INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 2. No. 3.

May 2010

A NEW POLYMORPHIC ROUTING PROTOCOL FOR MANET

Mamoun Hussein Mamoun

Faculty of Computer and Information Sciences

Mansoura University (EGYPT)
mamooninf@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

We propose in this paper, a new polymorphic, hybrid Routing Protocol (NPRP) which combines the merits of
proactive and reactive approach and overcome their demerits. Our proposed protocol creates route only when desired by
the source node as in case of reactive routing protocols and maintains the routing table at each node as in case of
proactive routing protocols. Also, it takes the advantage of broadcast nature of MANET to discover route and store
maximum information in the routing tables at each node. NPRP is compared with the AODV routing protocol. Simulation
results show a significant reduction in routing overhead, end-to-end delay and increases packet delivery ratio over
AODV.
Key words: MANET, MANET Routing Protocols, Newly Routing Protocol, Hybrid Routing Protocol.

1. INTRODUCTION

A mobile ad hoc network is a set of wireless mobile nodes can be connected dynamically in an arbitrary manner.
All nodes of these networks behave as routers and take part in discovery and maintenance of routes to other nodes in
the network. Many routing protocols have been proposed, but a few comparisons between them have been made [1].
The protocols are mainly classified into tow types, Proactive, Reactive:
- In Proactive [2, 3, 4] i.e. Table-driven routing protocols attempt to maintain consistent, up-to-date routing
information from each node to every other node in the network. These protocols require each node to maintain one or
more tables to store routing information, and they respond to changes in network topology by propagating hello
messages throughout the network in order to maintain a consistent network view. Proactive protocols include Dynamic
Sequenced Distance-Vector Routing (DSDV)[5], Source-Tree Adaptive Routing (STAR)[6], Multicast Optimized Link
State Routing (MOLSR)[7]. Cluster Head Gateway Switch routing (CHGS)[8] and Wireless Routing Protocol (WR) [9].
- Reactive routing protocol [10, 11]creates routes only when desired by the source node. When a node requires a
route to a destination, it initiates a route discovery process within the network. This process is completed once a route is
found or all possible route permutations have been examined. Once a route has been established, it is maintained by a
route maintenance procedure until either the destination becomes inaccessible along every path from the source or until
the route is no longer desired. Reactive protocols include Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing (AODV)[12],
Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)[13,14], etc. Some well-known hybrid multicast routing protocol include the Multicast
Zone Routing Protocol (MZR)[15], the Mobility-based Hybrid Multicast Routing (MHMR)[1], and Fisheye State Routing
(FSR)[16].
This paper proposes a Hybrid Routing Protocol which combines the features of proactive and reactive routing
protocol approaches. Our propose protocol creates route only when desired by the source node as in case of reactive
routing protocols and maintains routing table at each node as in case of proactive routing protocols. Hence it is called a
hybrid routing protocol. Furthermore, the proposed protocol takes advantage of broadcast nature of MANET which is
used to gain maximum routing information at the nodes in the network.
This paper is structured as follows: Section 2 describes the proposed protocol behavior. Section 3 presents the
simulation process and discusses the main findings. Concluding remarks are given in Section 4.

2. PROTOCOL DESCRIPTION

In Our proposed protocol, when a node has a packet to send to some destination and does not currently have a
route to that destination in its Routing Table (RT), the node initiates Route Discovery to find a route; this node is known
as the initiator of the Route Discovery, and the destination of the packet is known as the Discovery's target. The initiator
transmits a Route Request (RREQ) packet as a local broadcast, specifying the target and a unique identifier from the
initiator. Each node receiving the Route Request, it does the following:

IF the node is never received RREQ before

IF the destination in its RT
sends the RREQ to the destination
ELSE IF the destination does not in the RT
appends its node address in a request and rebroadcasts RREQ
ELSE
discards the RREQ
END IF
ELSE IF the node is destination
stops forwarding the RREQ and replies RREP back to the source
END IF

122 URL: www.ijar.lit.az

 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 2. No. 3. May 2010

2.1. Route Discovery

After the destination receives the RREQ, it copies the cluster ID list from the RREQ to the RREP. The destination
then tries to route the RREP to the source. RREP packet is broadcast to all neighbors which are in the coverage area of
the replying node. The RREP packet is broadcast to all neighbor nodes along with intended node. When the node
receives the RREP, it does the following:

IF it does not an intended node

updates its RT
drops the RREP
ELSE IF it is the destination
stops forwarding RREP
ELSE
adds its own ID in the received path and rebroadcasts RREP along the intended path
END IF

2.2. Route Maintenance

Usually link failure occurs due to node mobility. A node on detecting link failure sends a route error message
(RERR). This RERR message is forwarded to the source. Source will start fresh route discovery procedure after
receiving RERR message.

3. SIMULATION AND RESULTS

For our simulation, mobile ad hoc network consisting of 100 nodes placed randomly using uniform distribution in
2
an area of 1000 x 600 m is considered. The nodes in the network have the transmission range of 300m and a channel
capacity of 2 Mbps. The data traffic consists of 30 CBR sources sending four 512 bits packet per second. The mobility
model used is Random Waypoint. In this, each node is randomly placed in the simulated area and remains stationary for
a specified pause time. It then randomly chooses a destination and moves there at a velocity chosen uniformly between
a minimum velocity vmin and a maximum velocity vmax. Each node independently repeats this movement pattern through
the simulation. The experimental setup defines vmin as 0 m/s and v max as 20 m/s and varies the pause time as the
independent variable. A discrete-event packet –level simulator [17] was developed in order to monitor, observe and
measure the performance of the proposed protocol.
The performance of the proposed routing algorithm is gauged in terms of packet delivery ratio, average end-to-
end delay and normalized routing overhead. The results presented here are the average of 10 runs obtained for the
same simulation configuration of 30 active sources. The results obtained after simulation are compared with the well
known reactive protocol AODV.
Fig. 2 shows the packet delivery ratio compared with AODV. The packet delivery ratio is higher for the proposed
protocol NPRP as compared to AODV. At high mobility, the AODV has to reinitiate a route discovery process again. This
leads to lower packet delivery ratio. The NPRP proactively maintains the path to the destination, which leads to better
performance. At lower mobility, the performance is comparable as expected.

0.6 0.5
0.45
Average End-to-End Delay

0.5
0.4
Packet Delivery Ratio

AODV
0.4 0.35
NPRP
0.3
0.3 AODV 0.25
NPRP 0.2
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.1
0.05
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400
Paus e Time (s ec) Pause Time (se c)

Fig 2. Packet delivery ratio vs. Pause time Fig 3. Average End-to-end delay vs. Pause time

The quality of service of the network is defined by the end-to-end delay. The average delay decreases at low
mobility for both the protocols. The average delay is higher for AODV at high mobility as route failure occurs very
frequently. The NPRP maintains connectivity at all times leading to better performance.
Fig. 3 gives the comparison for the average end-to-end delay for AODV and NPRP. It is noticed that a significant
reduction in routing overhead for NPRP over AODV.
The routing overhead is shown in Fig. 4 gives the number of control packets per data packet to perform routing. It
is noticed that a significant reduction in routing overhead for NPRP over AODV. The performance of AODV is relatively
stable at lower mobility leading to a decrease in routing overhead.

URL: www.ijar.lit.az 123

 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 2. No. 3. May 2010

0.6

Routing Overhead per Data Packet

AODV
0.5
NPRP
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 100 200 300 400
Pause Tim e (sec)

Fig. 4. Routing Overhead per Data Packet vs. Pause time

5. CONCLUSIONS

The Proactive and Reactive approach for routing in ad hoc network have their merits and demerits. Our Proposed
routing protocol will have an advantage of both proactive and reactive approach. Our proposed protocol creates route
only when desired by the source node as in case of reactive routing protocols and maintains the routing table at each
node as in case of proactive routing protocols. Also, it takes the advantage of broadcast nature of MANET to discover
route and store maximum information in the routing tables at each node. Simulation results demonstrate that the
proposed protocol has a significant reduction in routing overhead, end-to-end delay and increases packet delivery ratio
over AODV routing.

REFERENCES

1. M. Royer and C. K. Toh, "A review of current routing protocols for ad hoc mobile wireless networks”. IEEE
Personal Communication Magazine, pp. 46-55, Apr. 1999.
2. C. Siva Ram Murthy and B.S. Manoj, “ Ad Hoc Wireless Networks Architectures and Protocol,” volume ISBN:
81-297-0945-7. Pearson Education, first Indian reprint, 2005 edition, 2005.
3. C. P. P. Bhagwat, “Highly Dynamic Destination Sequenced Distance Vector DSDV Routing for Mobile
Computers,” Proceeding of ACM SIGCOM, pp. 234 - 244, September 1994.
4. A. Khetrapal, ”Routing Techniques for Mobile Ad hoc Networks Classification and Qualitative/Quantitative
Analysis,” ICWN, pp. 251-257, 2006.
5. C. E. Perkins and P. Bhagwat, ”Highly Dynamic Destination-sequenced Distance-vector Routing for Mobile
Computers,” Computer Communications Review, pp. 224–244, October 1994.
6. J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, M. Spohn, “Source Tree Adaptive Routing (STAR) Protocol,” Proc. of 7th Intl. Conf.
on Network Protocols, p 273, 1999.
7. P. Jacquet, P. Minet, A. Laouiti, L. Viennot, T. Clausen, and C. Adjih, “ Multicast Optimized Link State
Routing,” Internet Draft, draft-ietf-manet-olsr-molsr-01.txt, April 2002.
8. C. C. Chiang, “Routing in Clustered Multihop: Mobile Wireless Networks with Fading Channel,” IEEE
Proceeding, Sicon’97, pp. 197- 211, April 1997.
9. S. Murthy and J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, “ A Efficient Routing Protocol for Wireless Networks,” ACM Mobile
Networks and Applications, pp. 183- 197, October 1996..
10. E. Royer C. Perkins and S. Das, “Ad hoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing,” (RFC 3561), July 2003.
11. C. Demir and C. Comanicia, “An Auction Based AODV Protocol for Mobile Ad hoc Network with Selfish Nodes,”
IEEE International Conference ICC'07, pp. 3351-3356, June 2007.
12. C. E. Perkins, E. M. Belding-Royer, and S. R. Das, “Ad hoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing,”
Internet Draft, draft-ietf-manet-aodv-13.txt, Feb. 2003.
13. R. Bai and M. Singhal,” DOA: DSR over AODV Protocol for Mobile Ad hoc Network,” IEEE Transaction on
Mobile Computing, 5: pp. 1403-1416, Oct 2006
14. J. Broch, D. B. Johnson, and D. A. Maltz, “The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad hoc Networks,”
Internet Draft, draft-ietf-manet-dsr-03.txt, Oct. 1999.
15. V. Devarapalli and D. Sidhu, “Mzr: A Multicast Protocol for Mobile Ad hoc Networks,” IEEE International
Conference on Communications (ICC), Helsinki, Finland, June 2001.
16. G. Pei, M. Gerla, and T. Chen, “Fisheye State Routing: A Routing Scheme for Ad hoc Wireless Networks,”
IEEE Intl. Conf. on Communications, 2000, 2000.
17. L. Bajaj, M Takai, R. Ahuja, K. Tang, R. Bagrodia and M. Gerla, “GloMoSim: A Scalable Network Simulation
Environment,” Computer Science Dept., University of California Los Angeles, it is available for download
GloMoSim at: http://pcl.cs.ucla.edu/, 2001.

124 URL: www.ijar.lit.az