This document discusses routing protocols for vehicular ad-hoc networks (VANETs). It introduces two routing protocols: Intersection-based Segment Routing (ISR) and Traffic-Aware Segment Routing (TASR). ISR partitions the roadway into segments defined by intersections and designates head nodes to forward data between segments. TASR also uses road segments but considers traffic densities on two successive segments when routing data packets. The document concludes that ISR generally performs better than TASR due to its consideration of more routing parameters and node mobility factors.

1. VEHICULAR AD-
HOC NETWORKS
ROUTING
PROTOCOL

2. Contents
1. Introduction
2. Network architecture
3. Communication domains
4. VANET characteristics
5. Routing Protocols
6. Conclusion
2

3. INTRODUCTION
3

4. Introduction
 Vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs) are created by applying
the principles of mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs)
 At the present time cars and other private vehicles are used daily
by many peoples.
 The biggest problem regarding them is safety
 Vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-
to-roadside architectures can co-exist in
VANETs
communications
 These types of communications allow vehicles to share different
kinds of information
4

5. Aim
“The ultimate goal is to provide an accident-free environment and
move toward implementation of the zero-accident car by the help of
vehicle area networks”
5

6. VANET ARCHITECTURE
6

7. System components
 On board unit (OBU)
 Application unit (AU)
 Roadside unit (RSU)
7

8. Main functions of RSU
 Extending the communication range of the ad
hoc network
 Running safety applications
 Providing Internet connectivity to OBUs.
8

9. COMMUNICATION DOMAINS
9

10. Communication domains
In – Vehicle domain
• This domain consists of an OBU and one or multipleAUs.
Ad hoc domain
• Two types of communications are available in the ad hoc domain
• Vehicles communicate with other vehicles
• Vehicle communicates with an RSU
10

11. Communication domains
Infrastructural domain
The RSU can connect to the infrastructural
networks or to the Internet, allowing the OBU
to access the infrastructure network
11

12. VANET CHARACTERISTICS
12

13. VANET characteristics
 Predictable mobility
 Large scale network
 Variable network density
 No Power Limitations
 High computational ability
 Security and privacy
13

14. ROUTING PROTOCOLS
14

15. ISR
 The ISR protocol uses segments to perform the routing in the urban VANETs
environment.
Routing protocol is based on routing parameters including vehicular
node position information, direction, traffic density, and link quality
between the communicating nodes in the network
Each segment contains head node (HN), which initiates routing
15

16. ISR - Segment Formation
 When the source node finds the destination out of its direct communication
range, the protocol divides the forwarding path into small road segments with
the help of the location information of vehicles and the road map information of
the nearby area.
 Each vehicle is considered to be equipped with an OBU and a digital road map
of the nearby area.
 Here, segments are identified by the number of intersections
16

17. ISR - Overview
17

18. Select HN to
forward Data
HN is connected to
next
segment HN
ISR –
Routing
Process
No
Get Distance and
Direction of Nodes
Start
End
No
Select HN and
direction
Add next segment
to path
Partition road into
Segments
If Destination Found
Yes
Destination is found
Forward data to
destination
Yes
18

19. TASR
 Traffic-aware segment-based routing
 TASR relies on traffic densities on the road segments
 TASR considers not only the next segment but also the succeeding segment
 In other words, TASR employs a look-ahead depth of two segments for data
packets routing
19

20. TASR - Characteristics
 Segments are formed depending upon intersections
 There are two head nodes in each segments, which are present on the opposite
ends of segment
 The HN choose the N2N segment on a metric called the estimated connectivity
degree (ECD)
 Each intermediate node contains information of its neighbor nodes
20

21. Results - Conclusion
 ISR is best performing in both no. of nodes analysis and vehicle speed analysis.
 This is because ISR uses more routing parameters then others
 TASR only consider traffic density but not the node mobility, also reply and
acknowledgment messages can create delay in communication
21