Int J Communication - 2022 - Babu - A Comprehensive Survey On Simulators Emulat

Received: 10 June 2021 Revised: 5 January 2022 Accepted: 1 February 2022
DOI: 10.1002/dac.5123
RESEARCH ARTICLE
A comprehensive survey on simulators, emulators, and

testbeds for VANETs
Sarath Babu | Arun Raj Kumar P
Computer Science and Engineering

Department, National Institute of
Summary
Technology Calicut, Kerala, India Nowadays, inter-vehicle and intra-vehicle communication triggers the develop-
ment of safety and non-safety applications in Vehicular Adhoc NETworks
Correspondence
Sarath Babu, Computer Science and (VANET). These applications need to be evaluated before the actual implemen-
Engineering Department, National tation. The performance of these applications is generally evaluated through
Institute of Technology Calicut, Kerala,
indispensable tools such as simulators, emulators, and testbeds. Although sim-
India.
Email: sarathbabu0410@gmail.com ulators, emulators, and testbeds are available as open-source or proprietary for
VANET applications, finding the correct tool for the experiment is intriguing
Funding information
Science and Engineering Research Board
and challenging from the researcher's perspective. In this paper, our focus is to
(SERB), Government of India, Grant/ provide a comprehensive survey on the existing simulators, emulators, and real
Award Number: EMR/2016/007502 time testbeds based on technical specifications, capabilities, etc. To the best of
our knowledge, there is no such an exhaustive survey that exists in the litera-
ture. Further, we developed a real time low-cost VANET testbed on our insti-
tute campus to implement the VANET related projects.
KEYWORDS
emulators, simulators, testbeds, vehicular adhoc networks
1 | INTRODUCTION
The road safety annual report of World Health Organization (WHO) 20201 indicates that approximately 1.35 million
people die from road accidents and nearly 3,700 people are killed per day globally every year. As a prevention to
road accidents, Inter-Vehicle Communication (IVC) plays a significant role in the Intelligent Transportation System
(ITS). The statistics indicate that low and middle-income countries have nearly 60% of the world's vehicles. These
low and middle-income countries suffer 93% of the world's injuries and deaths in road accidents. The surge of road
accidents in developing and under-developed countries reflects the need to update the existing transportation system
by ITS. The developed countries adopted enhanced communication and automated technologies into the transporta-
tion system to provide safety and convenience to the passengers. The ad hoc network that connects entities on the
road is known as Vehicular Adhoc NETwork (VANET).2 The VANET has similar features to its predecessor Mobile
Adhoc Networks (MANET), such as network self-configuration, less bandwidth, and short communication range.
Besides similarity, the VANET has unique features3 such as high mobility, predictable movement, variable network
density, highly dynamic network topology, unbounded network size, and abundant power. These features differenti-
ates VANET from the conventional ad hoc networks. However, these features are the challenges4,5 to the communi-
cation protocols in VANET. The high mobility, dynamic topology, and varying network density result in frequent
link breaks and network fragmentation. The varying topology results in packet loss, delay, and overhead due to its
path computation. Thus, active research is required in routing protocols, protocol stacks, fast handovers, network
availability, security, and privacy.6
Int J Commun Syst. 2022;35:e5123. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/dac © 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1 of 32
https://doi.org/10.1002/dac.5123
10991131, 2022, 8, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dac.5123 by Zhejiang University, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 of 32 BABU AND RAJ KUMAR P
The vehicles in VANET are equipped with communication devices known as On-Board Units (OBU). The static
nodes along the road that are capable of communicating to vehicles and neighboring static nodes are called Road Side
Units (RSU). VANET communication is generally of three types: (i) Vehicle to Vehicle (V2V), (ii) Vehicle to Infrastruc-
ture (V2I), and (iii) Infrastructure to Infrastructure (I2I). These communications support a wide range of safety and
non-safety applications. Figure 1 represents a VANET environment. A Dedicated Short-Range Communication
(DSRC)7 spectrum of 5.9 GHz is adopted for vehicular communication. DSRC is the radio frequency spectrum allocated
for VANET. The Wireless Access in Vehicular Environment (WAVE) protocol stack was designed to use the DSRC
spectrum in 802.11p.8–11 The IEEE 802.11p defines the physical layer and the Medium Access Control (MAC) sublayer
of the protocol stack.
The VANET is an active research area, and a plethora of research works exist in literature especially in the last few
years. The European countries, Japan, and the United States of America have turned the VANET from research to
deployment.12 The growth of VANET research requires efficient implementation and analysis of the algorithms.
VANET implementation and analysis are complex because of vehicle mobility and frequent network disconnections.
Though network simulators with mobility support are available for modeling, these simulators do not match with the
actual behaviour of the vehicular environments. The high relative mobility of the communicating nodes potentially
impacts the communication network. The following are the three types of implementations to evaluate the performance
of the novel algorithms: (i) simulation, (ii) emulation, and (iii) real time implementation. The taxonomy diagram of the
VANET experimental type is represented in Figure 2. A simulator replicates important and necessary behaviour from
the real environment to understand how the modelling works. Simulation is primarily used in the academic/research
community as performing experiments in real time is dangerous or expensive. For example, it is costly to test the new
protocol in 100 vehicles. Therefore, the novel ideas are evaluated in the simulation environment due to high infrastruc-
ture costs. The installation and configuration of the simulation are easier than emulators and real implementation.
However, the simulation results are questionable.
FIGURE 1 VANET environment

BABU AND RAJ KUMAR P 3 of 32
FIGURE 2 Taxonomy of VANET experiment platforms
There are various open-source and proprietary simulators available for VANET. Most of the simulators provide rich
functionality and a user-friendly interface. The VANET simulators mimic the various characteristics of the VANET
including mobility features such as motion constraints, traffic dynamics, real traffic scenarios, and the properties of the
wireless communication networks. In general, mobility features are included in the mobility module/simulator. Only a
few VANET simulators consist of both the network simulators and an inbuilt mobility simulator. The remaining
VANET simulators integrate the network simulator with a mobility simulator to simulate VANET characteristics. There
are various integrated simulators available for VANET. Based on the type of communication, integrated simulators are
further classified into cross-coupled and tightly coupled simulators. The cross-coupled simulators support unidirectional
communication from the mobility simulator to the network simulator. The mobility simulator generates the mobility
information and sends it to the network simulator. However, the tightly coupled simulators enable bidirectional com-
munication between the network and mobility simulators. The changes in any one simulator environment (mobility or
network) in a tightly coupled pair of simulators reflect changes in the other.
The emulator is the hardware or software that replicates as it exists in the real environment. In the growing techno-
logical world, hardware emulation is one of the popular tools for verification. The emulators are capable of generating
behaviour close to the realistic behaviour of the real environment. Hence, emulators produce accurate results compared
to the simulator. The emulators are reliable and suitable for debugging than simulators. Emulators provide users with a
more attractive and user-friendly Graphical User Interface (GUI). There are few emulators capable of emulating the
Vehicular Network. Similar to the simulator, some of the VANET emulators accept the mobility traces from the traces
generated by mobility simulators and traffic databases. Most of the emulators are proprietary or non-accessible to the
public. One of the major advantages of emulation is that the emulated code could be ported to real devices. However,
the emulators require high-performance devices for experiments and increases the cost of the system.
Real time implementations are the most accurate system models that produce accurate results than simulators and
emulators. Various environmental factors influence the characteristics of the vehicular network. After implementing a
novel protocol in simulator and emulator, deploying the same novel protocol in real time environment may produce
different results due to real time environment factors and communication parameters. Therefore, real time implementa-
tion and analysis are necessary to monitor the impact of various environmental factors affecting novel techniques. How-
ever, the field test or real time implementations have a higher cost, risk, and time consuming than simulators and
emulators. Various factors such as infrastructure cost, system failure, lack of automation, excessive time, and manpower
consumption are the challenges in real time implementation. Nowadays, institutions and organizations are developing
their own testbeds for conducting real time experiments. We focus on describing the possible ways to evaluate the per-
formance of the novel technique (applications and protocols) in VANET.
1.1 | Motivation
The research in the VANET domain for the past two decades proved that the traffic efficiency is improved by develop-
ing safety and comfort applications. Few countries are in the deployment stage and many research organizations cre-
ated the testbeds for field tests. But there is still an active research continuing on VANET challenges. The evaluation of
the novel algorithms is imperative in a dynamic environment such as VANET. However, in the literature, there are no
extensive studies discussing the possibilities, challenges, and advantages of simulators, emulators, and real time imple-
mentation. The existing survey papers focused mostly on the simulators alone.
The importance of selecting an appropriate tool for the experiments, tool's functionality, and layer-wise technical
details is not addressed in the existing surveys. Hence, there is a strong need for providing detailed insights on the simu-
lator, emulator, and real time testbeds. In this paper, the layer-wise technical specification along with the purpose-wise
suitability of simulators is discussed. Further, the possible experimentation methods and the advantages, disadvantages,
and challenges are explored.
1.2 | Contributions
Our contributions are as follows:
• The Vehicular Adhoc NETwork (VANET) had significant growth over the last decade. One of the main reasons
behind the growth is the real time deployment of autonomous vehicles. The methods to evaluate the proposed ideas
in VANET are implemented using simulators, emulators, and testbeds. This paper provides a comprehensive survey
on the VANET simulators, emulators, and real time testbeds. In this paper, the simulator and emulator
section discusses its features and provides a concise understanding on the availability and suitability. The testbed
section allows a researcher to understand the efficient and economical ways of conducting real time experiments. To
the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper that provides all three categories of experimentation methods in
detail.
• There are survey papers related to VANET experimentation methods that exist in the literature. The existing surveys
are compared in a tabular column consisting of the number of simulators discussed and the limitations against our
proposed comprehensive survey.
• The simulators are the most commonly preferred tool for testing new ideas in VANET. The change in experimenting
with standard network simulators to the simulators that provide rich functionality and creativity of the VANET envi-
ronment is evident. In our survey, we list the simulator categories as a taxonomy diagram with two tables in detail.
The first table provides the VANET simulators and their details. The second table shows the layer-wise specification
of VANET simulators. This helps the researchers (especially to beginners in the VANET research area) to understand
the basic idea on the availability of the VANET simulator and the features provided by the simulators.
• At the end of the discussion on simulators, we describe the purpose-wise suitability of simulators based on the factors
such as the capability of the simulator to design and test different applications scenarios, availability of documenta-
tion and resource, published works in the same area and citations, number of active users, active user groups and
support, and active development. These details will help the researchers to select the appropriate simulator for con-
ducting the specific experiments in VANET.
• We discuss the implementation of a low-cost testbed in our institute campus to execute various VANET-related pro-
jects. The testbed section and the subsection Low-Cost Testbed implementation highlight and explore the feasibility
of conducting the real time experiments. It definitely will motivate the researcher to develop the own testbed at a low
cost to conduct VANET experiments.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 discusses the details of popular simulators, advantages, and
challenges. In Section 3, the details of VANET emulators and their features are included. Section 4 includes the details
of real time implementations/testbeds, our proposed low-cost testbed, and the challenges and requirements of a real-
time testbed. Section 5 is an overall summarization and suggestions to the VANET researchers. Section 6 concludes the
paper.
2 | S I MU LA T OR S
The simulators mimic the VANET scenarios including the road traffic and network conditions.
2.1 | What needs to be modeled?
The main features that need to be modeled and simulated by a simulator are as follows:
(i) Motion constraints

(ii) Traffic dynamics
(iii) Real traffic scenarios
(iv) Channel characteristics
The motion constraints include the road topologies, starting and ending positions of vehicles, trip positions, intersec-
tions, signal lights, streets, and multiple lanes. The traffic dynamics consider the dynamic variations of the vehicle density,
direction, speed, traffic flow, stop signs, and pedestrians. The real traffic scenarios such as accidents and emergencies, traf-
fic jams, lane change, traffic signal violation, road conditions, and intersection traffic management are to be included in
the model. The VANET features affect the channel characteristics. Therefore, the dynamic channel characteristics such as
strength, channel life, reception power, packet loss, and radio obstructions are included in VANET simulation. The vehic-
ular environment includes road topology, vehicles, building streets, lights, traffic signals, pedestrian, and driver.
The mobility model of the vehicular environment is divided into two parts: macroscopic and microscopic movement.
The macroscopic movement describes the object and its behaviour. The macroscopic mobility model describes the road
topology, road structure, vehicle movement, the traffic regulations on the road, number of lanes, overtaking, traffic sig-
nal descriptions, and traffic rules. The road topology is currently construing in three ways: user-defined, random maps,
and imported maps. The user-defined graph of the road topology is created by the user using the tools such as MOVE.13
The random graphs are generated by algorithms such as Voronoi tessellation. The imported road maps are real road
maps imported from the databases such as Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER)14
databases or from online sites such as OpenStreetMap. The microscopic mobility model refers to the interaction object
with the other objects such as vehicle interaction with other vehicles or vehicle interaction with road infrastructure.
The microscopic mobility illustrates acceleration, deceleration, traffic jams, overtaking criteria,15 and driver behavior.
2.1.1 | Signal propagation models
The VANET simulators require a realistic channel representation of the signal propagation in the vehicular environ-
ment. The signal propagation in VANET causes a significant impact on the communication protocols or in the applica-
tions. In the real scenario, the variation in the characteristics of the channel shows the location and environment-
specific propagation characteristics such as path loss, fading, and shadowing. Therefore, an accurate channel modeling
is necessary for the VANET simulation environment. There are certain articles discussing the signal propagation
models in VANET.16–19 Simulators using various channel models20,21 for the validation are as follows:
(i) Unit disk model

(ii) Log-normal shadowing model
(iii) Obstacle-based shadowing model
(iv) Two-ray model
(v) Nakagami-m model
(vi) Friis free-space path loss model
In the unit disk model, the vehicles within a threshold distance communicate with each other. The obstacles or the
signal strength are not considered in the unit disk model. It is mostly used for topology characteristics analysis. The log-
normal shadowing model uses the log-normal probability density function to model additional attenuation of the
shadowing or fading model. The obstacle-based channel models use algorithms to represent the effect on the received
signal strength due to surrounding static and mobile obstacles. The two-ray ground-reflection model is a multipath
radio propagation model that is capable of predicting the path losses between transmitting and receiving antennas.
Nakagami-m distribution is a fading model representing the characteristics of the urban areas where frequent fluctua-
tions in the received signal power. It may model various conditions of propagation, providing more flexibility and accu-
racy. The Free-Space Path Loss (FSPL) model describes the degradation of radio waves signal strength in a line-of-sight
path through free space (no obstacles to cause reflection or diffraction).
2.1.2 | Mobility models
Mobility in VANET is one of the key features distinguishing from other networks.22,23 Simulating VANET involves road
topology creation, vehicle generation, traffic generation, signal management, driver behavior generation, acceleration,
deceleration, pedestrian behavior, etc. These parameter values are considered as random during the experiments. It
does not give a real behavior of the vehicular environment. The vehicle mobility model is generally classified into the
following four24 categories:
(i) Synthetic models

(ii) Survey-based models
(iii) Trace-based models
(iv) Traffic simulators-based models
Synthetic models create mathematical models that represent a realistic physical model effect. The synthetic model is
classified into five25 categories: (i) stochastic models, (ii) traffic stream models, (iii) car following models, (iv) queue
models, (v) behavioral models. The stochastic models output a random variation in one or more inputs over time. The
random variation is generated from the given historical data for a selected period. Traffic stream models recognize the
exact relationship between the parameters of traffic. These models assume the uniform value for the variable such as
speed. The car-following model defines the effect of the flow of one vehicle on another vehicle. These models represent
the driver's reactions to the changes in the relative positions of the leading vehicle. In queue models, the road acts as a
FIFO queue, and the cars are the elements passing through the queue. In the behavioral models, each movement is
determined by social influences. Survey based models the mobility generated from the social behavior statistics collected
in the survey and reproduces the pseudo-random or critical behavior seen in real city traffic. The trace-based model uses
the traces generated by the deployed testbeds. Many organizations are now developing testbeds for the real mobility gen-
eration. In the current scenario, the public availability of the trace is one of the issues. The issue related to these trace-
based models is the missing mobility pattern. To solve the issue, complex mathematical models26 are used. In the traffic
simulator-based models,27,28 the traces are generated from the mobility simulators29 such as SUMO30 and VISSIM.31
2.2 | Simulators and categories
In simulating a VANET environment, both the network and mobility are considered equally important. Currently, a
number of network simulators integrate the mobility module to simulate VANET scenarios. The following are the three
types of simulators available for VANET simulations:
1. Network simulator: Configures the network for testing algorithms.

2. Mobility simulator: Generates the vehicular movement traces.
3. Integrated simulator: Includes vehicular movement and network configuration
There are many simulators available in each of these categories. Among them, some of them are proprietary simula-
tors, and some are open-source simulators as shown in Figure 3. The network simulators allow us to configure and
evaluate the performance of the communication network. There are various network simulators available with signifi-
cant features. Among network simulators, the few simulators that support VANET are ns2,32 ns3,33 OPNET,34 OMNET
++,35 etc. ns2 stopped their developments and maintenance in 2011 (the most recent release ns-2.35 released on
November 4, 2011). Hence, an open-source ns3 simulator is popular. OPNET is also an open-source simulator and pro-
vides in-built models of devices and protocols. Proprietary simulators such as NETsim provides rich functionality along
with attractive and user-friendly interfaces. The mobility simulators are used to generate the road traffic conditions.
The vehicles traveling in a fixed road topology limits the vehicular node movements in all directions. Therefore, the
vehicular node mobility (direction) is predictable. It is tedious to simulate all the vehicular movements and traffic char-
acteristics in mobility simulators. The external factors such as pedestrian crossing, driver reactions under different situ-
ations, traffic signals, and abnormal conditions on the roads may affect normal mobility. There are various traffic
mobility simulators such as SUMO and VanetMobiSim.36 The VanetMobiSim imports maps from the TIGER database.
It supports lane changing, intersection management, overtaking, acceleration, and deceleration. SUMO is the popular
open-source mobility simulator that includes features such as vehicle types, collision-free movement, multi-lane roads
with lane changing, an openGL Graphical User Interface (GUI), and dynamic routing. The real road maps are extracted
from the open street map to exhibit the realistic behavior. MOVE simulator is used to generate a traffic mobility model
for VANET. Its output is realistic that could be used in network simulators. The STRAW37 simulator simulates the
mobility models of US cities. The network simulators do not directly use the mobility traces generated by STRAW. The
FreeSIM simulator visually represents the road traffic similar to a graph with speed as its edge. The FreeSIM38 simula-
tor generates or converts the real time data collected by a transportation organization. Nowadays, mobility simulators
create or import maps and generate mobility using inbuilt algorithms or real traffic data. VISSIM is an advanced flexible
traffic simulator developed by Planung Transport Verkehr (PTV) AG in Karlsruhe, Germany. VISSIM incorporates vehi-
cles, pedestrians, and cyclists in a single software platform. The Flexible API facilitates ease of use by eliminating
scripting challenges. VISSIM generates microscopic mobility, mesoscopic mobility, and a combination of both.
The network simulator alone does not generate the VANET environment due to a lack of vehicular mobility crea-
tion. Nowadays, the simulator develops some converters to convert the mobility traces generated by the mobility simu-
lator to the required format. Besides, the mobility simulators combined with the network simulator are known as
Integrated VANET simulators. There are few integrated simulators such as GrooveNet,39 SWANS++,40 and
CAVENET.41 The following are the two approaches adopted to integrate mobility and network simulators:
FIGURE 3 Simulators classification

1. Cross-coupled
2. Tightly coupled.
Figure 4A represents the cross-coupled simulators. A cross-coupled simulator combines an existing mobility simula-
tor with a network simulator. An interface acts as an intermediary between the mobility simulator and the network sim-
ulator. The advantage of cross-coupled simulator is the ability to integrate any mobility simulators with any network
simulator. The challenging task is developing an interface that works between two different simulators. The Traffic and
Network Simulation Environment (TraNS)42 integrate the open-source traffic simulator SUMO and the network simula-
tor ns2. TraNS is the first open-source project that attempted to couple the open-source traffic and network simulators.
TraNS supports two operational models, the application-centric model, and the network-centric model. The application-
centric model supports application analysis, and the network-centric model supports network protocol evaluation. The
iTETRIS43 is an open-source simulation platform integrating two open-source traffic and network simulators through a
central coordinator. The integration of ns3 and SUMO platforms supports the study of full standard cooperative ITS sys-
tems. VANETsim44 is an open-source simulator used only for the analysis of security and privacy protocols in VANET.
The real world map is extracted from the OpenStreetMap. It is an event-driven modeling framework developed specifi-
cally to examine the privacy and security effects of vehicular communications at the application level.
Figure 4B represents the tightly coupled simulators. In cross-coupled simulator, the output of the mobility simulator
is fed as an input to the network simulator. However, in tightly coupled, the network simulators do not wait for the
complete mobility trace file (generated by the mobility simulator). Because both the network and mobility simulators
work together in parallel. Vehicular Network Open Simulator (VENTOS)45 is open-source simulator comprising the
traffic mobility simulator SUMO and network simulator OMNET++. The traffic flow incorporates new control logic
such as intelligent traffic controller, collaborative driving, dynamic routing, and self-driving capability features. VEN-
TOS simulator supports V2X (Vehicle-to-Vehicle and Vehicle-to-Infrastructure) communication using DSRC spectrum.
VEINS46 is a modular framework. It bidirectionally couples network simulator OMNET++ with the traffic simulator
SUMO. The physical layer modeling toolkit MiXiM supports accurate models for radio interference and shadowing by
static and moving obstacles. The variation in mobility such as speed and direction affects the network topology
instantly. Based on the information communicated by the vehicular nodes, the node mobility such as position and
direction may vary. VEIN provides a full-stack simulation model for conducting VANET experiments and provides
more detailed modeling on the MAC and physical layer. Poster47 proposes an adaptive framework that supports the
portability of VANET applications in different simulation environments without modification. NCTUns48 is an open-
source software running on Linux, and it provides an easy-to-use integrated GUI environment for users to conduct sim-
ulation. It was initially developed as a network simulator. Further, NCTUns incorporated traffic simulations such as
road network construction and microscopic vehicle mobility models with its existing network simulation. VANET
Toolbox49 is an open-source simulator as well as an integrated VANET simulator based on MATLAB Discrete Event
FIGURE 4 Two types of simulators: (A) cross-coupled simulator; (B) tightly coupled VANET simulator
System (DES). This is a full stack of network protocol simulators. It requires more computation, and it is slower than
other simulators. Therefore, it is not capable of doing parallel programming. EstiNet50 creates road topology using a
road-building function. The road network is created manually or by an imported road map file. Human driving behav-
ior is used to control the car movements such as car-following, lane changing, overtaking, and compliance with traffic
light signals. It supports both V2V and V2I communication. GrooveNet simulator is an open-source hybrid simulator
that integrates mobility and network simulators. It imports real road maps from Tiger/Line databases. It supports vari-
ous modes such as driver mode, simulation mode, playback mode, hybrid simulation mode, and test generation mode.
In addition to these integrated simulators, the researchers combine different network and mobility simulators based
on availability, functionality, complexity, resource consumption, accuracy, cost, and technical support. Table 1 repre-
sents the popular simulators and details. Most of the simulators support scalability without additional requirements.
All the simulators use modular programming that increases debugging, reusability, and manageability. Traffic models
considered in all the simulators are microscopic. The ease of implementation, cost-effective, and no risk features of sim-
ulators attract researchers and industries to test the algorithms in simulated environments. Table 2 summaries the exis-
ting popular simulator with the layer-wise specification.
2.2.1 | Web-based or database-oriented simulators
CVANETSIM51 is a cloud-based discrete-event simulator for VANET developed by Telecom and Network Research Lab
(TNRL), University of Oklahoma. CVANETSIM is developed using Java programming language and MySQL database
in a Tomcat web server. It supports the use of an extensive database, real time data processing, complex multi-level
hierarchical calculation, etc. Moreover, the platform is accessible through the internet, preferably a cloud-based plat-
form with a user-friendly environment. CVANETSIM was designed particularly for VANET environments satisfying
requirements such as VANET clustering. CVANETSIM includes an efficient clustering protocol and may be accessed
over the internet. CVANETSIM supports easy data access through the database server, easy access over the internet,
and machine-independent functioning. Moreover, a cloud-based VANET simulation platform facilitates a path
TABLE 1 VANET simulators
Open Active Mobility Network Ease of Ease of Road

Simulator source development Language generator simulator setup use topology
GrooveNet Yes No C, C++ Built-in Built-in Moderate Moderate Any
SWANS++ Yes No Java JiST/SWANS SWANS Moderate Moderate Many
TraNS Yes No Java, C++ SUMO NS 2 Moderate Moderate Any
CAVENET No Yes Matlab Built-in NS2 Hard Moderate Straight
line and
circle
NCTUns Yes No Java, C++ Built-in Built-in Hard Moderate User-
Defined
MobiREAL No GTNetS NETSREAM Easy Hard Any
VEINS Yes Yes C++ SUMO OMNet++ Easy Easy Any
VSimRTI Yes Yes C++ SUMO, VISSIM OMNet++, Easy Moderate Any
PHABMACS SNS, NS3,
SWANS
VENTOS Yes Yes C++ SUMO OMNet++ Easy Easy Any
EstiNET No Yes Java Built-in EsriNET Moderate Moderate Any
iTETRIS Yes No C++ SUMO NS3 Hard Hard Any
NetSim No Yes C SUMO NetSim Easy Easy Any
VANETSim Yes Project closed Java 6 Map generated Built-in Moderate Moderate Moderate
on 2017 from
OpenStreetMap
10 of 32
TABLE 2 Simulators layer-wise functionality
Physical & MAC layer Performance evaluation
Simulators Features Support availability Network and Transport layer Application layer Features Availability
NETsim Protocols IEEE 1609, IEEE 802.11 a/b/n/ac/p 1. Network and Transport Services Basic Safety Message (BSM) Metrics Network related,
IEEE 1609.3 and IPv4 Protocol as per standard J2735 MAC related,
2. Routing Protocols: DSR, AODV, and transport
ZRP, OLSR related.
Propagation Friis Free Space Propagation, HATA 3. Transport protocol: WAVE Short Visualizer Graphical plot of
models Suburban, HATA Urban COST 231, Message (WSM) transmission dynamic
HATA Suburban, COST 231 HATA and reception service, Requests metrics over
Urban, Constant and Log-normal, and Channel Access Assignment time
Rayleigh and Nakagami
QoS Protocol IEEE 802.11e RTS
iTETRIS Protocols IEEE 802.11p, IEEE 1609, IEEE 1. CAR 2 CAR Communication 1. BSM Application Metrics Physical layer
802.16, Digital Video Broadcasting Consortium (C2C-CC) & IP 2. Traffic Generation with a related, MAC
Handheld (DVB-H), and cellular communication stack constant bit rate related, and
UMTS technology & channel implementation Single-hop Network
modelling. broadcast/ multicast/ unicast related
Propagation ITUR1411, Log-distance, communication Data logging Probe and
models ThreeLogDistance, Range, 2. Routing protocols: AODV, OLSR, collector
TwoRayGround, Friis Nakagami, DSDV, DSR and Opportunistic
Jakes propagation delay: Constant Routing
and Log-normal 3. Transport layer service -TCP/
UDP
Visualizer GnuPlot
BABU AND RAJ KUMAR P
TABLE 2 (Continued)

EstiNET Protocols IEEE 1609, IEEE 802.11p/a/g/n 1. Network and Transport Services WAVE Short Message Service Metrics Physical and
IEEE 1609.3 MAC layer
2. Data plane supports IP services related
Propagation Two-ray ground reflection model and the WSMP Visualizer Performance
models 3. Linux kernel-space IPv4/IPv6 monitor help to
routing mechanism plot line points
3. Transport protocol: UDP is and bar graph
required and TCP is optional,
WSMP
QoS Protocol IEEE 802.11e
VSimRTI Protocols SWANS network simulator uses the 1. Routing Protocols: single hop 1. Cooperative awareness messages Metrics MAC, PHY and
standard IEEE 802.11b, even if IEEE broadcasting (V2X), Cached 2. Uses techniques based on the Radio-channel
802.11p is the reference standard for Greedy GeoCast ETSI-ITS standard related
vehicular communication 3. Supports custom V2X
Propagation Free Space, Two Ray Ground, Three application creation possible Visualizer eworld plug-in
models Log Distance Path Loss effects. and the
(experimental state) visualizer tool
collect and
format data
VENTOS Protocols IEEE 802.11p, IEEE 1609.4, cellular 1. Routing protocols: AODV, 1. WSM Transmission flow, SAE Metrics Physical layer,
networking DSDV, and GPSR. J2735 message set MAC, Network
2. Support TCP/IP as well as the 2. External libraries integrated with layer, transport
DSRC/WAVE protocol stack the application layer modules layer and
3. Inter-process communication is 3. Adversary Module is included application
achieved through network layer related
Propagation path loss, Multi-path fading, and sockets 4. Transport protocols: Visualizer Matlab scripts to
models shadowing UDP/TCP plot different
aspects of the
simulation
scenarios
(Continues)
11 of 32
12 of 32
TABLE 2 (Continued)
SWANS++ Protocols IEEE 802.11 1. Routing protocol: GPSR and DSR NA* Metrics NA*
Propagation FreeSpace or TwoRay 2. Transport layer protocol - UDP
models and TCP
Modulation BPSK, QPSK, 16QAM, 64 QAM Visualizer NA*

VANETsim Protocols 1. Lower protocol layers, as well as Routing protocols: Supports various 1. Analyse security and privacy Metrics Privacy and
physical characteristics of the forwarding/routing protocols concepts on the application layer security related
propagation of radio waves, are such as Cache Greedy GeoCast 2. Special-purpose messages to
excluded from the simulation. simulate attacks.
2. No real encryption of messages
Propagation Excluded Visualizer Post Processing
models Engine,
GnuPlot
TraNS Protocols IEEE 1609, IEEE 802.11 a/b/n/ac/p 1. Network-centric, for realistic Application-centric design to Metrics Physical layer,
node mobility, VANET evaluate VANET applications MAC, Network
communication protocols that do that influence node mobility in and transport
not influence in real-time the real-time layer related
Propagation Two ray ground, Nakagami mobility of nodes.
models 2. Protocols: DSDV, OLSR,
Wireless Routing Protocol
QoS Protocol IEEE 802.11e RTS Visualizer Xgraph
(WRP), AODV, PGB, DSR.
3. Transport layer protocols - UDP
and TCP
TABLE 2 (Continued)
Veins Protocols IEEE 1609.4, IEEE 802.11b/p, and 1. Routing protocols: AODV, 1.Wave Short Message (WSM) Metrics Physical layer,
ETSI ITS G5 DSDV, and GPSR. handling, and periodic beaconing MAC, Network
2. Online re-configuration and re- 2. Sending WAVE service layer, transport
routing of vehicles announcements, BSMs, or layer and
Cooperative Awareness Messages application
(CAM). layer related
Propagation Free space path-loss, two-Ray 3. Supports seven privacy schemes
models Interference Model, Obstacle of different approaches such as
Shadowing, Nakagami-m, Constant silent period, context-based, and
and Log-normal mix-zone, and easily extended to
include more schemes.
Integrated ETSI ITS-G5, 4G/5G cellular Visualizer NA*
4. Includes adversary modules that
third-party networking such as 3GPP LTE and
eavesdrop on vehicle messages
models C-V2X, may be included via
and track their movements.
MATLAB/Simulink
GrooveNet Protocols IEEE 802.11a/b/g, 1xRTT and Protocol: broadcast Transport Supports multiple message types Metrics Physical layer,
Scholarly articles for Evolution-Data protocols: UDP and TCP such as GPS messages, vehicle MAC, Network
Optimized (EVDO) cellular emergency and warning event layer related
interfaces messages with priorities.
Propagation A threshold based physical layer with Visualizer NA*
models a uniform error rate is the base
physical layer model, fast fading and
log-normal path loss, two-ray
ground reflection.
(Continues)
13 of 32
14 of 32
TABLE 2 (Continued)
VANET Protocols IEEE 802.11a/p Support V2V communication and 1. The messages includes Basic Metrics Physical layer
Toolbox V2I is under development. Safety Message (BSM) and Lane and MAC
Changing Message. related
Propagation Two-ray ground reflection model and 2. Mobility models - car-following
models an Additive White Gaussian Noise model (CFM) and Lane Changing
(AWGN) channel based on WAVE/ Model (LCM) 3. Users simulate
DSRC standards. braking and changing lane
behaviours.
Additional Reliable Data Transmission (RDT)- Visualizer Basic GUI for
Support DATA-ACK conducting
simulations in
batches.
NA* - Not Available.

providing an application for real life vehicular communication. The prototype framework52 for the simulator is exe-
cuted using Amazon Elastic Computing Cloud (EC2). The cloud framework assists academia with simulation-bound
computational time, memory usage cost, and green IT effect. A Windows OS instance is configured with an OPNET
simulator on the Amazon EC2. OPNET provides significant benefits such as network scalability, minimum computa-
tion time, reduced need of hardware resources, usage costs, reduction of carbon emission, and mitigation of installa-
tion/configuration overhead of network simulators.
2.3 | Deciding factors for simulator selection
There are several simulators available for VANET experimentation. Since the performance or support of the simulators
varies from one another, selecting an appropriate simulator from the list is very important. While choosing a simulator,
the following factors are considered:
[F1] : The capability of the simulator to design and test different applications scenarios
[F2] : Availability of documentation and resource
[F3] : Published works in the same area and citations
[F4] : Number of active users
[F5] : Active user groups and support
[F6] : Active Development
Switching to a new simulator may trouble researchers who have already started working. Therefore, these factors
will help to identify the appropriate simulator. Based on these factors listed in Table 3, the researchers may choose suit-
able simulators for their requirements. The open-source integrated simulators (OMNET++ & SUMO, ns3 & SUMO,
etc.) have better functionalities and a strong user base. Therefore, various extensions are developed based on the current
requirements. The development in ns3 is faster than any other simulator. The vehicular platoon creation in VEINS sim-
ulator has an extension named “'plexe.”53 The recently released ns3.35 supports group mobility that will be helpful for
platoon creation. ns2 with SUMO is also a widely used simulator. However, due to the lack of updates, ns2 encounters
difficulties while integrating new technologies such as Software Defined Networking (SDN), Fog Computing, Edge
Computing, and 5G with VANET. The MATLAB-based VANET toolbox is popular for physical layer and MAC layer
protocol implementation and testing. The proprietary simulators provide support and documentation. However, the
number of users and open discussion regarding the implementation of various modules are less than the open-source
VANET simulators. Thus,all the open-source simulators that meet VANET testing requirements have been mostly pre-
ferred by the researchers over the past few years. VANET simulators have several advantages and disadvantages. The
advantages of the simulators are as follows:
TABLE 3 Simulators and recommendation levels
Simulators/use Routing Clustering Platooning Security Privacy

GrooveNet F1, F3, F4 F1, F3, F4 – F1, F3, F4 F1, F3, F4, F5
NS2 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5 – F1, F2, F3, F4, F5 F1, F3, F4
CAVENET F1, F3 – – – –
NCTUns F1, F2, F3, F4, F5 F1, F3, F5 – F1 –
VEINS F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6 F1, F3, F4, F5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5 F1, F3, F4, F5
VENTOS F1, F5 F1, F4 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6 F1, F2, F3, F4, F6 F1, F3, F4, F5
EstiNET F1, F2, F4, F5, F6 F1, F5, F6 – F1, F2, F6 –
NS3 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5 F1, F4, F5, F6 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5
NetSim F1, F2, F5, F6 F1, F2, F5, F6 – F1, F5 –
VANETSim – – – F1, F2, F3, F4 F1, F3, F4
VANET toolbox – F1, F2, F4, F5, F6 – F1, F2, F4, F6 F1, F2, F4, F6
• Risk-free environment
• Easy and fast deployment
• Cost-effective
• Iterative
• Visualization
• Automation in data collection and validation
• Large traffic scenarios are simulated using a single computer
• Free from system failure and environmental issues
The installation and configuration in the simulation are easier than emulators and real time implementation. The
emulator requires high-performance devices for experiments, and the real time implementation requires costly equip-
ment. It increases the cost of the system. Hence, there are several open-source simulators available for conducting
experiments. The simulation experiments are repeatable because the simulators can recreate the same experimental
conditions on varying the parameters. Several simulators support 2D or 3D visualization of the simulated environment.
Simulators use inbuilt codes for collecting and processing the statistics, and it will reduce the efforts of researchers.
Nowadays, the simulators include tools for plotting the obtained results. The main disadvantages of simulators are as
follows:
• Difficult to measure the effects of one parameter on the other

• Not able to simulate the exact real mobility
• Not able to simulate the channel characteristics variation with mobility
• Difficult to represent the channel characteristics variation with obstacles
Hence, the drawbacks of the VANET simulators turned the focus to alternative solutions such as Emulation and
Real time.
2.4 | Comparison with related surveys on simulators
Initially, the network simulators such as ns2 and NCTUns were used for VANET protocols. Further, the network simu-
lators integrated the mobility simulators to evaluate the VANET applications and protocols. A survey54 on VANET sim-
ulators discusses four freeware and open-source VANET simulators. It is the first survey on VANET simulators. Till the
year 2011, the TraNS (ns2 + sumo) was the widely used simulator and all the surveys included TraNS in their descrip-
tion. Since 2011, there were multiple options on VANET simulators to carry out the VANET experiments. However,
most of the simulator does not include the majority of the VANET features. A basic level recommendation to choose
simulators was provided to the users.56 Till the year 2015, the majority of the surveys included all the new simulators
and their background. Later, there was a remarkable growth in the VANET simulators in terms of VANET functionali-
ties. The VANET simulators included various mobility models and channel characteristics. An updated review on
VANET simulators in terms of their ability to support modern technologies such as SDN, Edge computing, and 5G,
along with VANET, was mentioned in Weber et al.65 VANET simulator VANETsim closed the project and stopped
maintenance. The summary of the existing tutorials/surveys based on VANET simulators is listed in Table 4.
3 | EM ULATOR
The VANET emulators combine real and artificial parts together to implement the VANET environment. The VANET
implementation in real time is expensive and time-consuming. Hence, the emulators support emulating an expensive
hardware. The VANET emulators are classified into two types: physical layer emulators and MAC layer emulators. In
the physical layer emulators, all the TCP/IP layers except the physical layer are real. Similarly, the MAC layer emula-
tors have all the layers real except the physical and MAC layer. There are various emulators that are implemented and
tested by various organizations.
The Airplug67 software offers a suitable graphical environment that emulates VANET. It is dedicated to Dynamic
topology and road experiments. It is a MAC layer emulator. The shell scripting helps the emulation powerful. It is an
TABLE 4 Comparison of the existing survey papers on VANET simulators
Number of
Sl. simulators
No. Title of the existing papers discussed Limitations/ shortcomings
1. A survey and comparative study of Mobility - 6 In the early development of VANET, fewer simulators were
simulators for vehicular ad hoc networks54 present. Among these, most of the simulators are currently
not used now
Network - 4
Integrated - 4
2. VANET Simulators: A Survey on Mobility Mobility - 4 • A brief description of each simulator is discussed
and Routing Protocols55
Network - 3 • The technical description of each simulator was not present
in detail
Integrated - 6
3. Simulation of vehicular ad-hoc networks: Mobility - 6 Application-wise, the support provided by the simulator is
Challenges, review of tools and not included
recommendations56
Network - 5
Integrated - 12
4. An Analysis of Simulators for Vehicular Ad Mobility - 6 Limited details are provided for each simulator
hoc Networks57
Network - 5
Integrated - 3
58
5. Detail Comparison of Network Simulators Network - 9 No detailed discussion on VANET mobility simulators and
features
Integrated - 2
6. Simulation Tools for Vehicular Ad Hoc Mobility - 5 • Limited information regarding mobility simulators and
Networks: A Comparison Study and traces
Future Perspectives59
Network - 6 • Four VANET simulators are focused alone
Integrated - 4
7. Simulation Tools and Techniques for Mobility - 2 • Mainly focused on Veins, iTETRIS, and VSimRTI
Vehicular Communications and
Applications60
Network - 3 • Comparison of the simulator is not included
Integrated - 3
8. Comparative Study of Connected Vehicle Mobility - 3 • The technical details and features of the simulator are not
Simulators61 present
Integrated - 5 • Network and mobility simulation is not discussed
9. Survey of Vehicular Network Simulators: A Mobility - 5 • The features of the simulator are not discussed
Temporal Approach62
Network - 5 • Comparison and recommendation are not included
Integrated - 6
10. Services and simulation frameworks for Mobility - 14 The details of simulators and recommendation are not
vehicular cloud computing: a included
contemporary survey63
Network - 7
Integrated - 9
(Continues)
TABLE 4 (Continued)
Number of
Sl. simulators
No. Title of the existing papers discussed Limitations/ shortcomings
11. A review of simulators used for VANETs: Mobility - 6 Mobility trace generation or integration of mobility
The case study of vehicular mobility simulators with network simulators are not included
generators64
Network - 6
Integrated - 4
65
12. VANET simulators: an updated review Mobility - 5 Supporting functionalities and application suitability of
various simulators not included
Network - 5
Integrated - 16
13. A Survey on Network Simulators for Mobility - 5 The features of the simulators are not mentioned
Vehicular Ad-hoc Networks (VANETS)66
Network - 6
Integrated - 5
indoor deployment of wireless nodes that do not have physical movement. It accepts road traffic mobility from
VanetMobiSim and emulates the VANET. Emulators support inter and intra-vehicle communication. It supports emu-
lated vehicles running on a different system. Open Access Research Testbed for Next-Generation Wireless Networks
(ORBIT)68 emulator nodes consists of wireless LAN standard arranged in the 2D grid model. Each node is equipped
with wireless and ethernet interfaces. ORBIT is used for the testing and analysis of new protocols. The ORBIT does not
generate real traffic mobility and not capable of real context sensing capability. ORBIT is programmed in the ruby script
and offers an experiment as a service. Users remotely access and run the experiments on the emulator. Mobile Opportu-
nistic Vehicular Emulation for Real Scenarios (mOVERS)69 is an emulator to support content distribution in vehicular
delay-tolerant based networks. In mOVERS, new protocols based on geographical positions and time are developed and
analysed. mOVERS ensures scalability while emulating VANET scenarios.
Autobot71 is a lightweight emulator dedicated to cellular communication for vehicular networks. Autobot combines
the operating system-level virtualization software docker and network emulator Netem.75 Autobot analyzes the perfor-
mance of the applications under various network properties. Autobot is capable of handling more number of emulated
nodes. Demo emulator70 contains one simulation host and one or more emulation hosts. Every emulation host is con-
nected to simulation using ethernet cables. The emulation host includes a wireless network tap device, a virtual wire-
less device driver that forwards the IEEE 802.11 frames received from the Linux wireless subsystem to the wtap80211
daemon process. The wtap80211 daemon process works as middleware between wtap80211 and the network simulator.
Real-time high-fidelity hardware-in-the-loop remote vehicle emulation (RVE)76 is an emulation framework for con-
nected automated vehicles. Traffic mobility traces are generated using either real world field tests or simulation results
or a combination of both. Mobility log generator and Real Time Communication Simulator (RTCSim) are the two pri-
mary components of the architecture. The generated trace file is sent to RTCSim. The log file is split based on each vehi-
cle. Multiple log files are sent to RTCSim, and the RTCSim emulates the communication between them. The
communication model allows emulation of 1,000 vehicles in real time. The RVE emulators maintain real time perfor-
mance without a noticeable loss inaccuracy.
Loop72 is a trace-based emulator of VANET protocols. Loop uses previously collected traces of the vehicle's position
and connectivity information. Loop runs visualization and the interaction features in two different threads. The loop
emulation loops over micro- and macro-periods iteratively. Ahmed et al73 created a flexible testbed for VANET, which
is not coupled to a specific emulator or simulator. It is an Android-based testbed that is deployed on virtual machines,
real hardware, and emulators. Testbed emulates location, mobility, wireless channel qualities, and wireless P2P com-
munication for VANET. The decoupled emulated data from specific sources use built-in real traces, network simulators,
urban simulators, and sensor data. Multistage emulation is followed where location, wireless characteristics, and the
other sensor data are initially processed. Further, these data are exported to the database format of the testbed and
eventually processed by the nodes of the testbed. w-iLab.t74 is an indoor wireless testbed. The modifications carried out
TABLE 5 VANET Emulators
Emulator Features Network part Mobility part scalability Focus

67
Airplug 1. Portable Network and emulated Scalable Realistic Experiment for application and
2. Robust channel protocols

3. V2V and V2I emulated
4. Shell scripting
ORBIT68 1. Flexible Real Hardware Emulated Fixed Experiment as a service for VANET users
2. Repeatable
3. Sharing
4. Ruby Scripting
mOVERS69 1. V2V and V2I Emulated Generated from MOVE Scalable To evaluate non-urgent Content Distribution
2. C/C++ Service
Demo70 1. V2V and V2I Emulated Emulated Scalable To test practical software of the system
71
Autobot 1. Light weight Emulated using OS- Emulated Scalable Rapid implementation and test application
2. Portable level under mobile network
3. Easy to install virtualization
4. V2I
5. Cellular communication
RVE71 1. Repeatable Emulated Emulated Artificial channel congestion is High Fidelity Hardware in loop emulator for
2. Controlled created for testing scalability V2V testing
3. V2V
Loop72 1. GUI Emulated Emulated mobility from Scalable To evaluate the impact of adding security
2. User friendly trace (Real/ features to the routing control plane of a
3. Parallelized execution simulated) VANET
4.Decoupled layering
5. V2V and V2I
6. c++
A flexible 1. Multi-stage emulation Link and network Emulate the trace Scalable To evaluate VANET application performance
testbed73 2. Decoupling layers emulated generated from SUMO
3. java, scripting framework, and
shell script are used.
w-iLab.t74 1. Approximation used to convert Real Emulated from trace Fixed For VANET field operation
IEEE 802.11a/b/g to IEEE
802.11p
2. V2V
19 of 32
are suitable for VANET. w-iLab.t is arranged in the Interdisciplinary Institute for BroadBand Technology (IBBT) office
premises in Ghent, Belgium, on three floors (17.5 90 m). There are 200 nodes in the network. Each node is Intel 86
architecture and each board is equipped with two Compex WLM54SAG, miniPCI wireless cards (AR5006XS 802.11a/
b/g 54/108 Mbps), and a Tmote Sky IEEE 802.15.4 mote. The nodes are centrally controlled and monitored. The major
disadvantage in using w-iLab.t is the absence of real movement of nodes in the wireless testbed. The link impairment
techniques emulate the variations of link quality on node mobility. Table 5 summarizes the details of VANET emula-
tors. The advantages of emulators are as follows:
1. Improved result accuracy

2. Close to real
3. Cost-effective
4. Mostly Repeatable
There exist some disadvantages as follows:
1. The emulators require more time and manpower than simulators

2. Not possible to emulate all the real time conditions
3. High resource consumption than simulators
4 | REAL TIME IMPLEMENTATIONS/TESTBEDS
The cost and the time of implementing a novel protocol/technique in a real environment are complex because several
known and unknown parameters create a significant impact in the real environment resulting in the failure of the sys-
tem. Hence, research institutions and industries are developing their own real time environments and testbeds. In the
literature, a few frameworks and architectures are proposed, implemented, and tested in real time.
Cabernet77 is a content delivery network for vehicles. It delivers data to and from vehicles using open 802.11b/g
(WiFi) Access Points (AP). The cars connect opportunistically during the trip. The real vehicular testbed deployed is
available in taxis in the Boston area. Each node contains a computing device equipped with GPS and IEEE 802.11 b/g
wireless LAN interface mounted inside the car. Cabernet Transport Protocol is developed in the transport layer to
achieve higher throughput. Paranthaman et al78 builds and evaluates a prototype of VANET in Middlesex University
Hendon Campus, London. The testbed is used to explore better propagation models, applications for road-critical pro-
tection, and algorithms for traffic management. An experiment was conducted inside the campus consisting of 4 RSUs.
The RSU and OBU made by ARADA systems are equipped with IEEE 802.11p with WAVE (Wireless Access in Vehicu-
lar Environment) standard specifications.
C-VET79 is Campus Vehicular Testbed developed by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) campus.
C-VET nodes have been installed in 30 facility management vehicles, 30 commuting vans, and a small pool of per-
manent UCLA campus facility vehicles. These vehicles are driven every day to perform both the routine and the
non-routine tasks inside the campus. The C-VET mobile node is made by industrial-strength Cappuccino PC. The
PC is configured with an Intel Dual Core Duo processor at 2.5 GHz, 2 GB of RAM, and 320 GB disk. In addition,
the PC is equipped with three wireless interfaces IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n of Atheros AR9160 chipset, IEEE 802.11p
interface of Daimler-Benz customized chipset and a standard Bluetooth interface mostly for internal communica-
tions. Sensors such as Infra-Red based CO2 sensors, electrochemical CO sensors, SIRF III or Ublox based GPS sen-
sors, temperature and humidity sensors, and a megapixel camera are used for flexible data collection. C-VET mesh
node is based on MobiMESH hardware. The mesh supports opportunistic internet access. CarTel80 is a mobile sensor
computing system developed by MIT, USA. CarTel node is a mobile node embedded with a couple of sensors and
relies on the opportunistic wireless network. The carTel has been implemented on six cars and runs in US metropol-
itan cities. It collects, processes, delivers, and visualizes data from a collection of remote, mobile, and intermittently
connected nodes. It relies on opportunistic wireless connectivity. CarTel offers a simple interface for query-oriented
programming, handles massive volumes of heterogeneous sensor data, and handles inconsistent and variable net-
work connectivity. The carTel has three components: portal, Intermittently Connected Database (ICEDB), and
Carry-and-Forward Network (CafNet). The ICEDB server is a delay-tolerant continuous query processor that
responds to local snapshot queries and logs. The continuous query results are prioritized. CafNet, a delay-tolerant
network stack, is used to communicate between the portal and the mobile nodes. These help to collect, process,
deliver, and visualize data from mobile sensor networks.
ORBIT project proposes two testbeds for the wireless network. The node is equipped with a computing device and
two mini-PCI-based IEEE 802.11 a/b/g interfaces for wireless communication. The first one is an indoor grid (20 20)
model node placement, and the second one is an outdoor testbed that deploys nodes over a 1.5 square mile area. Few
nodes placed on-campus shuttle buses run along fixed routes and on a fixed schedule. Besides, various devices are
deployed to measure the traffic and interference across the relevant portion of the radio spectrum. The design of the
grid testbed allows for greater flexibility. In addition, a subset of nodes is available with programmable UMTS and mea-
sures traffic and radio spectrum. The collected information is used to repeat the experiments. DieselNet81 consist of
35 buses. Every is bus equipped with a Diesel Brick computer of 1 GHz CPU, 1 GB RAM, 60 GB or greater hard drive,
and Linux OS. The brick includes three radio interfaces: an 802.11 b/g, PCI-based 802.11b/g/a and longer-range
MaxStream XTend 900 MHz. The 802.11b/g Access Point supports DHCP access to the travellers. The PCI-based
802.11b/g/a interface continuously monitors the surrounding area for DHCP offers and other vehicles. A longer-range
MaxStream XTend 900 MHz radio connects the throw boxes. In addition, few buses were equipped with Intel 6250
WiMAX clients. Diverse Outdoor Mobile Testbed (DOME)82 is a testbed for large-scale mobile experimentation. DOME
includes buses equipped with computers, nomadic battery-powered nodes, WiFi Access Points, and a WiFi mesh net-
work. The testbed provides the properties of temporal, technological, and spatial diversity on mobility. DOME testbed
addressed the modeling challenges such as mobility, channel, radio characteristics, and power consumption.
VanLAN83 sets up 11 static nodes and 2 vehicular nodes. The static nodes were placed across five buildings inside
the Microsoft campus. Each node consists of a small desktop with Atheros 5213 interface chipset. All nodes are config-
ured to the same 802.11p channel. The omni-directional antennas are arranged on the top of the vehicle and in the top
of the buildings. The vehicles allowed a maximum speed limit set to 40 km/h. Sanchez et al84 used the laptop to config-
ure adhoc nodes, and the laptops were equipped with IEEE 802.11a/b/g Ubiquiti SRC wireless card and an external
antenna MMCX. The WLAN link's communication range is increased by attaching an omni-directional antenna
(gain—8 dBi) with a 5 GHz range. The configured OBU was installed on the roof of three vehicles. The VARON route
optimization was validated, and handover's feasibility in inter-technology and multi-hop mechanisms was evaluated.
HarborNet85 is a vehicular mesh networking testbed deployed in the seaport of Leixoes in Portugal. The trucks,
administration vehicles, towboats, patrol vessels, and roadside infrastructure of the seaport are equipped with OBUs.
DSRC with WAVE protocol stack is used. The testbed supports cloud-based code deployment, remote network access,
and distributed data collection. The collected data are stored in the cloud servers and provide access through the web
service. The node failure is handled by a dual-booting technique. It supports delay-tolerant support for non-real time
applications. Shanghai Urban Vehicular network (SUVnet)86 uses GPS data of 4,000 taxis in shanghai for constructing
the mobility models. The collected GPS location of vehicles is mapped, and the traces are obtained. The generated trace
is used to construct a virtual VANET. The incomplete information from the taxis becomes imprecise. To regenerate the
trace of a vehicle from the inaccurate data, the following three steps are performed:
(i) Maps the GPS data on the road

(ii) Determines the route between two consecutive points
(iii) Preprocess the data for quality
Each taxi is modeled as an ad hoc node during the simulation time. The main advantages of the SUVnet mobility
model are that it is of large scale and realistic.
The real world testbed Vehicular Delay Tolerant Network (VDTN )87 testbed consists of a dedicated embedded hard-
ware and software system. The embedded hardware includes a vehicle attached with a computing device, GPS, and
IEEE 802.11b/g/n that operates at 2.4 GHz frequency spectrum. The main features of DTN such as IP over VDTN and
out of band signaling with plane separation are validated and verified. VDTNs support two real service applications in
urban scenarios: Warning Message Service and Traffic Jam Information Service. The VDTN testbed uses a few vehicular
nodes for the testing. VC-bots88 is a vehicular cloud testbed using vehicular robots. VC-bots emulates the real behavior
of vehicles using small robot vehicles. Nineteen robot vehicles of four types which are 7 VC-trucks, 1 VC-van, 1 VC-
sedan, and 10 VC-compact were built. The vehicle robots control the speed automatically. The attached sensors are used
to measure the state of the vehicle and the traffic. VC bots support multiple network access methods. An independent
WiFi network is used for robot management and remote control. An LTE modem is used to connect out of the range of
management WiFi networks. Every robot vehicle is equipped with multiple WiFi interfaces. RSU is equipped with a
TABLE 6 VANET Real Implementation
No. of
nodes
tested
Project Features (car/bus) Testing environment
77
Cabernet 1. Connection establishment time is 25 Deployed in taxis in the
reduced Boston area
2. V2I connectivity
3. Cellular connectivity
4. Cabernet Transport Protocol
developed
Middlesex University prototype VANET 1. V2V and V2I; 10 Middlesex University
testbed78 2. Investigate new propagation models, Hendon Campus, London
algorithms of improved safety and
traffic management
C-VET79 1. Pure vehicular ad hoc segment 100 UCLA campus
2. Flexible wireless mesh infrastructure
3. Opportunistic internet access
4. V2V AND V2I
CarTel80 1. Simple query-oriented programming 6 US metropolitan city.
interface
2. Handles large amounts of
heterogeneous sensors data
3. Rely on opportunistic wireless
ORBIT68 1. Flexible 400 Rutgers University campus
2. Repeatable
3. Shared to the user for experiments
4. Provide UMTS connectivity
5. Ruby Scripting
DOME82 1. Constantly upgrading and expanding 40 + 26 (as Micro-urban and rural
2. Remote Update Mechanism RSU) environment
3. Link Management Module
4. Mesh network
HarborNet85 1. Cellular backhaul is available 35 Seaport of Leixoes in
2. Data analytics and remote control of Portugal
Experiments by Connected cloud-
based system.
3. Delay-tolerant network services
Real Vehicular Delay-Tolerant Network 1. Safety Warning Message application 5 Internal streets of
Testbed87 and Traffic Jam Information service Fiat-Brazil park
2. Used wireless N-150 adapter
compatible with IEEE 802.11b/g/n
and operation frequency of 2.4 GHz.
VC-bots88 1. Java based mobility management UI 20 Road topology constructed
2. V2V AND V2I inside the office building.
3. Robot vehicle automatically adjusts
the speed
Smartphone and Laptop Frameworks for 1. Framework using smartphone and 10 --
Vehicular Networking Experimentation89 laptop
2. Cheaper and more flexible testbed
Design and Implementation of a VANET 1. IEEE 802.11g WiFi module used for 4 Fukuoka Institute of
Testbed: Performance Evaluation communication Technology, Japan
considering DTN Transmission over 2. Measured storage usage, packet
VANETs90 delivery ratio, and delay
TABLE 6 (Continued)
No. of
nodes
tested
Project Features (car/bus) Testing environment
86
SUVnet 1. Delay-tolerant network Inter vehicle 4000 City (Shanghai, China)
communication
Multi-channel based Sybil Attack Detection in 1. Implemented Sybil Attack Detection 6 Campus of Northwestern
Vehicular AdHoc Networks using RSSI91 2. Improve Voiceprint by allowing it to Poly technical University,
conduct detection on Service Channel rural area, and urban
(SCH) area.
WiFi access point and relays internet services. Software-Defined Radio (SDR) cards mounted on VC-truck test custom
MAC layer and physical layer protocols. It supports V2V and V2I communication.
Ambrosin et al89 discussed two real vehicular experimentation methods. The first framework is used on Android
smart-phones, and the second one uses a laptop. The framework makes use of the inbuilt GPS module and WiFi mod-
ules of the devices. The real time evaluation of the protocols is conducted by configuring the devices in real vehicles.
For smart-phones, a WiFi direct group was created for communication due to the difficulty of creating and destroying
the connection. In order to achieve a real ad hoc network behavior, data link level raw sockets are used to implement a
lightweight and connectionless protocol. It supports V2V communication with less infrastructure cost.
Nakasaki et al90 developed a DTN testbed for VANETs and tested the outdoor environment within the university
campus, Fukuoka Institute of Technology, Japan. Raspberry Pi was configured as OnBoard Unit (OBU). An IEEE
802.11g WiFi module embedded for communication and ad hoc mode is enabled in the Raspberry Pi. Four mobile
devices for outdoor testing and evaluated the epidemic routing protocol were deployed. Yao et al91 implemented and
tested VANET based Multi-channel Sybil Attack Detection in real time. The OBU is configured using an IEEE 802.11p
wireless module, namely, the IWCU OBU4.2 produced by ITRI and a GPS is connected to the laptop. IWCU OBU4.2 is
a DSRC device following the WAVE stack. The OBU mounted four vehicles and conducted experiments on campus,
rural areas, and urban areas. Neha et al92 describe a real time implementation of VANET. Moreover, each vehicle is
equipped with a wireless sensor network and communication device creating an ad hoc environment. The setup allows
vehicles to transfer mobility parameters such as distance, speed, and location coordinates (position) using GPS and RF
to provide vehicle-to-vehicle communication. HD44780 LCD DISPLAY is used as a vehicle display. Ultrasonic sensors,
IR sensors, and GPS units are used to collect vehicle information such as speed, location, and distance. The sensors and
other devices are connected to the CMOS 8-bit microcontroller that processes and forwards the information. IEEE
802.15.4 standard with 2.4 GHz ISM band is used for wireless communication. Table 6 summarizes the details of the
real time implementation. Paula et al93 developed a real world testbed for VDTN that evaluates the applicability of
VDTNs over different environments. A warning message service was implemented to assist the damaged cars. The car
sends a safety message periodically to other cars travelling in the same direction. The testbed was created using a laptop
equipped with GPS devices. The experiment was conducted around the Fiat Auto-mobile manufacturing plant in
Brazil.
European project COM2REACT94 built a local cooperative traffic management system based on V2V communica-
tion. The vehicles collect data and aggregate the collected data to the central server generating vehicle-specific recom-
mendations and information to relevant authorities. Mounted IEEE 802.11b and communication devices in five cars
were used to conduct the experiments. The goal of COM2REACT is to design and analyze the communication and con-
trol processes. SD-VANET is a new software-defined VANET testbed architecture that consists of the roadside units
and vehicles consisting of soft OpenFlow switches with WiFi capabilities. The testbed was deployed on Istanbul Techni-
cal University (ITU) campus. The testbed is configured using an OpenDaylight Software Defined Network (SDN) con-
troller and 10 Raspberry Pi OpenFlow switches. The OpenFlow switches are connected to the university campus wired
LAN. To validate the testbed Software Defined Network-WAM (SDN-WAM) was used.
The disadvantages of the VANET testbed are as follows:
• Costly compared to other methods

- Each component needs to be purchased for a real time implementation and increases the initial cost of deployment.
• More time consumption in the setup phase

- Each node needs to be configured, updated, maintained, and controlled individually.
- Increases the actual time consumption of a setup and implementation phase.
• Lack of automation in data collection and validation
- In the real scenario, the vehicular networks act as the distributed system. Ad hoc node does not have a central con-
troller, shared clock, or shared memory. Hence, every device captures and logs the data. Therefore, we need to
retrieve data from each device and aggregate it for validation.
- It is necessary to combine, filter, and evaluate the events of each node for proper validation. The lack of central con-
trol raises the overhead in the processing and analysis of the data.
• Scalability
- Limiting the experiment to a minimal number of mobile nodes could lead to assessments of bias. However, the
deployment of more nodes requires more money and effort.
• Repeatability is difficult
- Real time mobility and other parameters may not be the same for all the experiments. The mobility changes from
experiment to experiment.
4.1 | Low cost testbed implementation
Very few testbeds are available and all are not accessible to the public. Therefore, we developed our own testbed to test
and validate the proposed algorithms in the VANET domain. The multicast communication between vehicles was
implemented using the CARTRAC testbed. The name of the funded VANET project is Collaborative Trusted Anony-
mous Communication in Vehicular Networks (CARTRAC).95
The real implementation of VANET is expensive and requires more manpower. Conducting experiments in real road
traffic is difficult and risky. Therefore, an ad hoc network was created, and experiments were conducted using low-cost
Raspberry Pi devices mounted on RC cars. The low-cost testbed includes a Raspberry Pi model B device, a GPS module
(antenna and receiver) for the position information, a magnetometer for retrieving the direction information, and a
high-speed racing Remote Controlled (RC) car. The raspbian OS was installed on the raspberry pi. The GPS module and
magnetometer are connected to the Raspberry Pi and configured as an OBU. The Raspberry Pi is configured in adhoc
mode and a power bank supplies power to the configured OBU. The OBU is mounted on the top of the RC car and stra-
pped around it, as shown in Figure 5. The high-speed racing RC cars (model 144001) were used for the experiments. RC
cars moved up to a speed of 60 km/h and was used in the experiments. The remote controller works at 2.4 GHz and can
support a length of 100 m. The car's body is made of high-strength aluminium alloy with strong stability, zinc alloy gears,
and oil-pressure shock absorbers for strong wear resistance. Its high efficiency 550 strong magnetic motors support fast
to and fro motion. Eight mobile nodes and a few static nodes were configured using Raspberry Pi's. The configured static
nodes are fixed on the infrastructure (street lights and buildings). A laptop is connected to the ad hoc network to verify
FIGURE 5 VANET testbed

the connectivity and to monitor the mobile nodes. The OBU generates beacon messages for every 100 ms to detect the
nearby device. OBU shares the position, direction, and velocity information with its neighboring nodes. Our campus
roads have been chosen to conduct the experiments. The testbed helps to implement and test the following:
• Routing protocols
• Synthetic mobility trace
• Security algorithm
• Security attacks
• Transport protocol
• Handover
• Clustering and creating platoons
• Safety message dissemination
The routing protocol developed using the CARTRAC testbed is “DTMR: An adaptive Distributed Tree-based Multicast
Routing protocol for vehicular networks96.” In addition, there are various ongoing projects related to secure communica-
tion sharing the CARTRAC testbed in VANET domains. The experiments in the testbed are performed with minimum
risk. It is feasible to configure, manage, monitor, and maintain additional nodes with minimum expense and effort.
5 | R ELATED D I S CU S S I ON S
There are efficient simulators with rich functionalities available for VANET simulation. The significant difference
between the open-source simulator and the proprietary simulator is that the proprietary simulators provide better inter-
faces than the open-source simulator. But, mostly, the inbuilt codes are not allowed for modifications. One noticeable
advantage of the open source simulator such as ns3 is that there are many users working on it, and hence, an active
open forum and groups are available for technical support. The selection of simulators depends on the requirement.
For example, to design a protocol in the MAC layer, OMNET++ is better than ns3. The significant challenges working
with a simulator are as follows:
(i) It is difficult to measure the effects on one parameter

(ii) Generating real behavior in the environment is not feasible
The majority of the simulators achieve behavior close to the real one. However, the change in characteristics that
reflect exactly the environment may not be simulated. The channel characteristics are implemented without consider-
ing the high mobility environment. A change in a single variable may change the entire environment.
The emulators virtually create a real time environment for VANET. More hardware resources, time, and money are
required in emulator than the simulator. There are very few emulators that provide online access. The emulator
requires more system resources to scale the number of nodes. Emulators exhibit more natural behavior than simulators.
The deployment of research solutions in real cars may be too expensive. Nowadays, the researchers are running the
experiments in low expensive real time testbeds. Instead of actual OBU, the researchers configure the OBU using alter-
nate options such as Raspberry pi, GPS unit, and wireless access points. Few researchers are conducting the experi-
ments with their own vehicles (cars) to generate realistic mobility. The other group fixes the configured OBU in the
public transport for realistic mobility. It reduces the cost and effort of managing and controlling vehicles. The alternate
cost-effective method is using mini robotic vehicles or high-speed remote-controlled cars that were used to create mobil-
ity. Meanwhile, there exists a scalability issue. Experiments with a limited number of nodes lead to a biased result. The
main challenge is recreating real time experiments again with the same condition due to the dynamic change in the real
time environment parameters. Table 7 summarizes the features of the simulator, emulator, and real time testbeds.
In research, the new solutions developed today outperform the solutions that existed in the literature. The solutions
are compared and analysed by examining the behavior under the same/different set of input conditions or standard
benchmarks. In such cases, datasets play a vital role in analysing the state of the art solutions. Researchers use self-cre-
ated/custom datasets or directly accessible from publicly available dataset collections. A public domain database
TIGER/Line includes many geographic features such as roads, boundaries, and hydrography features, which were
widely used by various simulators and emulators to generate the real road topology. But classifying these datasets is
TABLE 7 A Comparison of Simulators, Emulators and real time implementation
Parameters Simulator Emulator Real Time Implementation

Definition Software system that models the Hardware or software that replicate an Actual implementation of the
applications and processes. actual device and permits to test same system to test the
system features. features.
Aim Imitate the internal features of an Replicate the functional characteristics. Implement 100% exactly of the
object. same system.
Mode of Reflects the internal behaviour of It replicates the operating systems, Real time implementation mode.
operation the device, but not the hardware hardware, and software of mobile
features. devices.
Performance Functions at a higher speed than Very slow Faster than simulator
the emulator
Efficiency Above average Better than simulator The original system performs
faster than the emulator or
simulator
Language High-level language Machine level assembly language Both machine-level assembly
language and high-level
language
Implementation Partial reimplementation of the Complete reimplementation of the Complete implementation in real
system system time
Availability Paid and open-source are Paid and open-source are available Expensive
available
Time Consumes average time Consumes more time than simulators More time consuming (initial
setup time required and
coordination time)
Maintenance Collaborative update and Collaborative update and maintenance Research labs from organization
and update maintenance are possible are possible
challenging. Unstandardized datasets may be incompatible or biased and may not include all the mandatory test condi-
tions. The unavailability of standardizing agencies and the lack of a common repository for sharing, validating, and
accessing the custom-made datasets prevent the researchers from using publicly available datasets. Due to the growing
interest in research, various organizations and research institutes are nowadays developing their own testbeds for gen-
erating traces and conducting experiments more accurately.
6 | C ON C L U S I ON
VANET is an emerging technology that is already an integral part of the ITS. There are many contributions to ITS from
different industries and institutes of various countries in recent years. Projects are currently being moved from the
experimental stage to the deployment stage. The technologies were implemented and analyzed using a simulator, emu-
lator, or testbed before actual deployment. The experiment that is more close to the real scenario is trustworthy. How-
ever, due to the lack of money and time, most of the experiments are evaluated using simulators. VEIN simulators are
most popular among VANET researchers, and the VEIN simulator is fastly adopting various emerging technologies of
VANET. There are just a few number of emulators dedicated to VANET scenarios. Among them, very few simulators
provide public access. Emulators were used for a very less number of experiments. Nowadays, various organizations are
developing testbeds for conducting real time experiments and real trace generation. Even though the real time experi-
ments require more money, time, and effort, it shows the real behaviour of the VANET environment. Hence, accurate
results are achieved in real time experiments than simulators and emulators. Therefore, the acceptance of real time
experiments is increasing day by day and several research institutions and organizations are adopting cost-effective
ways to develop testbeds.
A C K N O WL E D G M E N T S
Thanks to the anonymous reviewers for providing valuable comments and suggestions. Thanks to students, Justin P
Devasia (B170212CS) and Sebin Abraham Maret (B170161CS) of our institute for helping us in the VANET testbed
implementation. This work is funded by Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Government of India, under
Core Research Grant (CRG) scheme (EMR/2016/007502).
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are
not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.
ORCID
Sarath Babu https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3823-2213
Arun Raj Kumar P https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9052-2002
R EF E RE N C E S
1. Road traffic injuries. “https://www.who.int/health-topics/road-safety” last accessed on December 29; 2020.
2. Saini M, Alelaiwi A, Saddik AE. How close are we to realizing a pragmatic VANET solution? A meta-survey. ACM Comput Surv. 2015;
48(2):29. https://doi.org/10.1145/2817552
3. Al-Sultan S, Al-Doori MM, Al-Bayatti AH, Zedan H. A comprehensive survey on vehicular ad hoc network. J Netw Comput Appl. 2014;
37(1):380-392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2013.02.036
4. Sharef BT, Alsaqour RA, Ismail M. Vehicular communication ad hoc routing protocols: a survey. J Netw Comput Appl. 2014;40(1):
363-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2013.09.008
5. Zeadally S, Hunt R, Chen YS, Irwin A, Hassan A. Vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETS): status, results, and challenges. Telecommun
Syst. 2012;50(4):217-241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-010-9400-5
6. Liang W, Li Z, Zhang H, Wang S, Bie R. Vehicular ad hoc networks: architectures, research issues, methodologies, challenges, and
trends. Int J Distrib Sensor Netw. 2015;11(8):745303. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/745303
7. Liang L, Peng H, Li GY, Shen X. Vehicular communications: a physical layer perspective. IEEE Trans Vehic Technol. 2017;66(12):
10647-10659. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2017.2750903
8. Teixeira FA, e Silva VF, Leoni JL, Macedo DF, Nogueira JMS. Vehicular networks using the IEEE 80211p standard: an experimental
analysis. Vehic Communic. 2014;1(2):91-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vehcom.2014.04.001
9. Jiang D, Delgrossi L. IEEE 80211p: Towards an international standard for wireless access in vehicular environments. In: IEEE Vehicular
Technology Conference; 2008:2036-2040. https://doi.org/10.1109/VETECS.2008.458
10. Song C. Performance Analysis of the IEEE 802.11p Multichannel MAC protocol in vehicular ad hoc networks. Sensors (Basel). 2017;
17(12):2890. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17122890. PMID: 29231882; PMCID: PMC5751651.
11. Raviglione F, Malinverno M, Casetti C. Characterization and performance evaluation of IEEE 802.11p NICs. In: Proceedings of the 1st
ACM MobiHoc Workshop on Technologies, models, and Protocols for Cooperative Connected Cars (TOP-Cars '19) Association for Com-
puting Machinery; 2019; New York, NY, USA:13-18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3331054.3331548
12. Singh PK, Nandi SK, Nandi S. A tutorial survey on vehicular communication state of the art, and future research directions. Vehic
Commun. 2019;18:100164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vehcom.2019.100164
13. Lan K. C. MOVE: A practical simulator for mobility model in VANET. Telematics Communication Technologies and Vehicular Networks:
Wireless Architectures and Applications: IGI Global; 2009:355-368. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-840-6.ch021
14. Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing. “https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
TopologicallyIntegratedGeographicEncodingandReferencing”, last accessed on December 29; 2020.
15. Djenouri D, Soualhi W, Nekka E. VANET'S mobility models and overtaking: an overview. In: 2008 3rd International Conference on
Information and Communication Technologies: From Theory to Applications, ICTTA; 2008:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTTA.2008.
4530189
16. Van Eenennaam EM. A Survey of propagation models used in Vehicular Ad hoc Network (VANET) research. Communications. 2009;67:
132-147. http://wwwhome.cs.utwente.nl/eenennaa/unpublished/vanEenennaam_MRC_paper.pdf
17. Martinez FJ, Toh CK, Cano JC, Calafate CT, Manzoni P. Realistic Radio Propagation Models (RPMs) for VANET Simulations, IEEE Wire-
less Communications and Networking Conference, WCNC; 2009:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/WCNC.2009.4917932
18. Angeles W, Borin VP, Munaretto A, Fonseca M. The impact of propagation models in the performance of ad hoc routing protocols for
urban VANET. In: 2016 IEEE 84th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall); 2016:1-5. https://doi.org/10.1109/VTCFall.2016.
7881251
19. Kumar Singh P, Lego K. Comparative study of radio propagation and mobility models in Vehicular Adhoc NETwork. Int J Comput Appl.
2011;16(8):37-42. https://doi.org/10.5120/2031-2600
20. Cooper C, Franklin D, Ros M, Safaei F, Abolhasan M. A comparative survey of VANET clustering techniques. IEEE Commun Surv
Tutor. 2017;19(1):657-681. Firstquarter, https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2016.2611524
21. Akhtar N, Ergen SC, Ozkasap O. Vehicle mobility and communication channel models for realistic and efficient highway VANET Simu-
lation. IEEE Trans Vehic Technol. 2015;64(1):248-262. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2014.2319107
22. Hammouda S, Tounsi H, Frikha M. Towards a study of mobility models impact on VANET connectivity metrics. In: 2012 3rd Interna-
tional Conference on the Network of the Future, NOF, Vol. 2012; 2012:92-96. https://doi.org/10.1109/NOF.2012.6463998
23. Boukenadil B. Importance of realistic mobility models for VANET network simulation. Int J Comput Netw Commun. 2014;6(5):175-182.
https://doi.org/10.5121/ijcnc.2014.6513
24. Harri J, Filali F, Bonnet C. Mobility models for vehicular ad hoc networks: a survey and taxonomy. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2009;
11(4):19-41. Fourth Quarter 2009 https://doi.org/10.1109/SURV.2009.090403
25. Fiore M. Vehicular mobility and network simulation In: Olariu S, Weigle MC, eds. Handbook on Vehicular Networks: Taylor and Francis;
2008:344-423. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420085891
26. Seredynski M, Danoy G, Tabatabaei M, Bouvry P, Pigné Y. Generation of realistic mobility for VANETs using genetic algorithms. In:
2012 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, CEC; 2012:1-8.
27. Khairnar VD, Pradhan SN. Mobility models for Vehicular Adhoc Network simulation. In: ISCI 2011 - 2011 IEEE Symposium on Com-
puters and Informatics; 2011:460-465. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCI.2011.5958959
28. Sommer C, Dressler F. Progressing toward realistic mobility models in VANET simulations. IEEE Commun Mag. 2008;46(11):132-137.
https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2008.4689256
29. Ros FJ, Martinez JA, Ruiz PM. A survey on modeling and simulation of vehicular networks: communications, mobility, and tools. Com-
put Commun. 2014;43:1-15. ISSN 0140-3664, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2014.01.010
30. Behrisch M, Bieker L, Erdmann J, Krajzewicz D. SUMO Simulation of Urban MObility. Iaria,c,55–60; 2011.
31. Lownes NE, Machemehl RB. VISSIM: a multi-parameter sensitivity analysis. In: Proceedings of the 38th conference on Winter simula-
tion (WSC'06); 2006:1406-1413.
32. Issariyakul T, Hossain E. Introduction to Network Simulator 2 (NS2). Introduction to Network Simulator NS2. Boston, MA: Springer;
2012:21-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1406-3_2
33. Riley GF, Henderson TR. The ns-3 network simulator. In: Wehrle K, Gune M, Gross J, eds. Modeling and Tools for Network Simulation.
Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2010:15-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12331-3_2
34. Chang X. Network simulations with OPNET. In: Proceedings of the 31st conference on Winter simulation: Simulation—a bridge to the
future - Volume 1 (WSC '99) Association for Computing Machinery; 1999; New York, NY, USA:307-314. https://doi.org/10.1145/324138.
324232
35. Varga A. OMNeT++. In: Wehrle K, Gunes M, Gross J, eds. Modeling and Tools for Network Simulation. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer;
2010:35-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12331-3_3
36. Harri J, Filali F, Bonnet C, Fiore M. Vanetmobisim: generating realistic mobility patterns for VANETs. In: VANET-Proceedings of the
Third ACM International Workshop on Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks; 2006:96-97. https://doi.org/10.1145/1161064.1161084
37. Choffnes D, Bustamante FE. STRAW—an integrated mobility and traffic model for VANETs. In: Proceeding of the 10th International
Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (CCRTS); 2005:1-18.
38. Miller J, Horowitz E. Freesim—a free real-time freeway traffic simulator. In: 2007 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference;
2007; Seattle, WA:18-23. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITSC.2007.4357627
39. Mangharam R, Weller D, Rajkumar R, Mudalige P, Bai F. Groovenet: a hybrid simulator for vehicle-to-vehicle networks. In: 2006 Third
Annual International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Networking & Services; 2006; San Jose, CA:1-8. https://doi.org/10.
1109/MOBIQ.2006.340441
40. Research in Distributed Computing. http://oldaqualab.cs.northwestern.edu/projects/143-swans-extensions-to-the-scalable-wireless-
adhoc-network-simulator; 2020.
41. De Marco G, Tadauchi M, Barolli L. CAVENET: description and analysis of a toolbox for vehicular networks simulation. In: Proceedings
of the International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems-ICPADS; 2007:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPADS.2007.4447821
42. Piorkowski M, Raya M, Lugo AL, Papadimitratos P, Grossglauser M, Hubaux JP. TraNS: realistic joint traffic and network simulator for
VANETs. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Comput Commun Rev. 2008;12(1):31-33.
43. Rondinone M, Maneros J, Krajzewicz D, et al. ITETRIS: a modular simulation platform for the large scale evaluation of cooperative ITS
applications. Simul Modell Pract Theory. 2013;34:99-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2013.01.007
44. Tomandl A, Herrmann D, Fuchs K, Federrath H, Scheuer F. VANETsim: an open source simulator for security and privacy concepts in
VANETs. In: 2014 International Conference on High Performance Computing & Simulation (HPCS); 2014:543-550. https://doi.org/10.
1109/HPCSim.2014.6903733
45. Amoozadeh M, Deng H, Chuah C-N, Michael Zhang H, Ghosal Dipak. Platoon management with cooperative adaptive cruise control
enabled by VANET. Vehic Commun. 2015;2(2):110-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vehcom.2015.03.004
46. Sommer C, Eckhoff D, Brummer A, et al. Veins: the open source vehicular network simulation framework. In: EAI/Springer Innova-
tions in Communication and Computing; 2019:215-252. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12842-5_6
47. Ebers S, Fischer S. Poster: adapter framework for VANET simulators. In: 2014 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference (VNC); 2015:
193-194. https://doi.org/10.1109/VNC.2014.7013343
48. Wang SY, Chou CL. NCTUns 5.0 network simulator for advanced wireless vehicular network researches. In: 2009 Tenth International
Conference on Mobile Data Management: Systems, Services and Middleware; 2009; Taipei:375-376. https://doi.org/10.1109/MDM.
2009.59
49. Wang L, Iida R, Wyglinski AM. Vehicular network simulation environment via discrete event system modeling. IEEE Access. 2019;7:
87246-87264. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2922766
50. Wang S, Chou C, Yang C. EstiNet openflow network simulator and emulator. IEEE Commun Mag. 2013;51(9):110-117. https://doi.org/
10.1109/MCOM.2013.6588659
51. Mukhtaruzzaman M, Atiquzzaman M. Cloud-based VANET Simulator (CVANETSIM). ArXiv, abs/2101.11147; 2021.
52. Iqbal MA, Aleem M, Ibrahim M, Anwar S, Islam MA. Amazon cloud computing platform EC2 and VANET simulations. Int J Ad Hoc
Ubiquitous Comput. 2019;30(3):127. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijahuc.2019.098472
53. Segata M, Joerer S, Bloessl B, Sommer C, Dressler F, Cigno RL. Plexe: a platooning extension for Veins. In: 2014 IEEE Vehicular Net-
working Conference (VNC); 2014:53-60. https://doi.org/10.1109/VNC.2014.7013309
54. Martinez FJ, Toh CK, Cano J-C, Calafate CT, Manzoni P. A survey and comparative study of simulators for vehicular ad hoc networks
(VANETs). Wirel Commun Mob Comput. 2011;11:813-828. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcm.859
55. Spaho E, Barolli L, Mino G, Xhafa F, Kolici V. VANET Simulators: a survey on mobility and routing protocols. In: International Confer-
ence on Broadband and Wireless Computing, Communication and Applications; 2011:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1109/BWCCA.2011.11
56. Stanica R, Chaput E, Beylot A-L. Simulation of vehicular adhoc networks: Challenges, review of tools and recommendations. Comput
Netw. 2011;55(14):3179-3188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2011.05.007
57. Hussain SA, Saeed A. An analysis of simulators for vehicular ad hoc networks. World Appl Sci J. 2013;23(8):1044-1048. https://doi.org/
10.5829/idosi.wasj.2013.23.08.584
58. Kabir M, Islam S, Hossain M, Hossain S. Detail comparison of network simulators. Int J Sci Eng Res. 2014;5(10):203-218. https://doi.org/
10.13140/RG.2.1.3040.9128
59. Ben Mussa SA, Manaf M, Ghafoor KZ, Doukha Z. Simulation tools for vehicular ad hoc networks: A comparison study and future per-
spectives. In: 2015 International Conference on Wireless Networks and Mobile Communications (WINCOM); 2015:1-8. https://doi.org/
10.1109/WINCOM.2015.7381319
60. Sommer C, Harri J, Hrizi F, Schunemann B, Dressler F. Simulation tools and techniques for vehicular communications and applications.
In: Campolo C, Molinaro A, Scopigno R, eds. Vehicular ad hoc Networks. Cham: Springer; 2015:365-392. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
319-15497-8_13
61. Ahmed MS, Hoque MA, Pfeiffer P. Comparative study of connected vehicle simulators. SoutheastCon. 2016;2016:1-7. https://doi.org/10.
1109/SECON.2016.7506701
62. Silva MJ, Silva GI, Ferreira CMS, Teixeira FA, Oliveira RA. Survey of vehicular network simulators: a temporal approach. In:
Hammoudi S, Smialek M, Camp O, Filipe J, eds. Enterprise Information Systems. ICEIS 2018, Lecture Notes in Business Information
Processing, Vol. 363. Cham: Springer; 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26169-6_9
63. Ahmed B, Malik AW, Hafeez T, et al. Services and simulation frameworks for vehicular cloud computing: a contemporary survey.
J Wireless Com Network. 2019;2019:4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13638-018-1315-y
64. Bhatia TK, Ramachandran RK, Doss R, Pan L. A review of simulators used for VANETs: the case-study of vehicular mobility generators.
In: 2020 7th International Conference on Signal Processing and Integrated Networks (SPIN); 2020:234-239. https://doi.org/10.1109/
SPIN48934.2020.9070933
65. Weber J, Neves M, Ferreto T. VANET Simulators: an updated review. J Braz Comput Soc. 2021;27:8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13173-021-
00113-x
66. Aljabry IA, Al-Suhail GA. A survey on network simulators for vehicular adhoc networks (VANETS). Int J Comput Appl. 2021;174(11):
1-9. https://doi.org/10.5120/ijca2021920979
67. Buisset A, Ducourthial B, El Ali F, Khalfallah S. Vehicular networks emulation. In: 2010 Proceedings of 19th International Conference
on Computer Communications and Networks; 2010:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCCN.2010.5560164
68. Ott M, Seskar I, Siraccusa R, Singh M. ORBIT Testbed software architecture: supporting experiments as a service. In: First International
Conference on Testbeds and Research Infrastructures for the DEvelopment of NeTworks and COMmunities; 2005:136-145. https://doi.
org/10.1109/TRIDNT.2005.27
69. Pessoa G, Dias R, Condeixa T, Azevedo J, Guardalben L, Sargento S. Content distribution emulation for vehicular networks. In: 2017
Wireless Days; 2017:208-211. https://doi.org/10.1109/WD.2017.7918146
70. Kato A, Takai M, Ishihara S. Demo: wireless LAN emulator using wireless network tap device for testing a vehicular network system.
In: The 25th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom '19) Association for Computing
Machinery; 2019; New York, NY, USA:1-3. https://doi.org/10.1145/3300061.3343376
71. Ricard Q, Owezarski P, Ricard Q, Owezarski P, et al. Autobot: An Emulation Environment For Cellular Vehicular Communications.
HAL Id: hal-02347361 Autobot: an emulation environment for cellular vehicular communications; 2019.
72. Cirne P, Zuquete A, Sargento S. A trace-based emulator for vehicular ad hoc networks. In: SIMULTECH 2018-Proceedings of 8th Inter-
national Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications, Simultech; 2018:391-402. https://doi.
org10.5220/0006854503910402
73. Ahmed H, Pierre S, Quintero A. A flexible testbed architecture for VANET. Vehic Commun. 2017;9:115-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
vehcom.2017.04.004
74. Vandenberghe W, Moerman I, Demeester P, Cappelle H. Suitability of the wireless testbed w-iLab.t for VANET research. In: 2011 18th
IEEE Symposium on Communications and Vehicular Technology in the Benelux (SCVT); 2011:2011. https://doi.org/10.1109/SCVT.
2011.6101301
75. Jurgelionis A, Laulajainen J, Hirvonen M, Wang AI. An empirical study of NetEm network emulation functionalities. In: 2011 Proceed-
ings of 20th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks (ICCCN); 2011; Maui, HI:1-6. https://doi.org/10.
1109/ICCCN.2011.6005933
76. Shah G, Valiente R, Gupta N, et al. Real-time hardware-in-the-loop emulation framework for DSRC-based connected vehicle applica-
tions. ArXiv; 2019.
77. Eriksson J, Balakrishnan H, Madden S. Cabernet: vehicular content delivery using WiFi. In: Proceedings of the Annual International
Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, MOBICOM; 2008:199-210. https://doi.org/10.1145/1409944.1409968
78. Paranthaman VV, Ghosh A, Mapp G, et al. Building a prototype VANET testbed to explore communication dynamics in highly mobile
environments. In: Guo S, Wei G, Xiang Y, Lin X, Lorenz P, eds. Testbeds and Research Infrastructures for the Development of Networks
and Communities. TridentCom 2016, Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications
Engineering, vol. 177. Cham: Springer; 2017:81-90. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49580-4_8
79. Cesana M, Fratta L, Gerla M, Giordano E, Pau G. C-VET the UCLA campus vehicular testbed: integration of VANET and mesh
networks,; 2010:689-695. https://doi.org/10.1109/EW.2010.5483535
80. Hull B, Bychkovsky V, Zhang Y, et al. Cartel: a distributed mobile sensor computing system. In: SenSys'06: Proceedings of the Fourth
International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems; 2006:125-138. https://doi.org/10.1145/1182807.1182821
81. UMass DOME Testbed. https://dome.cs.umass.edu/umassdieselnet
82. Soroush H, Banerjee N, Balasubramanian A, Corner MD, Levine BN, Lynn B. DOME: a diverse outdoor mobile testbed. In: Proceedings
of the 1st ACM International Workshop on Hot Topics of Planet-Scale Mobility Measurements, HotPlanet '09; 2009:1-6. https://doi.org/
10.1145/1651428.1651431
83. Balasubramanian A, Mahajan R, Venkataramani A, Levine BN, Zahorjan J. Interactive wifi connectivity for moving vehicles. SIGCOMM
Comput Commun Rev. 2008;38(4):427-438. https://doi.org/10.1145/1402946.1403006
84. Sanchez MI, Gramaglia M, Bernardos CJ, De La Oliva A, Calderon M. On the implementation, deployment and evaluation of a network-
ing protocol for VANETs: The VARON case. Ad Hoc Netw. 2014;19:9-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2014.02.001
85. Ameixieira C, Cardote A, Neves F, et al. Harbornet: a real-world testbed for vehicular networks. IEEE Commun Mag. 2014;52(9):
108-114. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2014.6894460
86. Huang HY, Luo PE, Li M, et al. Performance evaluation of SUVnet with real-time traffic data. IEEE Trans Vehic Technol. 2007;56(6):
3381-3396. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2007.907273
87. Paula MCG, Rodrigues JJ, Dias JA, Isento JN, Vinel A. Performance evaluation of a real vehicular delay-tolerant network testbed. Int J
Distrib Sensor Netw. 2015;11(3):219641. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/219641
88. Lu D, Li Z, Huang D, et al. VC-Bots: a vehicular cloud computing testbed with mobile robots. In: IoV-VoI - Proceedings of the 1st
MobiHoc International Workshop on Internet of Vehicles and Vehicles of Internet; 2016:31-36. https://doi.org/10.1145/2938681.2938683
89. Ambrosin M, Bujari A, Conti M, De Gaspari F, Palazzi CE. Smartphone and laptop frameworks for vehicular networking experimenta-
tion. In: IFIP Wireless Days; 2013:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/WD.2013.6686481
90. Nakasaki S, Yoshino Y, Ikeda M, Barolli L. Design and implementation of a VANET testbed: performance evaluation considering DTN
transmission over VANETs. In: Barolli L, Xhafa F, Javaid N, Enokido T, eds. Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Com-
puting. IMIS 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Vol. 773. Cham: Springer; 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
93554-6_73
91. Yao Y, Xiao B, Wu G, et al. Multi-Channel Based sybil attack detection in vehicular ad hoc networks using RSSI. IEEE Trans Mobile
Comput. 2019;18(2):362-375. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMC.2018.2833849
92. Neha G, Thakre RD, Suryawanshi YA. Gupta real time implementation of vehicular adhoc network, international. J Eng Trends Technol
(IJETT). 2017;45(3):121-126. ISSN:2231-5381. https://www.ijettjournal
93. Paula MCG, Isento JN, Dias JA, Rodrigues JJPC. A real-world VDTN testbed for advanced vehicular services and applications. In: IEEE
16th International Workshop on Computer Aided Modeling and Design of Communication Links and Networks (CAMAD); 2011;
Kyoto:16-20. https://doi.org/10.1109/CAMAD.2011.5941108
94. De La Fortelle A, Laurgeau C, Muhlethaler P, Toor Y. COM2REACT: V2V communication for cooperative local traffic management. In:
14th World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems, ITS; 2007:1920-1924.
95. CARTRAC. https://sites.google.com/view/scout-lab/projects/external-sponsored-projects?authuser=0; 2021.
96. Babu S, Parthiban ARK. DTMR: an adaptive distributed tree-based multicast routing protocol for vehicular networks. Comput Standards
Interfaces. 2022;79:103551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2021.103551
How to cite this article: Babu S, Raj Kumar P A. A comprehensive survey on simulators, emulators, and
testbeds for VANETs. Int J Commun Syst. 2022;35(8):e5123. doi:10.1002/dac.5123
A P P END I X A : ABBREVIATIONS
AODV Adhoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing

AP Access Point
AWGN Additive White Gaussian Noise White Gaussian Noise
BPSK Binary Phase-shift keying
BSM Basic Safety Message
C2C-CC CAR 2 CAR Communication Consortium
CafNet Carry-and-Forward Network
CAM Cooperative Awareness Message
CCH Control Channel
CFM Car-Following Model
CSMA/CA Carrier-Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance
DES Discrete Event System
DSR Dynamic Source Routing
DSRC Dedicated Short Range Communication
DTN Delay Tolerant Network
DVB-H Digital Video Broadcasting Handheld
EC2 Amazon Elastic Computing Cloud
EDCA Enhanced Distributed Channel Access
EDCF Enhanced Distribution Coordination Function
ETSI European Telecommunications Standards Institute
EVDO Evolution-Data Optimized
FIFO First In First Out
FSPL Free-Space Path Loss
GPRS General Packet Radio Service
GPS Global Positioning System
GUI Graphical User Interface
HCF Hybrid Coordination Function
IBBT Interdisciplinary Institute for BroadBand Technology
ICEDB Intermittently Connected Database
ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems
IVC Inter Vehicle Communication
LCM Lane-Changing Model
LSR Link State Routing
LTE Long-Term Evolution
MAC Medium Access Control
MANET Mobile Adhoc Networks
mOVERS Mobile Opportunistic Vehicular Emulation for Real Scenarios
ns2 Network simulator 2
ns3 Network simulator 3
OBU On-Board Units
OLSR Optimized Link State Routing Protocol
OMNET++ Objective Modular Network Testbed in C++
OPNET Optimized Network Engineering Tools
ORBIT Open Access Research Testbed for Next-Generation Wireless Networks
OSM OpenStreetMap
PTV Planung Transport Verkehr
QAM Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
QoS Quality of Service
RSU Road Side Units
RTS/CTS Request To Send / Clear To Send
SCH Service Channel
SDN Software-Defined Networking

SDR Software-Defined Radio
SUMO Simulation of Urban MObility
TCP Transmission Control Protocol
TIGER Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing
TNRL Telecom and Network Research Lab
TraNS Traffic and Network Simulation
UCLA University of California, Los Angeles
UDP User Datagram Protocol
UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
V2I Vehicle to Infrastructure
V2V Vehicle to Vehicle
V2X Vehicle to Everything
VANET Vehicular Adhoc Networks
VDTN Vehicular Delay Tolerant Network
VENTOS Vehicular Network Open Simulator
WAVE Wireless Access in Vehicular Environment
WHO World Health Organization
WRP Wireless Routing Protocol
WSM Wave Short Message
WSMP WAVE Short Messaging Protocol
ZRP Zone Routing Protocol

Int J Communication - 2022 - Babu - A Comprehensive Survey On Simulators Emulat

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Int J Communication - 2022 - Babu - A Comprehensive Survey On Simulators Emulat

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Received: 10 June 2021 Revised: 5 January 2022 Accepted: 1 February 2022

A comprehensive survey on simulators, emulators, and

Sarath Babu | Arun Raj Kumar P

Computer Science and Engineering

FIGURE 1 VANET environment

FIGURE 2 Taxonomy of VANET experiment platforms

Our contributions are as follows:

2.1 | What needs to be modeled?

(i) Motion constraints

2.1.1 | Signal propagation models

(i) Unit disk model

2.1.2 | Mobility models

(i) Synthetic models

2.2 | Simulators and categories

1. Network simulator: Configures the network for testing algorithms.

FIGURE 3 Simulators classification

2.2.1 | Web-based or database-oriented simulators

TABLE 1 VANET simulators

Open Active Mobility Network Ease of Ease of Road

TABLE 2 Simulators layer-wise functionality

Physical & MAC layer Performance evaluation

Physical & MAC layer Performance evaluation

Physical & MAC layer Performance evaluation

Modulation BPSK, QPSK, 16QAM, 64 QAM Visualizer NA*

Physical & MAC layer Performance evaluation

Physical & MAC layer Performance evaluation

NA* - Not Available.

2.3 | Deciding factors for simulator selection

TABLE 3 Simulators and recommendation levels

Simulators/use Routing Clustering Platooning Security Privacy

• Difficult to measure the effects of one parameter on the other

2.4 | Comparison with related surveys on simulators

TABLE 4 Comparison of the existing survey papers on VANET simulators

Emulator Features Network part Mobility part scalability Focus

2. Robust channel protocols

1. Improved result accuracy

There exist some disadvantages as follows:

1. The emulators require more time and manpower than simulators

4 | REAL TIME IMPLEMENTATIONS/TESTBEDS

(i) Maps the GPS data on the road

TABLE 6 VANET Real Implementation

• Costly compared to other methods

• More time consumption in the setup phase

4.1 | Low cost testbed implementation

FIGURE 5 VANET testbed

(i) It is difficult to measure the effects on one parameter

TABLE 7 A Comparison of Simulators, Emulators and real time implementation

Parameters Simulator Emulator Real Time Implementation

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

AODV Adhoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing

SDN Software-Defined Networking

You might also like