IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science(IIJCS)

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm

A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email: editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 2, Issue 6, June 2014 ISSN 2321-5992


Volume 2 Issue 6 June 2014 Page 5



Abstract
Vehicular Adhoc Networks (VANETs) are highly mobile wireless networks that are designed to support vehicular safety, traffic
monitoring, and other commercial applications. VANETs are used for short-range, high-speed communication among nearby
vehicles, and between vehicles and roadside infrastructure units. Vehicle mobility will cause the communication links between
vehicles to be broken frequently. Such link failures require a direct response from the routing protocols, leading to a potentially
excessive increase in the routing overhead and degradation in network scalability. Link failure rate will differ for different
traffic conditions like low, medium and dense. In this paper an adaptive routing is proposed which in turn uses both reactive
and proactive protocols to continue with network communication by reducing the link failure rate. Due to the reduction of link
failures the number of packets delivered is improved.

Keywords: Fisheye State Routing, On Demand Routing, Zone Based Routing.

1. INTRODUCTION
Communication between vehicles by means of wireless technology has a large potential to improve traffic safety and
travel comfort of drivers and passengers. Several potential applications in the area of inter-vehicle communications
require data routing algorithms for the underlying ad hoc network, with the sharp increase of vehicles on roads in the
recent years, driving has not stopped from being more challenging and dangerous. Roads are saturated, safety distance
and reasonable speeds are hardly respected, and drivers often lack enough attention.

2. RELATED WORKS
Several routing protocols have been defined by many researchers for VANET. With the passage of time there is a need
of having new protocols in order to have successful communication. The history of VANET routing begins with the
traditional MANET routing protocols. Several topology based routing protocols for MANET had been analyzed for
VANET. Jerome Haerri et.al evaluated the performance of AODV and OLSR for VANET in city environment, in their
study in which all the characteristics are handled through the Vehicle Mobility Model. Performance analyses of
traditional ad-hoc routing protocols like AODV, DSDV and DSR for the highway scenarios have been presented, and
the authors proposed that these routing protocols are not suitable for VANET because of rapid topology changes. Their
simulation results showed that these conventional routing protocols of MANET increase the routing load on network,
and decrease the packet delivery ratio and end to end delay. Kakkasageri compared AODV and DSR with Swarm
intelligence routing algorithm and have shown that AODV and DSR has less performance than swarm intelligence
routing algorithm in VANET. Even though many researchers proposed various routing protocols for different
environment and architecture of VANETs, effective packet delivery is still a very big challenge.

3. PROPOSED ADAPTIVE ROUTING
In real life, vehicles are moving at different speed in different traffic conditions. If the vehicles are connected by some
means without considering the different speed of vehicles, it can be considered as VANET. It will not be effective if
same protocol is employed for all traffic conditions. An adaptive routing protocol is proposed to make the VANET
more efficient for all traffic conditions. This adaptive routing protocol is not a new protocol; it employs different
existing routing protocols for different scenarios. This adaptive routing protocol is proposed mainly for highly dense
traffic at urban area and highway and also with medium and low traffic conditions for the same. In this protocol, three
types of routing protocols are used depends on the traffic. They are link state routing, zone based routing and on
demand routing protocol.
The traffic is said to be dense or medium or low based on the number of nodes in the area of interest. But, in VANET,
it is sufficient to detect the number of neighbor nodes in order to check the traffic condition. In our proposed work, the
different routing protocols are selected based on the number of neighbor nodes. Selection procedure is shown as a
flowchart in the Fig.1. Hence if this routing protocol is employed, it will be adaptable to all environments independent
of the number of neighbors. To employ this protocol, maintaining a counter in each node to indicate the number of
Adaptive Routing for Vehicular Adhoc Networks
with Low, Medium and Dense Traffic

M.S.Godwin Premi, Betty Martin, S.Maflin Shaby

Faculty of EEE, Sathyabama University, Chennai-119
IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science(IIJCS)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email: editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 2, Issue 6, June 2014 ISSN 2321-5992


Volume 2 Issue 6 June 2014 Page 6


neighbor nodes and maintaining a link state table/routing table in each node to find the shortest route that is necessary.
Since the vehicular networks are capable of providing enough power and enough memory, maintaining these conditions
will not be a problem in VANETs.

Fig.1: Selection of routing protocol

In our proposed protocol, the link failure rate is reduced if the routing protocol is switched from one to other. When the
number of neighbor nodes is equal to m no. of nodes then the fisheye state routing is selected. Fisheye State Routing
(FSR) is a type of link state routing and it is a proactive routing protocol. In this protocol, route is determined at every
node by maintaining a link state map or topology map. The link state table implicitly acts like the routing table. There
are three major phases in the protocol. They are Neighbor Discovery, Information Dissemination and Route Discovery.
Initially every node starts with an empty topology table and an empty neighbor list. During Neighbor Discovery phase,
all the nodes establish and maintain the neighbourhood node relationships. During Information Dissemination phase,
link state packets are disseminated. These packets contain the neighbourhood node link information. During Route
Discovery phase, shortest route from source to destination is determined using link state packets. This is suitable for
medium traffic conditions. In highly dense area, more vehicles are connected and present in the zone. As per fisheye
routing, maintaining a link state map for more neighbouring nodes will be complex. When the number of neighbor
nodes is greater than m no. of nodes then adaptive dense zone routing protocol is used to reduce the complexity. It is a
zone based routing protocol and it is a proactive routing protocol. In this, all the vehicles maintain a routing table
which contains the neighbourhood information within that zone or the average area of the vehicle. The routing table
contains the route with minimum hop distance along with the neighbor node identity. Since adaptive dense zone
routing protocol makes use of dense zone approach based on adaptive mesh structures the complexity is very much
reduced. When the number of neighbor nodes is lesser than m no. of nodes then the adhoc on demand routing
protocol is selected. In this protocol, the link is established with the nearest node whenever there is a requirement by a
source node to transmit the data and the data is forwarded. The Fig. 2 indicates the sample highway scenario where as
Fig. 3 gives the sample urban scenario.


Fig.2. Sample Highway Scenario
IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science(IIJCS)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email: editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 2, Issue 6, June 2014 ISSN 2321-5992


Volume 2 Issue 6 June 2014 Page 7




Fig.3. Sample Urban Scenario

4. SIMULATION RESULTS
To validate the proposed routing methodology m is fixed as 20 for all simulations. Simulations are carried out to
calculate the packet delivery with respect to time. The number of packets delivered for proposed routing and individual
routing protocols are plotted. The number of packets delivered with respect to time for fisheye state routing and
proposed adaptive routing is given in Fig. 4. The green line indicates the proposed routing and the red line indicates
the individual protocol when they are only used. The number of packets delivered with respect to time for adaptive
dense zone routing routing and proposed adaptive routing is given in Fig. 5. The number of packets delivered with
respect to time for Adhoc on demand routing and proposed adaptive Routing is given in fig.6. Simulation results are
almost same for urban scenario and highway scenario. Here the results are obtained for urban scenario.



Fig. 4. Packet Delivery Ratio vs simulation time Fig.5. Packet Delivery Ratio vs simulation time
(Fisheye state routing and Adaptive routing) (Adaptive dense zone routing and Adaptive routing)

Packets delivered vs t Packets delivered vs t
IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science(IIJCS)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email: editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 2, Issue 6, June 2014 ISSN 2321-5992


Volume 2 Issue 6 June 2014 Page 8



Fig. 6. Packet Delivery Ratio vs simulation time (Adhoc on demand routing and Adaptive routing)

5. CONCLUSION
Due to the high speed of vehicles there will be rapid changes in the topology of VANET which in turn affect the packet
delivery. By selecting a suitable routing protocol packet delivery can be improved. From the results it is understood that
rather than relying on the single protocol the combined version of these three protocols that is the proposed adaptive
routing provides higher data delivery.

REFERENCES
[1] Kevin C. Lee, Uichin Lee, Mario Gerla,"Survey of Routing Protocols in Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks," Advances in
Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks: Developments and Challenges, IGI Global, Oct, 2009.
[2] Ericson, Communication and Mobility by Cellular Advanced Radio, ComCar project, www.comcar.de, 2002.
[3] W. Franz, H. Hartenstein, and M. Mauve, Eds., Inter-Vehicle-Communications Based on Ad Hoc Networking
Principles-The Fleet Net Project. Karlshue, Germany: Universitatverlag Karlsuhe,November 2005.
[4] Festag, et. al., NoW-Network on Wheels: Project Objectives,Technology and Achievements, Proceedings of 6
th

InternationalWorkshop on Intelligent Transportations (WIT), Hamburg, Germany,March 2008.
[5] Reichardt D., Miglietta M., Moretti L., Morsink P., and Schulz W.,CarTALK 2000 safe and comfortable
driving based upon inter-vehicle-communication, in Proc. IEEE IV02.
[6] Morris R., Jannotti J., Kaashoek F., Li J., Decouto D., CarNet: A scalable ad hoc wireless network system, 9th
ACM SIGOPS European Workshop, Kolding, Denmark, Sept. 2000.
[7] Pei, G., Gerla, M., and Chen, T.-W. (2000), Fisheye State Routing: A Routing Scheme for Ad Hoc Wireless
Networks, Proc. ICC 2000, New Orleans, LA, June 2000.
[8] Perkins, C.; Belding-Royer, E.; Das, S. (July 2003)Adhoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing.
[9] Guangyu Pei, Mario Gerla, Tsu-Wei Chen, Fisheye State Routing in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
nrlweb.cs.ucla.edu/publication/.../05_75
[10] Irem Nizamoglu, Sinem Coleri Ergen, Oznur Ozkasap, EpiDOL: Epidemic Density Adaptive Data Dissemination
Exploiting Opposite Lane in VANETs, springer,978-3-642-40552-5_20




Packets delivered vs t
Packets delivered vs t