Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ABSTRACT
Mobile ad-hoc networks (MANET) rely on wireless connections between mobile
nodes, which mean limited bandwidth & high rate of disconnections between
nodes. So there is a great need for a new routing protocol that have low routing
message overhead to enhance the performance of MANET. The reduction of
routing message overhead will decrease the wasted portions of bandwidth that
used for exchange routing messages between nodes, and increase the bandwidth
available for transferring data, which in turn increases the network throughput and
decreases the latency. This paper proposes a new MANET routing protocol that
decreases both of the routing message overhead and the average end to end delay
by on average 27.9%, 13.7% respectively less than the well known AODV routing
protocol. This led to increase the throughput by 23.87% more than AODV routing
protocol.
Keywords: Ad-hoc, AODV, Local Repair, MANET, and on-demand routing.
INTRODUCTION
Volume 2 Number 3
Page 16
www.ubicc.org
(1)
Where:
TTLMNR: the last known hop count from the
upstream node of the failure to the destination.
NH: the number of hops from the upstream node of
the failure to the source of the currently
undeliverable packet.
TTLLA: constant value
After the upstream node broadcasts the RREQ packet,
it waits the discovery period to receive RREP
packets in response to the RREQ packet. When the
destination or an intermediate node that has a fresh
route to the destination receives the RREQ packet, a
RREP packet will be forwarded towards the
upstream node. If discovery period finished and the
upstream node didn't receive a RREP for that
destination, it transmits a RERR message for that
destination to the source. On the other hand, if the
upstream node receives one or more RREP packets
during the discovery period, it first compares the hop
count of the new route with the value in the hop
count field of the invalid route table entry for that
destination. In the case of the hop count of the
newly determined route to the destination is greater
than the hop count of the previously known route,
the upstream node transmits a RERR message for
that destination towards the source, with 'N' bit set.
Finally, the upstream node updates its route table
entry for that destination.
3
Volume 2 Number 3
Page 17
SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT
www.ubicc.org
N
(
N
HC
(3)
(N N )
PR
( N LRR )
PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS
(4)
( N LRF )
5.3 Throughput
Throughput is a very important parameter in
evaluating the modifications performance. It is
calculated as the number of bits received per second.
Throughput is affected by the number of packets
dropped or left wait for a route which is calculated as
the summation of the number of packets dropped or
left wait for a route for all the nodes.
5.1
DT
N PD
(N N )
(2)
Volume 2 Number 3
Page 18
SIMULATION SCENARIOS
www.ubicc.org
SCENARIOS RESULTS
AODVLRT
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
AODV
AODVLRT
0.6
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
5000
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Volume 2 Number 3
Page 19
www.ubicc.org
AODV
AODVLRT
17000
16500
16000
AODV
AODVLRT
80000
75000
70000
65000
60000
55000
50000
45000
40000
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
15500
15000
14500
14000
50
100
150
200
250
300
AODVLRT
1.7
1.5
1.3
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Volume 2 Number 3
Page 20
www.ubicc.org
AODVLRT
7.2.3 Throughput
The throughput resulted from both AODV
and AODVLRT routing protocols has been presented
in Fig. (6). The result demonstrates that the
AODVLRT routing protocol has higher throughput
than the AODV routing protocol by on average 39%.
This returns to that local repair in AODVLRT acts in
trials by broadcasting first RREQ packet with TLL =
LR_TTL_START (equal to 2 in the experiment).
This reduces the routing overhead which by its turn
resulted in increasing throughput. On the other side,
local repair in AODV broadcasts RREQ packet once
with TTL as in Eq. (1) which resulted in higher
routing message overhead which led by its turn to
reduce the throughput.
AODV
AODVLRT
15000
14000
13000
12000
11000
10000
9000
8000
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
250000
240000
230000
220000
210000
200000
190000
180000
170000
160000
150000
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Volume 2 Number 3
AODVLRT
Page 21
www.ubicc.org
AODVLRT
11000
10500
10000
9500
9000
8500
8000
7500
7000
6500
6000
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Volume 2 Number 3
Page 22
www.ubicc.org
[10] R.
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
REFERENCES
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
Volume 2 Number 3
Page 23
[18]
www.ubicc.org