This document compares the AODV and OLSR routing protocols for wireless ad hoc networks. AODV is a reactive protocol that establishes routes on demand, while OLSR is a proactive protocol that maintains routes through periodic table updates. Several studies are summarized that simulate and compare the performance of AODV and OLSR under different network conditions and metrics like end-to-end delay, throughput, and load. The studies generally find that AODV performs better for lower mobility or less dense networks, while OLSR is more suitable for higher mobility or dense networks. Neither protocol dominates in all scenarios, and a hybrid approach may provide the most benefits.
Performance Analysis and Simulation of OLSR Routing Protocol in MANET ijcnac
Mobile ad hoc network is a collection of wireless nodes that are communicate other
nodes (router) without using access point, infrastructure . Mobile ad-hoc network is an
autonomous system that means no need for depaentd other nodes it have own capability
to handle and controlling all funcitionlity, to sending and receiving all information form
one device to other device. MANET has power full feature that controlling itself by
dynamic nature, multihop,low power and configuration of the system. In this paper we
analyzing, simulation and implements the TC messages and HELLO Message by MPR of
OLSR routing performance checked at 200 nodes on Qualnet 5.0.2 simulator. In Qualnet
simulator to simulate and implement the performance of OLSR routing protocols takes
various performance metrics like hello message sent (HMS) , hello message received
(HMR), TC message generated (TCMG), TC message replied (TCMR), TC messages
received on Constant Bit Rate (CBR) using random waypoint model. In this paper check
the performance OLSR routing protocol gives effective performance for lage networks.
The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR) is an IP routing protocol optimized for mobile ad hoc networks, which can also be used on other wireless ad hoc networks. OLSR uses hello and topology control (TC) messages to discover and then disseminate link state information throughout the mobile ad hoc network.
Contents which are covered here:
Classification of Ad-Hoc Routing Protocol
Link State Routing
Problems of Link State Routing
Optimized Link State Routing Protocol
1 Hop and 2 Hop Neighbors
Hello Packet
MPR Selection
Topology Table
MPR Information Declaration
*** Animated figure/diagram might not be visible in PDF view. Please consider it. ***
OLSR Model, OLSR Protocol, Optimized Link-State Routing Protocol
COMPARISON OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS FOR AD HOC WIRELESS NETWORK WITH MEDICAL DATA Zakaria Zubi
Ad Hoc wireless network that without any central controlling authority, which is a collection of mobile nodes that are dynamically and arbitrarily located in such a manner that the interconnections between nodes are capable of changing on a continual basis, so nodes cooperate to route a packet.
The purpose of the routing protocols is to discover rapid changes of the topology in such a way that intermediate nodes can act as routers to forward packets on behalf of the communicating pair .
Performance Analysis and Simulation of OLSR Routing Protocol in MANET ijcnac
Mobile ad hoc network is a collection of wireless nodes that are communicate other
nodes (router) without using access point, infrastructure . Mobile ad-hoc network is an
autonomous system that means no need for depaentd other nodes it have own capability
to handle and controlling all funcitionlity, to sending and receiving all information form
one device to other device. MANET has power full feature that controlling itself by
dynamic nature, multihop,low power and configuration of the system. In this paper we
analyzing, simulation and implements the TC messages and HELLO Message by MPR of
OLSR routing performance checked at 200 nodes on Qualnet 5.0.2 simulator. In Qualnet
simulator to simulate and implement the performance of OLSR routing protocols takes
various performance metrics like hello message sent (HMS) , hello message received
(HMR), TC message generated (TCMG), TC message replied (TCMR), TC messages
received on Constant Bit Rate (CBR) using random waypoint model. In this paper check
the performance OLSR routing protocol gives effective performance for lage networks.
The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR) is an IP routing protocol optimized for mobile ad hoc networks, which can also be used on other wireless ad hoc networks. OLSR uses hello and topology control (TC) messages to discover and then disseminate link state information throughout the mobile ad hoc network.
Contents which are covered here:
Classification of Ad-Hoc Routing Protocol
Link State Routing
Problems of Link State Routing
Optimized Link State Routing Protocol
1 Hop and 2 Hop Neighbors
Hello Packet
MPR Selection
Topology Table
MPR Information Declaration
*** Animated figure/diagram might not be visible in PDF view. Please consider it. ***
OLSR Model, OLSR Protocol, Optimized Link-State Routing Protocol
COMPARISON OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS FOR AD HOC WIRELESS NETWORK WITH MEDICAL DATA Zakaria Zubi
Ad Hoc wireless network that without any central controlling authority, which is a collection of mobile nodes that are dynamically and arbitrarily located in such a manner that the interconnections between nodes are capable of changing on a continual basis, so nodes cooperate to route a packet.
The purpose of the routing protocols is to discover rapid changes of the topology in such a way that intermediate nodes can act as routers to forward packets on behalf of the communicating pair .
In the last few years, video streaming facilities over TCP or UDP, such as YouTube, Facetime, Daily-motion, Mobile video calling have become more and more popular. The important
challenge in streaming broadcasting over the Internet is to spread the uppermost potential quality,
observe to the broadcasting play out time limitation, and efficiently and equally share the offered
bandwidth with TCP or UDP, and additional traffic types. This work familiarizes the Streaming
Media Data Congestion Control protocol (SMDCC), a new adaptive broadcasting streaming
congestion management protocol in which the connection’s data packets transmission frequency is
adjusted allowing to the dynamic bandwidth share of connection using SMDCC, the bandwidth share
of a connection is projected using algorithms similar to those introduced in TCP Westwood. SMDCC
avoids the Slow Jump phase in TCP. As a result, SMDCC does not show the pronounced rate
alternations distinguishing of modern TCP, so providing congestion control that is more appropriate
for streaming broadcasting applications. Besides, SMDCC is fair, sharing the bandwidth equitably
among a set of SMDCC connections. Main benefit is robustness when packet harms are due to
indiscriminate errors, which is typical of wireless links and is becoming an increasing concern due to
the emergence of wireless Internet access. In the presence of indiscriminate errors, SMDCC is also
approachable to TCP Tahoe and Reno (TTR). We provide simulation results using the ns3 simulator
for our protocol running together with TCP Tahoe and Reno.
Routing protocols for mobile ad-hoc networks have to
face the challenge of frequently changing topology, low
transmission power and asymmetric links. Both
proactive and reactive routing protocols prove to be
inefficient under these circumstances. The Zone Routing
Protocol (ZRP) combines the advantages of the proactive
and reactive approaches by maintaining an up-to-date
topological map of a zone centered on each node. Within
the zone, routes are immediately available. For
destinations outside the zone, ZRP employs a route
discovery procedure, which can benefit from the local
routing information of the zones.
In the last few years, video streaming facilities over TCP or UDP, such as YouTube, Facetime, Daily-motion, Mobile video calling have become more and more popular. The important
challenge in streaming broadcasting over the Internet is to spread the uppermost potential quality,
observe to the broadcasting play out time limitation, and efficiently and equally share the offered
bandwidth with TCP or UDP, and additional traffic types. This work familiarizes the Streaming
Media Data Congestion Control protocol (SMDCC), a new adaptive broadcasting streaming
congestion management protocol in which the connection’s data packets transmission frequency is
adjusted allowing to the dynamic bandwidth share of connection using SMDCC, the bandwidth share
of a connection is projected using algorithms similar to those introduced in TCP Westwood. SMDCC
avoids the Slow Jump phase in TCP. As a result, SMDCC does not show the pronounced rate
alternations distinguishing of modern TCP, so providing congestion control that is more appropriate
for streaming broadcasting applications. Besides, SMDCC is fair, sharing the bandwidth equitably
among a set of SMDCC connections. Main benefit is robustness when packet harms are due to
indiscriminate errors, which is typical of wireless links and is becoming an increasing concern due to
the emergence of wireless Internet access. In the presence of indiscriminate errors, SMDCC is also
approachable to TCP Tahoe and Reno (TTR). We provide simulation results using the ns3 simulator
for our protocol running together with TCP Tahoe and Reno.
Routing protocols for mobile ad-hoc networks have to
face the challenge of frequently changing topology, low
transmission power and asymmetric links. Both
proactive and reactive routing protocols prove to be
inefficient under these circumstances. The Zone Routing
Protocol (ZRP) combines the advantages of the proactive
and reactive approaches by maintaining an up-to-date
topological map of a zone centered on each node. Within
the zone, routes are immediately available. For
destinations outside the zone, ZRP employs a route
discovery procedure, which can benefit from the local
routing information of the zones.
Its about the need for standard in networking, and caters to IEEE 802 standard in detail. FI you want to listen to this lecture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVD5sOpA0lc
A computer network is defined as the interconnection of two or more computers. It is done to enable the computers to communicate and share available resources.
Components of computer network
Network benefits
Disadvantages of computer network
Classification by their geographical area
Network classification by their component role
Types of servers
Performance Evaluation of Reactive, Proactive and Hybrid Routing Protocols Ba...CSCJournals
Ad hoc network is a collection of wireless mobile nodes where wireless radio interface connects each device in a MANET to move freely, independently and randomly. Routing protocols in mobile ad hoc network helps to communicate source node with destination node by sending and receiving packets. Lots of protocols are developed in this field but it is not easier to decide which one is winner. In this paper, we present investigations on the behavior of five routing protocols AODV (Ad hoc On demand distance vector), DSR (Dynamic Source Routing), DYMO (Dynamic MANET On demand), OLSR (Optimized link state routing) and ZRP (Zone routing protocol) based on IEEE 802.11CSMA/CA MAC protocol are analyzed and compared using QualNet simulator on the basis of performance metrics such as Average Jitter, Total Packets Received, Packet Delivery Ratio, End-to-End Delay, Throughput, Average Queue Length, Average time in Queue, dropped packets due to non availability of routes and Energy consumption in transmit and receive Mode. To test competence and effectiveness of all five protocols under diverse network scenarios costing is done by means varying load by varying CBR data traffic load, changing number of Nodes and mobility. Finally results are scrutinized in from different scenarios to provide qualitative assessment of the applicability of the protocols.
Performance analysis on multihop transmission using arp routing protocol in i...eSAT Journals
Abstract
Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) are becoming more and more important in the modern environment. It can be used instantly to connect to the local or remote network without using the pre-existing infrastructure. The mobile or user in the network can together establish the infrastructure. In order to improve the limited range of radio transmission, multiple network ‘hops’ are needed so that the communication between the mobiles can be establish. There are varieties of protocol that had been proposed for the hopping methods but most of them suffer from high overhead. This project proposed a new method of hopping protocol for IEEE 802.11b using the existing network protocol which is Address Resolution Protocol (ARP). The ARP message is used in the network to find the MAC address of the destination. This can also be done by having multi hops where the proposed method using ARP designed will make an intermediate node act as a router in order to find the destination address and forward the data successfully. In this proposed method, the data is directly passed to the intermediate node and the intermediate node will help to find the route to the destination and passed the data to the destination node. This will reduce the transmission time. From the simulation obtained, it proved that the proposed method using the ARP protocol can works well as the existing network protocol which is Ad Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV). The simulation is composed into two types of environment which are with and without obstacles. The throughput, the packet loss and the round trip time for various distances is simulated and the results shows that the performance of the proposed method using ARP is much better compared to the AODV.
Index Terms: Address Resolution Protocol (ARP), Ad-Hoc, 802.11 Wifi, Hopping
IJRET : International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology is an international peer reviewed, online journal published by eSAT Publishing House for the enhancement of research in various disciplines of Engineering and Technology. The aim and scope of the journal is to provide an academic medium and an important reference for the advancement and dissemination of research results that support high-level learning, teaching and research in the fields of Engineering and Technology. We bring together Scientists, Academician, Field Engineers, Scholars and Students of related fields of Engineering and Technology.
OPTICAL SWITCHING CONTROLLER USING FPGA AS A CONTROLLER FOR OCDMA ENCODER SYSTEMEditor IJCATR
This paper proposed a design of optical switching controller using FPGA for OCDMA encoder system. The encoder is one
of the new technologies that use to transmit the coded data in the optical communication system by using FPGA and optical switches.
It is providing a high security for data transmission due to all data will be transmitting in binary code form. The output signals from
FPGA are coded with a binary code that given to an optical switch before it signal modulate with the carrier and transmit to the
receiver. In this paper, AA and 55 data were used for source 1 and source 2. It is generated sample data and sent packet data to the
FPGA and stored it into RAM. The simulation results have done by using software Verilog Spartan 2 programming to simulate. After
that the output will produces at waveform to display the output. The main function of FPGA controlling unit is producing single pulse
and configuring optical switching system.
Performance Improvement of IEEE 802.22 WRAN Physical LayerIOSR Journals
The spectrum available for the wireless services is limited, the increased demand of wireless
application has put a lot of limitations on the utilization of available radio spectrum. For the efficient spectrum
utilization for wireless application IEEE 802.22 standard i.e. WRAN (Wireless Regional Area Network) is
developed which is based on cognitive radio technique that senses the free available spectrum. It allows sharing
of geographically unused channels allocated to the TV Broadcast Service, without interference.
In this paper we are evaluating the performance of WRAN over physical layer with QPSK, 16-QAM
and 64-QAM modulation with Convolution coding with code rate of 1/2, 2/3, 3/4, 5/6 and obtaining the BER
curves for rician channel. Simulation is performed in MATLAB
Performance Improvement of IEEE 802.22 WRAN Physical LayerIOSR Journals
Abstract: The spectrum available for the wireless services is limited, the increased demand of wireless application has put a lot of limitations on the utilization of available radio spectrum. For the efficient spectrum utilization for wireless application IEEE 802.22 standard i.e. WRAN (Wireless Regional Area Network) is developed which is based on cognitive radio technique that senses the free available spectrum. It allows sharing of geographically unused channels allocated to the TV Broadcast Service, without interference. In this paper we are evaluating the performance of WRAN over physical layer with QPSK, 16-QAM and 64-QAM modulation with Convolution coding with code rate of 1/2, 2/3, 3/4, 5/6 and obtaining the BER curves for rician channel. Simulation is performed in MATLAB. Keywords - CC, CP, CR, OFDMA, PHY Layer, WRAN
Performance Improvement of IEEE 802.22 WRAN Physical LayerIOSR Journals
Abstract: The spectrum available for the wireless services is limited, the increased demand of wireless
application has put a lot of limitations on the utilization of available radio spectrum. For the efficient spectrum
utilization for wireless application IEEE 802.22 standard i.e. WRAN (Wireless Regional Area Network) is
developed which is based on cognitive radio technique that senses the free available spectrum. It allows sharing
of geographically unused channels allocated to the TV Broadcast Service, without interference.
In this paper we are evaluating the performance of WRAN over physical layer with QPSK, 16-QAM
and 64-QAM modulation with Convolution coding with code rate of 1/2, 2/3, 3/4, 5/6 and obtaining the BER
curves for rician channel. Simulation is performed in MATLAB.
Keywords - CC, CP, CR, OFDMA, PHY Layer, WRAN
2. AODV AND OLSR ROUTING PROTOCOLS
Key Terms
Ad hoc Network: Infra Structure less networks
AODV: Ad hoc On Demand Distance Vector
OLSR: Optimized Link State Routing
Wireless Ad hoc is Dynamically forming a temporary
network
3. 1: COMPARING AODV AND OLSR
ROUTING PROTOCOLS
By: Aleksandr Huhtonen (Helsinki University of
Technology)
Abstract
Mobile networks creates underlying architecture for
communication without the help of fixed routers
Hosts have limited transmission range
No fixed router
Each host act as a router
4. PROBLEM
Challenge for mobile protocols is that they also
have to deal with mobility of hosts. Hosts can
appear and disappear in various locations.
5. AD HOC NETWORK ROUTING PROTOCOLS
Ad hoc network routing protocols
Table Driven (Pro-Active): OLSR and Better
Approach To Mobile Ad hoc Networking
(B.A.T.M.A.N)
On Demand (Reactive): AODV, Admission Control
Enabled On Demand Routing (ACOR), Dynamic
Source Routing and Dynamic Man-NET on Demand
Routing
6. QUALITIES TO BE EFFECTIVE
Distributed Operation
Loop freedom
Demand based operation
Proactive operation
Security
Sleep period operation
7. AD HOC ON DEMAND PROTOCOL (AODV)
AODV is a Reactive protocol n Routes are created
when needed
Routing table stores information about next hop
2 destination
Route Discovery
RREQ message with destination IP and Seq. # is
broadcasted
Sequence number prevent looping
RREP from desired destination is unicasted
RREP-ACK optional
RERR in case of route breakage
Route repairing
10. AODV ROUTING TABLE
Destination address
Destination sequence number
Hop count
Next hop
Route state (valid, in valid)
Precursor list
11. ADVANTAGES
Doesn’t need any central administrative system
to handle the routing system
Reduce the control traffic messages
The AODV has great advantage in overhead over
simple protocols.
Using the RRER message AODV reacts relatively
quickly to the topological changes in the network
and updating affected host
AODV is a loop free protocol
12. OPTIMIZED LINK STATE ROUTING (OLSR)
OLSR is a proactive protocol, Routes are always
available
Information of the network
Topological change causes flooding
Control Messages
Hello Messages (one hop count)
Topology Control Messages (TC) topology info.
Multipoint Relays (MPR)
Neighbor Sensing by Hello Messages
MPR Selector Set
MPR can only transmit topology information
13. MPR (MULTI-POINT RELAYS)
The core optimization in OLSR is that of MPR.
It’s used to reduce the message exchange
overhead by reducing the number of hosts that
broadcast messages in a network.
For efficiency MPR is kept low n only MPR can
send throughout messages.
14. ROUTING TABLE CALCULATION
The host maintains the routing table
The routing table entries have following
information:
i. destination address
ii. next address,
iii. number of hops to the destination
iv. local interface address.
The routing table is recalculated if any change
occurs in these sets.
For the routes for routing table entry the
shortest path algorithm is used.
15. ADVANTAGES
OLSR doesn’t need any infrastructure
The proactive protocol provides that the protocol
has all the information to all the participated
hosts.
Flooding is minimized by the MPRs having the
drawback of maximum usage of bandwidth
OLSR is best for the networks using larger
number of nodes.
16. AODV AND OLSR ROUTING PROTOCOLS
FOR WIRELESS AD-HOC AND MESH
NETWORKSANALYSIS & RESULTS
End to end delay
For 100 nodes
For 50 nodes
19. IMPLEMENTATION AND PERFORMANCES OF
AODV AND OLSR
Writers
A. Saika
M.M.Himmi
Abstract
Comparing a reactive and proactive protocol
Network Simulator 2 was used
Concluded that it depends on several constraints
20. EXPERIMENT AND RESULTS
There were 4 nodes, two fixed and two mobile.
Measuring area was set to 500 x 500 m2
Time of simulation was 150 seconds
Protocols used were:
AODV (for reactive)
OLSR (for proactive)
The result of network was a .tr file, used for
creating graphs and charts
23. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF AODV
AND OLSR ON THE ORBIT TEST BED
ORBIT stands for Open Access Research Test bed
It is an indoor grid based wireless network
emulator consisting of 400 radio nodes.
It is a test bed to conduct network based
experiments under conditions that are similar to
real life conditions.
24. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Orbit Traffic Generator(OTG) and Orbit Traffic
Receiver(OTR) was used to generate TCP and
UDP traffic.
20 nodes were created in the experiment. The
input load was gradually increased and
conducted the experiment for 100 s at each
setting to obtain steady.
For each channel rate offered load was increased
until saturation.
25. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
After saturation OLSR lost stability and showed
large variation in throughput.
At high loads the nodes started competing for
bandwidth ,causing collisions
AODV performed better in terms of stability.
AODV doesn’t allow throughput to increase
beyond saturation.
26. TCP UDP BASED ANALYSIS OF AODV
AND OLSR
Experimental Setup
Network simulations are implemented using NS-2
simulator.
Each node is then assigned a particular trajectory .
The number of nodes which we take in this is of
about 30.
In each simulation scenario, the nodes are initially
located at the center of the simulation.
27. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Data rate of 512 Mbps in UDP and of 1024 Mbps
in TCP is used
The nodes start moving after the first 20 seconds.
Constant Bit Rate (CBR) traffic and Internet
Protocol (IP) is used as Network layer protocol.
the number of traffic sources was fixed at 20
maximum speed of the nodes was set to 100m /s
the pause time was varied as 20, 40 ,60, 80 and
100 seconds.
28. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
The AODV protocol will perform better in the
networks with static traffic.
It uses fewer resources than OLSR.
The AODV protocol can be used in resource
critical environments.
The OLSR protocol is more efficient in networks
with high density and highly sporadic traffic.
29. COMPARISON AND CONCLUSION
AODV performs efficiently in case of low
bandwidth
OLSR requires more band width to send TC
messages in case of topology change
AODV performs better in case of low mobility
In case of high mobility AODV per packet delay
is increased but is more effective in case of
throughput as compared to OLSR.
Scalability is limited in case of large network,
AODV suffers flooding and OLSR table grows
Remarkable to consider to combine both and
have maximum benefit
Editor's Notes
AODV differs from other on-demand routing protocols in that is uses sequence numbers to determine an up-to-date path to a destination. Every entry in the routing table is associated with a sequence number. The sequence number act as a route timestamp, ensuring freshness of the route. Upon receiving a RREQ packet, an intermediate node compares its sequence number with the sequence number in the RREQ packet. If the sequence number already registered is greater than that in the packet, the existing route is more up-to-date.http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3561.txt
The format of the Route Request message is illustrated above, and contains the following fields: Type 1 J Join flag; reserved for multicast. R Repair flag; reserved for multicast. G Gratuitous RREP flag; indicates whether a gratuitous RREP should be unicast to the node specified in the Destination IP Address field D Destination only flag; indicates only the destination may respond to this RREQ (see section 6.5). U Unknown sequence number; indicates the destination sequence number is unknown. Reserved Sent as 0; ignored on reception. Hop Count The number of hops from the Originator IP Address to the node handling the request. Perkins, et. al. Experimental [Page 7] RFC 3561 AODV Routing July 2003 RREQ ID A sequence number uniquely identifying the particular RREQ when taken in conjunction with the originating node's IP address. Destination IP Address The IP address of the destination for which a route is desired. Destination Sequence Number The latest sequence number received in the past by the originator for any route towards the destination. Originator IP Address The IP address of the node which originated the Route Request. Originator Sequence Number The current sequence number to be used in the route entry pointing towards the originator of the route request.
The format of the Route Reply message is illustrated above, and contains the following fields: Type 2 R Repair flag; used for multicast. A Acknowledgment required; see sections 5.4 and 6.7. Reserved Sent as 0; ignored on reception. Perkins, et. al. Experimental [Page 8] RFC 3561 AODV Routing July 2003 Prefix Size If nonzero, the 5-bit Prefix Size specifies that the indicated next hop may be used for any nodes with the same routing prefix (as defined by the Prefix Size) as the requested destination.Hop Count The number of hops from the Originator IP Address to the Destination IP Address. For multicast route requests this indicates the number of hops to the multicast tree member sending the RREP. Destination IP Address The IP address of the destination for which a route is supplied. Destination Sequence Number The destination sequence number associated to the route. Originator IP Address The IP address of the node which originated the RREQ for which the route is supplied.Lifetime The time in milliseconds for which nodes receiving the RREP consider the route to be valid. Note that the Prefix Size allows a subnet router to supply a route for every host in the subnet defined by the routing prefix, which is determined by the IP address of the subnet router and the Prefix Size. In order to make use of this feature, the subnet router has to guarantee reachability to all the hosts sharing the indicated subnet prefix. See section 7 for details. When the prefix size is nonzero, any routing information (and precursor data) MUST be kept with respect to the subnet route, not the individual destination IP address on that subnet. The 'A' bit is used when the link over which the RREP message is sent may be unreliable or unidirectional. When the RREP message contains the 'A' bit set, the receiver of the RREP is expected to return a RREP-ACK message. See section 6.8.