks the deadline of its HOL packet. The
the EDF policy is used to schedule real time flows nodes hearing the DATA packet add an entry for S i
according to their absolute deadlines, where the in their local scheduling tables by filling the
absolute deadline is the node arrival time plus the corresponding fields. The receiver of the DATA
delay bound. packet copies the priority of the HOL packet in ACK
To realize a distributed scheduling over 802.11, before sending the ACK frame. All the stations that
the authors of [18] used a priority broadcast did not hear the DATA packet add an entry for S i
mechanism where each station maintains an entry for using the information in the ACK packet.
the highest priority packet of all other stations. Thus,
stations can adjust their backoff according to other 3.2 DM medium access backoff policy
stations priorities.
Let’s consider two stations S 1 and S 2
The overhead introduced by the broadcast transmitting two flows with the same deadline D1 (
priority mechanism is negligible. This is due to the D1 is expressed as a number of 802.11 slots). The
fact that priorities are exchanged using native DATA two stations having the same delay bound can access
and ACK packets. Nevertheless, the authors of [18] the channel with the same priority using the native
propose a generic backoff policy which can be used 802.11 DCF.
by a class dynamic priority schedulers no matter if Now, we suppose that S 1 and S 2 transmit flows
this scheduler targets delay sensitive flows or rate
sensitive flows. with different delay bounds D1 and D 2 such as
D1 < D 2 , and generate two packets at time instants
In this paper, we focus on delay sensitive flows t 1 and t 2 . If S 2 had the same delay bound as S 1 ,
and propose to support the fixed priority deadline
monotonic scheduler over 802.11 to schedule delay its packet would have been generated at time t '2 such
sensitive flows. For instance, we use a priority as t '2 = t 2 + D 21 , where D21 = ( D2 − D1 ) .
broadcast mechanism similar to [5] and propose a
At that time, S 1 and S 2 would have the same
new medium access backoff policy where the
backoff value is inferred from the deadline priority and transmit their packets according to the
• i : the value of the BAB selected by S 1 in channel during additional D21 slots. Therefore, S 1
[0 ,W − 1] . moves to the state ( ~ C 2 , i − j , i − j ,− D 21 ) ,
• ( i − j ) : corresponds to the current backoff of i = 1..W − 1 , j = 0.. min( D21 − 1, i − 1) .
the station S 1 .
• D 21 : corresponds to ( D2 − D1 ) . We choose Now, If S 1 is in one of the states
the negative notation − D 21 for stations of ( C 2 , i , i − D21 ,− D21 ) , i = ( D21 + 1) ..W − 1 and at
C1 to express the fact that only stations of least one of the ( n − 1) remaining stations (either a
category C 2 have a positive DMSB equal to category C1 or a category C 2 station) transmits,
D 21 . then S 1 moves to one of the states
Initially S 1 selects a random BAB and is in ( ~ C 2 , i − D21 , i − D21 ,− D21 ) , i = ( D21 + 1) ..W − 1 .
one of the states ( ~ C2 , i , i ,− D21 ) , i = 0..W − 1 .
During ( D 21 − 1) slots, S 1 decrements its backoff if
4.2 Markov chain modeling a station of
category C2
none of the ( n1 − 1) remaining stations of category Figure 2 illustrates the Markov chain modeling
C1 transmits. Indeed, during these slots, the n 2 a station S 2 of category C 2 . Each state of S 2
stations of category C 2 are decrementing their Markov chain is represented by the quadruplet
DMSB and wouldn’t contend for the channel. ( i , k , D21 − j , D21 ) where:
• i : refers to the BAB value selected by S 2 in
When S 1 is in one of the states [0 ,W − 1] .
( ~ C 2 , i , i − ( D21 − 1) ,− D21 ) , i = D 21 ..W − 1 and • k : refers to the current BAB value of S 2 .
th
senses the channel idle, it decrements its D 21 slot. • D21 − j : refers to the current DMSB of S 2 ,
But S 1 knows that henceforth the n 2 stations of j ∈ [ 0 , D21 ] .
category C 2 can contend for the channel (the D 21 • D21 : corresponds to ( D 2 − D1 ) .
slots had been elapsed). Hence, S 1 moves to one of
the states ( C 2 , i , i − D21 ,− D 21 ) , i = D 21 ..W − 1 . When S 2 selects a BAB, its DMSB equals D21
and is in one of the states ( i , i , D 21 , D 21 ) ,
However, when the station S 1 is in one of the i = 0..W − 1 . During D21 slots, only the n1
states ( ~ C 2 , i , i − j ,− D 21 ) , i = 1..W − 1 , stations of category C1 contend for the channel.
j = 0.. min( D 21 − 1, i − 1) and at least one of the
( n1 − 1) remaining stations of category C1 If S 2 senses the channel idle during D21 slots, it
transmits, then the stations of category C 2 will moves to one of the states ( i , i ,0 , D 21 ) , i = 0..W − 1 ,
reinitialize their DMSB and wouldn’t contend for where it ends its shifting backoff.
C 2 have also decremented their DMSB and can of category C 2 contend for the channel
(pink states in figure 2).
contend for the channel. Thus, S 2 decrements its
γ 2 = { ( i , i ,0 , D21 ) , i = 0..W − 1
BAB and moves to the state ( i , i − 1,0 , D 21 ) ,
∪ ( i , i − 1,0 , D 21 ) , i = 2..W − 1}
i = 2..W − 1 , only if none of ( n − 1) remaining
stations transmits.
Therefore, when stations of category C 1 are in
If S 2 is in one of the states ( i , i − 1,0 , D 21 ) , one the states of ξ 1 , stations of category C 2 are in
i = 2..W − 1 , and at least one of the ( n − 1) one of the states of ξ 2 . Similarly, when stations of
remaining stations transmits, the n 2 stations of category C 1 are is in one of the states of γ 1 ,
category C 2 will reinitialize their DMSB and S 2 stations of category C 2 are in one of the states of
moves to the state ( i − 1, i − 1, D21 , D21 ) , γ 2.
i = 2..W − 1 . Hence, we derive the expressions of S 1
4.3 Blocking probabilities in the Markov chains blocking probabilities p11 and p12 shown in
According to the explanations given in figure 1 as follows:
paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2, the states of the Markov
chains modeling stations S 1 and S 2 can be divided − p11 : the probability that S 1 is blocked given
into the following groups:
that S 1 is in one of the states of ξ 1 . p11 is
• ξ 1 : the set of states of S 1 where none of the the probability that at least a station S 1' of
n 2 stations of category C 2 contends for the the other ( n1 − 1) stations of C 1 transmits
channel (blue states in figure 1). given that S 1' is in one of the states of ξ 1 .
ξ 1 = { ( ~ C 2 , i , i − j ,− D 21 ) , i = 0..W − 1,
p 11 = 1 − ( 1 − τ ) n1 − 1 (3)
j = 0.. min( max( 0 , i − 1) , D 21 − 1)}
11
p 12 = 1 − ( 1 − τ ) n1 − 1 ( 1 − τ 22 ) n2
∑
j
π ij = 1 (10)
12
(5)
4.4 Transition probability matrices
where τ 12 is the probability that a station S 1' 4.4.1 Transition probability matrix of a
category C1 station
of C 1 transmits given that S 1' is in one of
Let P1 be the transition probability matrix of
the states of γ 1 . the station S 1 of category C1 . P1 { i , j} is the
τ 12 [
= Pr S 1' transmits γ 1 ] probability to transit from state i to state j . We
π 1( C2 ,D21 ,0 ,− D21 ) have:
= W−1
(6)
P1 { ( ~ C 2 , i , i − j ,− D 21 ) , ( ~ C 2 , i , i − ( j + 1) ,− D 21 )}
∑ π 1
( C2 ,i ,i − D21 ,− D21 )
i = D21 = 1 − p11 , i = 2..W − 1, j = 0.. min( i − 2 , D 21 − 2 )
(11)
and τ 22 the probability that a station S 2' of P1 { ( ~ C 2 , i ,1,− D 21 ) , ( ~ C 2 ,0 ,0 ,− D 21 )} = 1 − p11 ,
C 2 transmits given that S 2' is in one of the i = 1.. min(W − 1, D 21 − 1)
states of γ 2 . (12)
P1 { ( ~ C 2 , i , i − D 21 + 1,− D 21 ) , ( C 2 , i , i − D 21 ,− D 21 )}
τ 12 = Pr [ S '2 transmits γ 2 ] = 1 − p11 , i = D 21 ..W − 1
( 0 ,0 ,0 ,D21 ) (13)
π
= 2
(7) P1{ ( ~ C2 , i , i − j ,− D21 ) , ( ~ C2 , i − j , i − j ,− D21 )}
W−1 W−1 (14)
= p11 , i = 2..W − 1, j = 1.. min( i − 1, D21 − 1)
∑i= 0
π
( i ,i ,0 ,D21 )
2 + ∑
i= 2
π
( i ,i − 1,0 ,D21 )
2
i = 2..W − 1
(25) + Pr [ S 2 transmits successfully γ 2 ] Pr[γ 2 ]
=τ 22 ( 1 − p 22 ) Pr [γ 2]
P2 { ( i , i − 1,0 , D21 ) , ( i − 1, i − 2 ,0 , D21 )} = 1 − p22 , (30)
(26)
i = 3..W − 1 − Pidle : the probability that the channel is idle.
1
P2 { ( 0 ,0 ,0 , D21 ) , ( i , i , D21 , D21 )} = , i = 0..W − 1 (27)
W The channel is idle if the n1 stations of
category C 1 don’t transmit given that these stations
By replacing p 21 and p22 by their values in
are in one of the states of ξ 1 or if the n stations
equations (8) and (9) and by replacing P2 and Π 2
(both category C 1 and category C2 stations) don’t
in (10) and solving the resulting system, we can
( i ,k ,D − j ,D21 ) transmit given that stations of category C 1 are in
express π 2 21 as a function of τ 11 , τ 12
one of the states of γ 1 . Thus:
and τ 22 given respectively by equations (4), (6)
( R ,i ,i − j ,− D21 )
and (7). Moreover, by replacing π 1 and Pidle = ( 1 − τ 11 ) n1 Pr [ξ 1 ] + ( 1 − τ 12 ) n1 ( 1 − τ 22 ) n2 Pr [γ 1 ]
( i ,k ,D21 − j ,D21 ) (31)
π 2 by their values, in equations (4), (6)
and (7), we obtain a system of non linear equations Hence, the expression of the throughput of a
as follows:
category C i station is given by:
(
Ts = T PHY + TMAC + T p + T D + SIFS + )
(33)
( TPHY + T ACK + T D ) + DIFS
(
Tc = TPHY + TMAC + T p + TD + EIFS ) (34)
For numerical results stations transmit 512 Figure 3: Normalized throughput as a function of
bytes data packets using 802.11.b MAC and PHY the contention window size ( D 21 = 1, n = 8 )
layers parameters (given in table 1) with a data rate
equal to 11Mbps. For simulation scenarios, the Analytically, stations belonging to the same
propagation model is a two ray ground model. The traffic category have the same throughput given by
transmission range of each node is 250m. The equation (31). Simulation results validate analytical
distance between two neighbors is 5m. The EIFS results and show that stations belonging to the same
parameter is set to ACKTimeout as in ns-2, where: traffic category (either category C1 or category C 2
) have nearly the same throughput. Thus, we
ACKTimeout = DIFS + ( T PHY + T ACK + T D ) + SIFS
conclude the fairness of DM between stations of the
(35) same category.
Table 1: 802.11 b parameters. For subsequent throughput scenarios, we focus
on one representative station of each traffic
category. Figure 4, compares category C1 and
category C 2 stations throughputs to the one
obtained with 802.11.
11
• Psuc : the probability that S 1 observes a
successful transmission on the channel,
while S 1 is in one of the states of ξ 1 .
11
Psuc = ( n1 − 1)τ 11 ( 1 − τ 11 ) n1 − 2 (36)
12
• Psuc : the probability that S 1 observes a
successful transmission on the channel,
while S 1 is in one of the states of γ 1 .
12
Psuc = ( n1 − 1)τ 12 ( 1 − τ 12 ) n1 − 2 ( 1 − τ 22 ) n2
(37)
Figure 5: Normalized throughput as a function of + n2τ 22 ( 1 − τ 22 ) n2 − 1 ( 1 − τ 12 ) n1 − 1
the number of contending stations
We evaluate H 1( R ,i ,i − j ,− D21 ) ( Z ) for each state
All the curves show that DM performs service
differentiation over 802.11 and offers better of S1 Markov chain as follows:
throughput for category C1 stations independently
Ts
of the number of contending stations. 1 11 Te
H 1( ~ C2 ,i ,i ,− D21 ) ( Z ) = + Psuc Z +
W
6 SERVICE TIME ANALYSIS Tc
min ( i + D21 − 1,W − 1)
(( 1 −
Ĥ 1( C ,i + D ,i ,− D ) ( Z ) = H 1( C ,i + D ,i ,− D ) ( Z ) TS1 ( Z ) = p11 ) H 1( ~ C 2 ,0 ,0 ,− D21 ) ( Z )
T
Z e
2 21 21 2 21 21
if ( i + D 21 ) ≤ W − 1 Tc
Te
)∑ (
m
+ ( 1 − p12 ) H 1( C2 ,D21 ,0 ,− D21 ) ( Z ) p11 H 1( ~ C2 ,0 ,0 ,− D21 ) ( Z )
Ĥ 1( C2 ,i + D21 ,i ,− D21 ) ( Z ) = 0 Otherwise Z
i= 0
(39)
+ p12 H 1( C2 ,D21 ,0 ,− D21 ) ( Z ) )) i
We also have: m+ 1
Tc
T
( (1 − p11 ) Z ) j H 1( ~ C2 ,i ,i ,− D21 ) ( Z )
(
+ Z e p11H 1( ~ C2 ,0 ,0 ,− D21 ) ( Z ) + p12 H 1( C 2 ,D21 ,0 ,− D21 ) ( Z ) )
j ,− D21 ) ( Z ) =
H 1( ~ C2 ,i ,i −
Ts Tc
( )
11
1 − Psuc Z
Te 11
− p11 − Psuc Z
Te (44)
i = 2..W − 1, j = 1..min( i − 1, D21 − 1)
6.1.2 Service time Z-transform of a category
(40) C2 station:
In the same way, let TS2 (Z) be the service
( (1 − p11 ) Z ) D21 H 1( ~ C2 ,i ,i ,− D21 ) ( Z ) time Z-transform of a station S 2 of category C 2 .
H 1( C2 ,i ,i − D21 ,− D21 ) ( Z ) =
Ts Tc We define:
( )
1− 11 Te
Psuc Z − p11 − 11
Psuc
T
Z e H 2( i ,k ,D21 − j ,D21 ) ( Z ) : The Z-transform of the
+ ( 1 − p12 ) ZH 1( C 2 ,i + 1,i + 1− D21 ,− D21 ) ( Z ) ,i = D21 ..W − 2 time already elapsed from the instant S 2 selects a
(41) basic backoff in [0 ,W − 1] (i.e. being in one of the
states ( i , i , D21 , D 21 ) ) to the time it is found in the
H 1( C 2 ,W − 1,W − 1− D21 ,− D21 ) ( Z )
state ( i , k , D21 − j , D 21 ) .
( (1 − p11 ) Z ) D21 H 1( ~ C2 ,W − 1,W − 1,− D21 ) ( Z ) Moreover, we define:
=
Ts Tc
( )
11 Te 11 T 21
1− Psuc Z − p11 − Psuc Z e • Psuc : the probability that S 2 observes a
+ ( 1 − p12 ) ZH 1( C 2 ,i + 1,i + 1− D21 ,− D21 ) ( Z ) ,i = D21 ..W − 2 successful transmission on the channel,
(42) while S 2 is in one of the states of ξ 2 .
11
Psuc = ( n1 − 1)τ 12 ( 1 − τ 12 ) n1 − 1 (45)
(1 − p11 ) ZH 1( ~ C2 ,1,1,− D21 ) ( Z )
H 1( ~ C 2 ,0 ,0 ,− D21 ) ( Z ) =
Ts Tc
22
( )Z • Psuc : the probability that S 2 observes a
11 Te 11 Te
1− Psuc Z − p11 − Psuc
successful transmission on the channel,
min ( W − 1,D21 − 1)
1 while S 2 is in one of the states of γ 2 .
+ ( 1 − p11 ) Z ∑ H 1( ~ C2 ,i ,1,− D21 ) ( Z ) +
W
i= 2 22
Psuc = n1τ 12 ( 1 − τ 12 ) n1 − 1 ( 1 − τ 22 ) n2 − 1
(43) (46)
+ ( n2 − 1)τ 22 ( 1 − τ 22 ) n2 − 2 ( 1 − τ 12 ) n1
If S 1 transmission state is ( ~ C 2 ,0 ,0 ,− D 21 ) ,
the transmission will be successful only if none of We evaluate H 2( i ,i ,D21 − j ,− D21 ) ( Z ) for each state
the ( n1 − 1) remaining stations of C 1 transmits. of S1 Markov chain as follows:
1
Whereas when the station S 1 transmission state is H 2( i ,i ,D21 − j ,D21 ) ( Z ) = , i = 0 and i = W − 1 (47)
( C 2 , D21 ,0 ,− D21 ) , the transmission occurs W
successfully only if none of ( n − 1) remaining Ts
1 22 Te
H 2( i ,i ,D21 ,D21 ) ( Z ) = + Psuc Z +
stations (either a category C 1 or a category C 2 W
station) transmits.
Tc
( )
If the transmission fails, S 1 tries another p 22 − Psuc 22
Z e H 2( i + 1,i ,0 ,D21 ) ( Z ) , i = 1..W − 2
T
( 1 − p 22 ) ZH 2( 1,1,0 ,D21 ) ( Z )
+
Ts Tc (53)
22 Te
( )
Tdec ( Z )
22 Te D21
1 − Psuc Z + p 22 − Psuc Z
~ 1 − TS i ( Z )
Xi (Z) = (55) Figure 9: Complementary service time distribution
1− Z for different values of D21 (W=64)
In figure 8, we depict analytical and simulation In figure 10, we depict the complementary
values of the complementary service time service time distribution for both category C 1 and
distribution of both category C 1 and category C 2 category C 2 stations and for values of n , the
station (W = 32 ) . number of contending nodes.
Figure 8: Complementary service time distribution Figure 10: Complementary service time
distribution for different values of the contending
for different values of D21 , (W = 32 ) stations
All the curves drop gradually to 0 as the delay Analytical and simulation results show that
increases. Category C 1 stations curves drop to 0 complementary service time curves drop faster
faster than category C 2 curves. Indeed, when when the number of contending stations is small for
both category C 1 and category C 2 stations. This
ABSTRACT
Providing quality of service in an ad hoc network is a challenging task. In this
paper, we discuss a framework for user perceived quality of service in mobile ad
hoc networks. In our framework, we try to aggregate the impact of various quality
of service parameters. Our framework is flexible and has a provision of providing
dynamic quality of service. Further, an application may adapt from the required
quality of service to that which can readily be provided by the network under a
stressful environment. Our framework may adapt to the QoS desired by a source
based on user satisfaction.
discussions. Finally, the last section is for conclusion In what follows, we define aggregated QoS to
and future directions. incorporate the effect of the parameters mentioned
above.
2 A FRAMEWORK FOR AN AGGREGATED Definition 1: Let there be n QoS parameters
QOS P1 , P2 ,..., Pn . Let Pk ,1 ≤ k ≤ n for bandwidth be
defined as follows.
In this section, we describe a framework for an
aggregated QoS. We call our framework as an FileSize
aggregated QoS (AQS) framework because it PBW = (2)
BW
aggregates the effect of many QoS parameters or
metrics. In our framework, we consider a set of QoS where, FileSize denotes the size of file that is sent
parameters such as end-to-end delay, delay jitter, using the particular bandwidth.
bandwidth, packet delivery ratio, route lifetime 1 . Let Pk ,1 ≤ k ≤ n for packet delivery ratio be
Our aggregation mechanism consists of
assigning importance or weights to each of the defined as follows.
parameters discussed in the previous subsection, and
PPDR = RΔ (3)
then computing a factor of aggregation. Let us first
consider assignment of importance or weights 2 . To where, Δ is the duration of time for which the
each of these parameters, we assign a weight
particular packet delivery ratio 3 is desired.
wi , 0 ≤ wi ≤ 1 , in such a fashion so that
Having defined the constituent parameters in
n time units, we now define a parameter called
∑ w =1
i =1
i (1) Weighted Aggregate QoS (WAQ) as follows.
B.Ramachandran S.Shanmugavel
Dept. of Electronics & Communication Engg. Dept. of Electronics & Communication Engg.
S.R.M. University Anna University
Chennai – 603 203 Chennai – 600 025
profbram@yahoo.com ssv@annauniv.edu
Abstract : AODV and DSR send control packets only when route
The mobile nature of nodes and dynamic discovery or route maintenance is done. When a route
topology of Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs) lead is created or repaired, the control packets, particularly
to route failures and requiring the transmission of RREQ packets flooded by source is network wide
control packets. It is important to reduce the number of broadcast. Moreover, the number of control packets
control packets to save resources and to improve the increased rapidly with network size and topology
overall performance of the network. Ad-hoc On- changes.
demand Distance Vector (AODV) is appealing as an The primary goal of an ad-hoc network
efficient on demand routing protocol because of low routing protocol is correct and efficient route
routing overhead and high performance. However, establishment between a pair of nodes so that messages
AODV is not robust against topology variations as it may be delivered in a timely manner. Route
uses weak links due to long hops introduced by shortest construction should be done with a minimum of
path metric. In this paper we propose a mobility overhead and bandwidth consumption. The on-demand
adaptive cross layer design to enhance the performance routing protocols create route only when desired by the
of AODV routing protocol by establishing stable source node. When a node requires a route to a
routes. The adaptive decision making according to the destination, it initiates a route discovery process within
speed of mobile nodes on Route Request (RREQ) the network. This process is completed once a route is
packet forwarding results in stable routes. We also test found or all possible route permutations have been
the impact of node density in the network on our examined. Once a route has been established, it is
algorithm, to tell, when to invoke the our cross layer maintained by a route maintenance procedure or until
design in mobile ad-hoc networks. To demonstrate the the route is no longer desired. The Ad-hoc On-Demand
efficiency of our protocol and its impact on network Distance Vector routing protocol builds on the
connectivity, we present simulations using network Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV)
simulator, GloMoSim. algorithm. It is an improvement on DSDV because it
Keywords: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks, AODV, Routing typically minimizes the routing load by creating routes
Overhead, Stable Route, and Cross Layer Design. on a demand basis.
AODV [2] is a pure on-demand route
I. Introduction acquisition system, since node that are not on a
Recent growing interest on potential selected path do not maintain routing information or
commercial usage of MANETs has led to the serious participate in routing table exchanges. When a source
research in this energy and bandwidth constrained node desires to send a message to some destination and
network. It is essential to reduce control packet does not already have a valid route to that destination,
overhead as they consume resources. Routing in it initiates a “route discovery” process to locate the
MANETs is non trivial. Since mobile nodes have destination. It broadcasts a route request packet to its
limited transmission capacity, they mostly neighbours, which then forward to their neighbours and
intercommunicate by multi-hop relay. Multi-hop so on, until either the destination or an intermediate
routing is challenged by limited wireless bandwidth, node with a “fresh enough” route to the destination is
low device power, dynamically changing network located. During the process of forwarding the RREQ,
topology, and high vulnerability to failure and many the intermediate nodes record in their route tables the
more. To meet those challengeous, many routing address of the neighbor from which the first copy of
protocols have been proposed for MANET [1]. They the broadcast packet is received thereby establishing a
are categorized as proactive and reactive protocols. reverse path. If additional copies of the same RREQ
Proactive protocols such as DSDV periodically send are later received, these packets are discarded. Once
routing control packets to neighbors for updating the RREQ reaches the destination or an intermediate
routing tables. Reactive routing protocols such as node with a fresh enough route, the destination /
References:
[1] Mohammad Ilyas, “The Hand Book of Ad-hoc
Wireless Networks”, CRC Press, 2003.
[2] C E Perkins, E M Royer and S R Das, “ Ad-
hoc On-demand Distance Vector Routing
Protocol”, IETF RFC 3651, July 2003.
[3] B.Awerbuch, D.Holmer and H.Rubens, “High
Throughput Route Selection in Multi-rate Ad-hoc
networks”, in Proc. of First working Conf. on
Wireless On-demand Network Systems, 2004.
[4] X.Zhong et al., “Stable Enhancement for AODV
Routing Protocol”, in proc. of 14th IEEE Conf. on
Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio
Communication, vol 1, pp 201-205,2003.
[5] Y.Zhang and T.A. Gulliver, “Quality of Service for
Fig 8. Node Density vs Routing Overhead Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector Routing”, in
proc.of IEEE International Conf. on Wireless
Mobile Computing, Networking and
Communications, vol 3, pp 192-193, 2005.
[6] R.S.Chang and S.J.Leu, “Long-lived Path Routing
with Received Signal strength for Ad-hoc
Networks”, in proc. of 1st International
Symposium on Wireless Pervasive Computing,
2006.
[7] G.Quddus et al., “Finding A Stable Route Through
AODV by Using Route Fragility Coefficient as
Metric”, In proc. of International Conf. on
Networking and Services, pp 107- 113, 2006.
[8] M.Idrees et al., “Enhancement in AODV Routing
Using Mobility Agents”, in proc. of IEEE
Symposium on Emerging Technologies, pp 98-
102, 2005.
[9] D.Espes and C.Teyssie, “Approach for Reducing
Control Packets in AODV-based MANETs”, in
Fig 9. Node Density vs PDR proc. of 4th European Conf. on Universal Multi-