MANET is a standalone system of mobile wireless nodes that move at any time within a changing topology. These mobile nodes are self-managed, perform the routing process, and flow data between them across multiple hops and independently of any central authority. The path from the source node to the target node is chosen based on several criteria called path selection criteria. Single-Path routing protocols store the best path for the target node in the source node routing table, while Multi-Path routing protocols store multiple paths for the target node in the source node routing table with the goal of having Alternate paths that can be used if the primary path used fails. In this research, we conducted a performance Evaluation of the Multi-path routing protocols in wireless mobile Ad-hoc networks AODMV, MDART, where the nodes move random movement in the RWP model, and the contract speed is changed for all performance parameters (throughput -Data Packets Dropped - Average End-to-End Delay - Packet Delivery Ratio/Fraction - Normalized Routing Load - Routing Overhead). The study showed that the performance of the AOMDV protocol is best for medium and slow speed in all measured parameters, while performance of MDART protocol is the worst for medium and slow speed, and that there is no effective routing protocol no matter how fast the nodes are. Keywords: MANET, AOMDV, MDART, Multi-Path Routing Protocols, Performance Evaluation, NS-2.

1. 1
‫التوجيه‬ ‫بروتوكوالت‬ ‫أداء‬ ‫تقييم‬‫متعددة‬‫المسار‬‫ات‬
‫النقالة‬ ‫المخصصة‬ ‫الالسلكية‬ ‫الشبكات‬ ‫في‬
AOMDV, MDART
MDART
NS-2
*‫طالب‬‫دكتوراه‬–‫الحاسوبية‬ ‫والشبكات‬ ‫النظم‬ ‫هندسة‬ ‫قسم‬–‫المعلوماتية‬ ‫الهندسة‬ ‫كلية‬–.‫البعث‬ ‫جامعة‬
**‫مساعد‬ ‫أستاذ‬–‫الحاسوبية‬ ‫والشبكات‬ ‫النظم‬ ‫هندسة‬ ‫قسم‬–‫كلية‬‫المعلوماتية‬ ‫الهندسة‬–‫البعث‬ ‫جامعة‬.

2. 2
MANET is a standalone system of mobile wireless nodes that move at
any time within a changing topology. These mobile nodes are self-
managed, perform the routing process, and flow data between them
across multiple hops and independently of any central authority. The
path from the source node to the target node is chosen based on several
criteria called path selection criteria. Single-Path routing protocols store
the best path for the target node in the source node routing table, while
Multi-Path routing protocols store multiple paths for the target node in
the source node routing table with the goal of having Alternate paths that
can be used if the primary path used fails. In this research, we conducted
a performance Evaluation of the Multi-path routing protocols in wireless
mobile Ad-hoc networks AODMV, MDART, where the nodes move
random movement in the RWP model, and the contract speed is changed
for all performance parameters (throughput -Data Packets Dropped -
Average End-to-End Delay - Packet Delivery Ratio/Fraction -
Normalized Routing Load - Routing Overhead). The study showed that
the performance of the AOMDV protocol is best for medium and slow
speed in all measured parameters, while performance of MDART
protocol is the worst for medium and slow speed, and that there is no
effective routing protocol no matter how fast the nodes are.

3. 3
MANETAOMDV, MDART
:‫يلي‬ ‫ما‬ ‫يقدم‬ ‫أن‬ ‫البحث‬ ‫من‬ ‫يتوقع‬
1.‫تحليلية‬ ‫دراسة‬ ‫إجراء‬‫ل‬‫التوجيه‬ ‫بروتوكوالت‬‫متعددة‬‫المسار‬‫ات‬‫الشب‬ ‫في‬‫ك‬‫ات‬
‫النقالة‬ ‫المخصصة‬ ‫الالسلكية‬.

4. 4
2.‫التوجيه‬ ‫بروتوكوالت‬ ‫أداء‬ ‫تقييم‬‫متعددة‬‫المسار‬‫ات‬‫الالسلكية‬ ‫الشبكات‬ ‫في‬
‫ا‬‫البروتوكولين‬ ‫وهي‬ ‫النقالة‬ ‫لمخصصة‬‫نموذج‬ ‫وفق‬ ،
‫العشوائي‬ ‫التنقل‬.
23
-

5. 5
32

6. 6

7. 7
‫البحث‬‫البروتوكوالت‬
‫المدروسة‬
‫أهم‬‫النتائج‬
‫البروتوكول‬
‫األفضل‬
“Determination of
critical transmission
range in ad-hoc
networks”
AODV,
AOMDV
‫البروتوكول‬ ‫أن‬AOMDV‫فعال‬
‫المفقودة‬ ‫الرزم‬ ‫عدد‬ ‫تقليل‬ ‫في‬
‫الرزم‬ ‫تسليم‬ ‫نسبة‬ ‫زيادة‬ ‫وبالتالي‬
‫فيها‬ ‫تتغير‬ ‫التي‬ ‫الشبكات‬ ‫في‬
‫كبير‬ ‫بشكل‬ ‫الطوبولوجيا‬‫با‬ ،‫ل‬‫رغم‬
‫ا‬ ‫حمل‬ ‫من‬‫في‬ ‫الكبير‬ ‫لتوجيه‬‫ه‬
‫استخدامه‬ ‫عند‬ ‫التأخير‬ ‫وزيادة‬.
AOMDV
“AN IMPROVED
MULTIPATH DHT
BASED ROUTING
PROTOCOL FOR
MOBILE AD-HOC
NETWORKS”
AOMDV,
MDART,
DSDV
‫البروتوكول‬ ‫أداء‬AOMDV
‫أداء‬ ‫يبقى‬ ‫بينما‬ ‫ينخفض‬
‫البروتوكول‬AODV‫ثابت‬‫كما‬ ،
‫بروتوكول‬ ‫أن‬MDART‫هو‬
‫للشبكات‬ ‫األنسب‬‫المحلية‬
‫الالسلكية‬IEEE802.11‫و‬ ،‫هو‬
.‫الطاقة‬ ‫ناحية‬ ‫من‬ ً‫ا‬‫أيض‬ ‫األفضل‬
MDART
“Simulative
Contemplation of
AODV, AOMDV and
MDART Protocols”
AOMDV,
AODV,
MDART
‫بروتوكول‬MDART‫أداء‬ ‫يحقق‬
‫البروتوكولين‬ ‫من‬ ‫أفضل‬
AODV, AOMDV‫ازدياد‬ ‫عند‬
.‫العقد‬ ‫عدد‬
MDART
“Performance
Comparison of VANET
Routing Protocols”
AODV,
DSR,
DSDV
‫يحقق‬‫بروتوكول‬DSR‫أداء‬
،‫الشبكات‬ ‫من‬ ‫النوع‬ ‫هذا‬ ‫في‬ ‫أفضل‬
‫غير‬ ‫البروتوكوالت‬ ‫هذه‬ ‫أن‬ ‫كما‬
‫استخدا‬ ‫عند‬ ‫فعالة‬‫شبكات‬ ‫في‬ ‫مها‬
.‫الالسلكية‬ ‫المركبات‬
DSR
“Qos Based Analysis Of
MDART Using AODV
And AOMDV”
AOMDV,
AODV,
MDART
‫بروتوكول‬MDART‫أداء‬ ‫يحقق‬
‫البروتوكول‬ ‫من‬ ‫أفضل‬AOMDV
‫األداء‬ ‫معايير‬ ‫ناحية‬ ‫من‬
.‫المدروسة‬
MDART

8. 8
“A More Realistic
Random Direction
Mobility Model”
AODV,
AOMDV
‫البروتكول‬AOMDV‫من‬ ‫أفضل‬
‫البروتوكول‬AODV‫بالنسبة‬
‫لكن‬ ‫الرزم‬ ‫تسليم‬ ‫لنسبة‬
‫البروتوكول‬AODV‫األفضل‬ ‫هو‬
‫بالنسب‬‫التأخير‬ ‫زمن‬ ‫لمتوسط‬ ‫ة‬
AOMDV,
AODV
“Performance
Comparison of routing
protocols for Ad hoc
networks”
AODV,
DSR,
OLSR
‫البروتوكوالت‬AODV, DSR
‫البروتوكول‬ ‫من‬ ‫أفضل‬OLSR‫في‬
‫على‬ ‫والكبير‬ ‫المتوسط‬ ‫الحمل‬ ‫حالة‬
‫الشبكة‬.
AODV,
DSR
“The GloMoSim
Simulator s”
AODV,
DSR
‫ا‬‫لبروتوكول‬AODV‫من‬ ‫أفضل‬
‫البروتوكول‬DSR‫ترسل‬ ‫عندما‬
‫عقد‬ ‫لعدة‬ ‫البيانات‬ ‫المصدر‬ ‫العقدة‬
‫الدراسة‬ ‫تمت‬ ‫حيث‬ ،‫هدف‬
‫الشبكي‬ ‫المحاكي‬ ‫باستخدام‬
GloMoSim.
AODV
“Performance Analysis
of AODV, DSR, and
Swarm Intelligence
Routing Protocols In
Vehicular Ad hoc
Network Environment”
AODV,
DSR
‫البروتوكولين‬AODV,DSR
‫مع‬ ‫مقارنة‬ ‫الشبكة‬ ‫أداء‬ ‫من‬ ‫تخفض‬
‫المخصصة‬ ‫البروتوكوالت‬
.‫الالسلكية‬ ‫المركبات‬ ‫لشبكات‬
VANET
Protocols
“Performance
Evaluation of Routing
Protocols for Mobile
Ad Hoc Networks”
AODV,
DSDV
‫البروتوكول‬AODV‫أفضل‬
،‫لإلنتاجية‬ ‫بالنسبة‬‫و‬‫البروتوكو‬‫ل‬
DSDV.‫للتأخير‬ ‫بالنسبة‬ ‫أفضل‬
AODV,
DSDV
“Evaluation of MANET
Routing Protocols in
Realistic
Environments”
AODV,
DSR,
TORA
AODV‫بالنسبة‬ ‫األفضل‬ ‫هو‬
‫المناسب‬ ‫غير‬ ‫من‬ ‫وأنه‬ ‫لإلنتاجية‬
‫البروتوكول‬ ‫استخدام‬DSR
‫والبروتوكول‬TORA‫زي‬ ‫عند‬‫ادة‬
‫بي‬ ‫البيانات‬ ‫تدفق‬ ‫عدد‬.‫العقد‬ ‫ن‬
AODV
“Comparative Analysis
of Multipath Routing
Algorithms for Mobile
Ad-hoc Networks”
AODV,
MDART,
MSR
‫ب‬‫روتوكول‬MDART‫أداء‬ ‫يحقق‬
‫من‬ ‫أفضل‬AOMDV‫بالنسبة‬
.‫المدروسة‬ ‫األداء‬ ‫لمعايير‬
MDART
“Performance
Measurement of
Various Routing
Protocols in Ad-hoc
Network”
AODV,
OLSR,
DSR
‫البروتوكول‬ ‫أداء‬AODV‫أفضل‬
‫العقد‬ ‫كثافة‬ ‫كانت‬ ‫حال‬ ‫في‬
‫حالة‬ ‫في‬ ‫أما‬ ‫ومنخفضة‬ ‫متوسطة‬
‫أداء‬ ‫يكون‬ ‫للعقد‬ ‫الكبيرة‬ ‫الكثافة‬
‫البروتوكول‬DSR‫والبروتوكول‬
AODV,
OLSR,
DSR

9. 9
OLSR‫المحاكاة‬ ‫وتمت‬ ،‫أفضل‬
‫المحاكي‬ ‫باستخدام‬QUALNET.
“Performance
Evaluation of Routing
Protocols in Mobile Ad
hoc Networks
(MANETs)”
AODV,
OLSR,
TORA,
DSR
‫البروتوكول‬OLSR‫بالنسبة‬ ‫أفضل‬
،‫التأخير‬ ‫ومتوسط‬ ‫لإلنتاجية‬
‫البروتوكول‬DSR‫بالنسبة‬ ‫أفضل‬
،‫الشبكة‬ ‫على‬ ‫التوجيه‬ ‫لحمل‬
‫البروتوكول‬AODV‫في‬ ‫أفضل‬
‫الشبكة‬ ‫عبر‬ ‫الحمل‬ ‫كان‬ ‫حال‬
‫منخ‬ ‫العقد‬ ‫وسرعة‬ ‫خفيف‬،‫فضة‬
‫والبروتوكول‬TORA‫أداء‬ ‫يعطي‬
‫عبر‬ ‫الخفيف‬ ‫الحمل‬ ‫حالة‬ ‫في‬ ‫جيد‬
.‫المنخفضة‬ ‫والسرعات‬ ‫الشبكة‬
AODV,
OLSR,
TORA,
DSR
“Simulation Based
Performance
Comparison of AODV,
AOMDV, DSR and
MDART Routing
Protocols in MANETS”
AOMDV,
AODV,
MDART,
DSR
‫بروتوكول‬AOMDV‫ن‬ ‫يحقق‬‫تائج‬
‫السناريوهات‬ ‫كل‬ ‫في‬ ‫أفضل‬
.‫األداء‬ ‫لمعايير‬ ‫بالنسبة‬ ‫المدروسة‬
AOMDV
“Performance
Comparison of AODV,
AOMDV, OLSR, DSR
and GSR Routing”
AODV,
AOMDV,
OLSR,
DSR,
GSR
‫البروتوكول‬AODV‫األفضل‬ ‫هو‬
‫شبكات‬ ‫في‬ ‫استخدامه‬ ‫ويمكن‬
‫لنسبة‬ ‫بالنسبة‬ ‫وذلك‬ ،‫المركبات‬
‫الرز‬ ‫تسليم‬.‫التأخير‬ ‫ومتوسط‬ ‫م‬
AODV
“Performance analysis
of AODV, DSDV and
OLSR in a VANETs
safety application
scenario”
AODV,
DSDV,
OLSR
‫البروتوكول‬AODV،‫األفضل‬ ‫هو‬
‫البروتوكول‬ ‫أن‬ ‫كما‬DSDV‫يعاني‬
.‫الشبكة‬ ‫عبر‬ ‫التوجيه‬ ‫حمل‬ ‫من‬
AODV
“The reliable routing
algorithm with regard
to packet deadline in
wireless sensor
networks”
AODV,
OLSR,
TORA
‫البروتوكول‬OLSR‫أداء‬ ‫يعطي‬
‫البروتوكول‬ ‫من‬ ‫أفضل‬AODV
‫والبروتوكول‬TORA.
OLSR
“Performance
Comparison of Routing
Protocols for Ad Hoc
Networks”
AODV,
DSR
‫البروتوكول‬‫ين‬AODV‫و‬DSR
‫أدائها‬‫جيد‬‫ذات‬ ‫الشبكات‬ ‫في‬
.‫الكبير‬ ‫الحمل‬
AODV,
DSR
“Trace Based Mobility
Model for Ad Hoc
Networks”
AOMDV
‫البروتوكول‬AOMDV‫صمم‬
‫ذات‬ ‫للشبكات‬ ً‫ا‬‫خصيص‬
‫يحدث‬ ‫التي‬ ‫المتغيرة‬ ‫الطوبولوجيا‬
‫بالمسارات‬ ‫متكرر‬ ‫انقطاعات‬ ‫بها‬
‫البروتوكول‬ ‫في‬ ‫ألنه‬ ،‫العقد‬ ‫بين‬
AOMDV‫من‬ ‫أكثر‬ ‫اكتشاف‬ ‫يتم‬
AOMDV

10. 10
‫مسار‬‫المصدر‬ ‫العقدة‬ ‫بين‬
‫هو‬ ‫المسارات‬ ‫أحد‬ ,‫والهدف‬
‫والمسارات‬ ‫الرئيسي‬ ‫المسار‬
‫حال‬ ‫في‬ ‫بديلة‬ ‫تكون‬ ‫خرى‬ُ‫األ‬
‫ولكل‬ ‫الرئيسي‬ ‫المسار‬ ‫انقطاع‬
‫حدوث‬ ‫لمنع‬ ‫تسلسلي‬ ‫رقم‬ ‫مسار‬
.‫الحلقات‬



11. 11

5
23

12. 12

AODV



13. 13
AOMDV
MDART
DART
MDART
DART
DARTMDART
MDART
DART
MDART
MDART
MDART
MDART
DHT
Distributed Hash Table32[27]
S
D

14. 14
|
L3
L=3LLevel2
L+1
34
2-b32

L
Sibling ID
3Slibing ID
3Next Hop
2Route cost
4Network ID
5Route log
22223
223
01x

15. 15
1xx
DART
MDARTn
log(n)n32
6.

16. 16
𝑇ℎ𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ𝑝𝑢𝑡 =
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙𝐵𝑖𝑡𝑠𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑
𝑆𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝐷𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠 𝐷𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑑 = ∑ 𝐷𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠 𝐷𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑑

17. 17
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐸𝑛𝑑 − 𝑡𝑜 − 𝐸𝑛𝑑 𝐷𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑦 =
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑
𝑃𝐷𝐹 ( 𝑃𝐷𝑅) = (
𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠
𝑆𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠
) × 100
𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠
𝑆𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠

18. 18
𝑁𝑅𝐿 =
𝑅𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠 𝑆𝑒𝑛𝑡
𝑆𝑢𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝐷𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑒𝑑
𝑅𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠 𝑆𝑒𝑛𝑡
𝑆𝑢𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝐷𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑒𝑑
𝑅𝑂𝐻 = ∑ 𝑆𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑅𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠
𝑆𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑅𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠

19. 19

20. 20

21. 21
Protocol
Speed
MDART AOMDV
1 5764.99162 7715.71137
2 5443.21174 7714.23226
3 5214.215 7640.79537
4 4980.11577 7413.14103
5 4928.38321 7325.01677
6 4780.93738 7170.85897
7 4435.78403 7045.95661
8 4415.4026 6759.55277
9 4318.28501 5988.46549
10 3375.77614 4818.30227
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
THROUGHPUT(BPS)
SPEED M/S
THROUGHPUT
MDART AOMDV

22. 22
Protocol
Speed
MDART AOMDV
1 274 206
2 347 237
3 350 272
4 360 296
5 389 332
6 420 381
7 440 371
8 480 419
9 570 419
10 680 428
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0
NUMBEROFPACKETDROPPED
SPEED M/S
PACKET DROPPED
MDART AOMDV

23. 23
Protocol
Speed
MDART AOMDV
1 0.13676568 0.12794385
2 0.08860663 0.0955313
3 0.09577622 0.09819648
4 0.09801729 0.0992552
5 0.12178548 0.10452654
6 0.12610791 0.10917235
7 0.16954682 0.11797329
8 0.20803961 0.12122059
9 0.24021041 0.15136193
10 0.26254945 0.23525859
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
AVERAGEEND-TO-ENDDELAY
SPEED M/S
END-TO-END DELAY
MDART AOMDV

24. 24
Protocol
Speed
MDART AOMDV
1 65.48744 70.88361
2 71.5563 75.87086
3 71.36968 71.52892
4 70.48629 68.58751
5 48.42128 64.46986
6 47.47796 64.23429
7 35.79074 60.91104
8 25.06799 54.9538
9 20.46261 54.79166
10 11.60587 53.52475
.

25. 25
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0
PDR(PDF)%
SPEED M/S
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO/FRACTION
MDART AOMDV

26. 26
Protocol
Speed
MDART AOMDV
1 4.30233112 3.58859551
2 4.98429959 3.69475832
3 5.11405162 4.04277744
4 5.55968144 4.45968049
5 5.67109204 4.98088681
6 5.67568808 5.24055604
7 8.45956045 5.30670451
8 9.68683712 6.21423341
9 11.94011838 6.71348361
10 20.25233643 7.08531209
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NORMALIZEDROUTINGLOAD(NRL)
SPEED M/S
NORMALIZED ROUTING LOAD (NRL)
MDART AOMDV

27. 27
7-8-9-10 m/s
AOMDV
Protocol
Speed
MDART AOMDV
1 214 177
2 263 188
3 311 217
4 353 232
5 355 305
6 365 328
7 428 384
8 493 429
9 663 484
10 773 495

28. 28
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
ROUTINGOVERHEAD(ROH)
SPEED M/S
ROUTING OVERHEAD (ROH)
MDART AOMDV

29. 29
AOMDV

30. 30
AOMDVReactive
MDARTProactive




31. 31






32. 32
A. Mishra, Sh. Singh, A. Tripath, “Comparison of Manet Routing
Protocols”, International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile
Computing IJCSMC, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, pg.67 – 74, February (2019).
[1]:
S. Aifa, T. Thomas, N. Andrews, “Three-Tier Approach for Identifying
Malicious Nodes in MANET”, International Journal of Wireless
Communications and Networking Technologies IJWCNT, Volume 8, No.3,
April - May (2019).
[2]:
J.B. Helonde, S. Shah, “AN IMPROVED MULTIPATH DHT BASED ROUTING
PROTOCOL FOR MOBILE
AD-HOC NETWORKS”, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING
SCIENCES & RESEARCH
TECHNOLOGY IJESRT, ISSN: 2277-9655, Impact Factor: 5.164,
February, (2019).
[3]:
Ch. Tamilnadu, “A Novel Approach to Mobile Ad-hoc Network: Routing
Protocols, Characteristics and Features”, International Research Journal of
Engineering and Technology IRJET, Volume: 06 Issue: 01 | Jan (2019).
[4]:
M. ALSHAIKH, A. MORIE, “Performance Evaluation Of Single-Path
Routing Protocols In Wireless Mobile Ad-hoc Networks”, Journal of
ALBAATH University, Series of Engineering Sciences, Volume 41, Issue
88, Nov (2019).
[5]:
K.Soumya, S. Setty, “ANALYZING THE IMPACT OF EAVES ON ENERGY
CONSUMPTION OF AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL FOR MANETS”,
International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks IJWMN, Vol. 11, No.
1, February (2019).
[6]:
E. Walia, V. Bhatia, D. Gupta, “Routing Strategy for Flying ADHOC
Network”, International Journal on Future Revolution in Computer Science
& Communication Engineering IJFRCSCE, Volume: 4 Issue: 3, March
(2018).
[7]:
M. Samkaria, V. Ganpati, “Simulation Based Performance Comparison of
AODV, AOMDV, DSR and MDART Routing Protocols in MANETS”, IJCSMC,
Vol. 3, Issue. 10, pg.605 – 612, October (2014).
[8]:
S. Sharma, G. Singh, “Simulative Contemplation of AODV, AOMDV and
MDART Protocols”, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research
and Technology (IJAERT) Volume 2 Issue 2, ISSN No.: 2348 – 8190, May
(2014).
[9]:

33. 33
M. V. Khiavi, "Performance Comparison of AODV and AOMDV Routing
Protocols in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks", International Research Journal of
Applied and Basic Sciences IRJABS, vol. 4, no. 11, pp. 3279-3285, (2013).
[10]:
J.Singh, S. Kang, “Qos Based Analysis Of MDART Using AODV And
AOMDV”, International Journal of Computer Science Engineering and
Information Technology Research IJCSEITR, Vol. 3, Issue 5, 177-184 , Dec
(2013).
[11]:
H. Tariq, U. S. Khan and S. Zafar, "Performance Evaluation of Routing
Protocols for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks" , Journal of Basic and Applied
Scientific Research, pp. 471-475, (2013).
[12]:
D. Sharma, I. Mishra, “Comparative Analysis of Multipath Routing
Algorithms for Mobile Ad-hoc Networks”, International Journal of
Computers and Distributed Systems, Vol. No.3, Issue III, (2013).
[13]:
M. U. Nagaraj, M. P. Dhamal, "Performance Comparison of AODV,
AOMDV, OLSR, DSR and GSR Routing", UACEE International Journal of
Advances in Computer Networks and its Security, vol. 2, (2012).
[14]:
G. Z. Santoso, M. Kang, "Performance analysis of AODV, DSDV and OLSR
in a VANETs safety application scenario", International Conference in
Advanced Communication Technology ICACT, 2012 14th, pp. 57-60,
(2012).
[15]:
A. Ghaffari, S. Taghipour, "The reliable routing algorithm with regard to
packet deadline in wireless sensor networks", J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res, vol.
2, no. 3, pp. 2970-2957, (2012).
[16]:
M. S. Chadha, R. Joon, "Simulation and Comparison of AODV, DSR and
AOMDV Routing Protocols in MANETs", International Journal of Soft
Computing and Engineering IJSCE, vol. 2, no. 3, July (2012).
[17]:
R. Rani, N. Sharama and P. K. Singh, "Performance Comparison of VANET
Routing Protocols", International Conference, pp. 1-4, (2011).
[18]:
S. R. Biradar, K. Majumder, S. K. Sakar and Puttamadappa, "Performance
Evaluation and Comparison of AODV and AOMDV", International Journal
on Computer Science and Engineering IJCSE, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 373-377,
(2010).
[19]:
M. Caleffi, L. Paura, “M-DART: multi-path dynamic address routing”,
wileyonlinelibrary.com, (2010).
[20]:
M. E. Morote, “Evaluation of MANET Routing Protocols in Realistic
Environments”, Thesis College of Electronics and Information Engineering
-Tongji University, (2010).
[21]:
N. S. Mohamad Usop, A. F. Amir Abidin, "Performance Evaluation of
AODV, DSDV & DSR Routing Protocol in Grid Environment", IJCSNS
International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, vol. 9, no.
7, July (2009).
[22]:

34. 34
M. S. S, K. M. S, M. and C. V, "Performance Analysis of AODV, DSR, and
Swarm Intelligence Routing Protocols In Vehicular Ad hoc Network
Environment" , International conference on future Computer and
Communication, pp. 21-25, April (2009).
[23]:
B. Nyirenda, J. Mwanza, “Performance Evaluation of Routing Protocols in
Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs)”, thesis Blekinge Institute of
Technology MEE08:52, SWEDEN January (2009).
[24]:
V. Vetriselvi and R. Parthasarathi, "Trace Based Mobility Model for Ad Hoc
Networks", IEEE, pp. 1-8, (2007).
[25]:
B. Gloss, M. Scharf and D. Neubauer, "A More Realistic Random Direction
Mobility Model", Traffic and QoS Management in Wireless Multimedia
Networks (Wi-QoST), October (2005).
[26]:
J. Eriksson, M, Faloutsos, S. Krishnamurthy, “DART: Dynamic Address
RouTing for Scalable Ad Hoc and Mesh Networks”, University of California,
(2004).
[27]:
D. B. Johnson, D. A. Maltz and Y.-C. Hu, "The Dynamic Source Routing
Protocol(DSR)",. [Online]. Available: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-
manet-dsr-10, 19 July (2004).
[28]:
M. Zorzi, Bertocchi, G. Mazzini and P. Bergamo, "Performance
Comparison of routing protocols for Ad hoc networks", IEEE Global
Telecommunications Conference, GLOBECOM, pp. 1033-1037, (2003).
[29]:
B. Wiberg, "Porting AODV-UU Implementation to ns-2", Uppsala Master’s
Thesis in Computer Science, no. SE-751 05 Uppsala, December 18, (2002).
[30]:
M. K. Marina and S. R. Das, "On-demand multipath distance vector
routing in ad hoc networks", IEEE, pp. 14-23, (2001).
[31]:
-
M. Sánchez, P. Manzoni, Z. J. Haas, "Determination of critical transmission
range in ad-hoc networks", Proceedings of Workshop on Multiaccess,
Mobilityand Teletraffic for Wireless Communications (MMT’99), October
(1999).
[32]:
F. Bertocchi, P. Bergamo, G. Mazzini and M. Zorzi, "Performance
Comparison of Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Networks", DI, University of
Ferrara, Italy.
[33]:
M. A. Rahman, M. S. Islam, A. Talevski, "Performance Measurement of
Various Routing Protocols in Ad-hoc Network".
[34]:
"The GloMoSim Simulator", [Online]. Available: http://pcl.cs.ucla.edu/.[35]:
S. Corson and J. Macker, "Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET):Routing
Protocol Performance Issues and Evaluation Considerations", [RFC 2501],
January 1999. [Online]. Available: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2501
[36]:

35. 35