In ad hoc networks, routing plays a pertinent role. Deploying the appropriate routing protocol is very important in order to achieve best routing performance and reliability. Equally important is the mobility model that is used in the routing protocol. Various mobility models are available and each can have different impact on the performance of the routing protocol. In this paper, we focus on this issue by examining how the routing protocol, Optimized Link State Routing protocol, behaves as the mobility model is varied. For this, three random mobility models, viz., random waypoint, random walk and random direction are considered. The performance metrics used for assessment of Optimized Link State Routing protocol are throughput, end-to-end delay and packet delivery ratio.
Route Stability in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networksarpublication
A Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) is a wireless network consisting of mobile nodes, which can communicate with each other without any infrastructure support. In these networks, nodes typically cooperate with each other, by forwarding packets for nodes which are not in the communication range of the source node. A fundamental issue arising in mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs) is the selection of the optimal path between any two nodes. A method that has been advocated to improve routing efficiency is to select the most stable path so as to reduce the latency and the overhead due to route reconstruction. In this work we study the stability of a routing path, which is subject to link failures caused by node mobility, and we consider as metrics of interest the duration and the availability of a path. Moreover, using the results on path duration and availability, we show how to determine the optimal path in terms of route stability, under the Random Direction mobility models.
Effect of mobility models on the performance of multipath routing protocol in...csandit
In this paper, we have analyzed the performance of multipath routing protocol with various mobility
models for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks. The basic purpose of any multipath routing protocol
is to overcome various problems occurs while data delivery through a single path routing protocol.
For high acceptability of routing protocol, analysis of routing protocol in ad hoc network
only with random way point mobility model is not sufficient. Here, we have considered Random
waypoint, Random Direction and Probabilistic Random Walk mobility Model for proper analysis
of AOMDV routing protocol. Results obtained show that with increasing node density, packet
delivery ratio increases but with increasing node mobility Packet delivery ratio decreases.
Effect of node mobility onaomdv protocol in manetijwmn
In this paper, we have analyzed the effect of node mobility on theperformance of AOMDV multipath routing
protocol. This routing protocol in ad hoc network has been analyzed with random way point mobility model
only. This is not sufficient to evaluate the behavior of a routing protocol. Therefore, in this paper, we
have considered Random waypoint, Random Direction and Probabilistic Random Walk mobility Model for
performance analysis of AOMDV protocol. The result reveals that packet delivery ratio decreases with the
increasing node mobility forall mobility models. Also, average end-to-end delay is also vary with varying
node speed, initially upto 20 nodes in all mobility models delay is minimum.
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.
Performance evaluation of proactive, reactive and hybrid routing protocols wi...eSAT Journals
Abstract Our work mainly focused on the performance and effects of different mobility models like Random Waypoint, Reference Point Group, and Manhattan mobility models in different aspects to improve and analyze the behavior of Optimized Link-State Routing (OLSR), Temporally-Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA) and Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) routing protocols. These three routing protocols can be classified into the following three general categories, based on the timing when the routes are discovered and updated-proactive (OLSR), reactive (TORA) and hybrid (ZRP). In literature various researchers have discussed the performance issues in AODV, DSDV and DSR routing protocols in Random Waypoint mobility model on Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs) is not satisfactory due to link failure and late acknowledgement. To resolve the specified issue, we have come up with other alternatives like Reference Point Group, and Manhattan mobility model and also other routing protocols like OSLR, TORA and ZRP. A simulation was carried out in NS2 and Bonnmotion for above said protocols and mobility models in Constant Bit Rate (CBR) traffic to analyzed using various metrics like packet delivery fraction, end to end delay and normalized routing load. In our simulation it was shown that few mobility model performed better in different routing protocols. In our simulation results, we got a high Normalized Routing Load for Random Waypoint compared to Reference Point Group, and Manhattan mobility model in both DRP and OSLR protocols. Index Terms: MANET, CBR, Routing protocols, Mobility models, NS2
This document analyzes the performance of the Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) in mobile ad hoc networks using the OPNET simulator. It provides an overview of ZRP, including that it is a hybrid routing protocol that uses a proactive approach within routing zones and a reactive approach between zones. The document describes simulating ZRP with 20, 40, and 60 nodes and measuring its throughput, load, data dropped, and delay. The results showed that as node count increased, ZRP's throughput, load, and data dropped increased, while delay also rose with more nodes. ZRP thus performed best with fewer nodes and worse with more nodes in the simulated mobile ad hoc networks.
Mobility is one of the basic features that define an ad hoc network, an asset that leaves the field free for the
nodes to move. The most important aspect of this kind of network turns into a great disadvantage when it
comes to commercial applications, take as an example: the automotive networks that allow communication
between a groups of vehicles. The ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) routing protocol, designed
for mobile ad hoc networks, has two main functions. First, it enables route establishment between a source
and a destination node by initiating a route discovery process. Second, it maintains the active routes, which
means finding alternative routes in a case of a link failure and deleting routes when they are no longer
desired. In a highly mobile network those are demanding tasks to be performed efficiently and accurately.
In this paper, we focused in the first point to enhance the local decision of each node in the network by the
quantification of the mobility of their neighbours. Quantification is made around RSSI algorithm a well
known distance estimation method.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKSijcax
A Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of mobile nodes that want to communicate without any pre-determined infrastructure and fixed organization of available links. Each node in MANET operates as a router, forwarding information packets for other mobile nodes. There are many routing protocols that possess different performance levels in different scenarios. The main task is to evaluate the existing routing
protocols and finding by comparing them the best one. In this article we compare AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR and DYMO routing protocols in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) to specify the best operational conditions for each MANETs protocol. We study these five MANETs routing protocols by different simulations in NS-2 simulator. We describe that pause time parameter affect their performance. This performance analysis is measured in terms of Packet Delivery Ratio, Average End-to-End Delay, Normalized Routing Load and Average Throughput.
Route Stability in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networksarpublication
A Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) is a wireless network consisting of mobile nodes, which can communicate with each other without any infrastructure support. In these networks, nodes typically cooperate with each other, by forwarding packets for nodes which are not in the communication range of the source node. A fundamental issue arising in mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs) is the selection of the optimal path between any two nodes. A method that has been advocated to improve routing efficiency is to select the most stable path so as to reduce the latency and the overhead due to route reconstruction. In this work we study the stability of a routing path, which is subject to link failures caused by node mobility, and we consider as metrics of interest the duration and the availability of a path. Moreover, using the results on path duration and availability, we show how to determine the optimal path in terms of route stability, under the Random Direction mobility models.
Effect of mobility models on the performance of multipath routing protocol in...csandit
In this paper, we have analyzed the performance of multipath routing protocol with various mobility
models for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks. The basic purpose of any multipath routing protocol
is to overcome various problems occurs while data delivery through a single path routing protocol.
For high acceptability of routing protocol, analysis of routing protocol in ad hoc network
only with random way point mobility model is not sufficient. Here, we have considered Random
waypoint, Random Direction and Probabilistic Random Walk mobility Model for proper analysis
of AOMDV routing protocol. Results obtained show that with increasing node density, packet
delivery ratio increases but with increasing node mobility Packet delivery ratio decreases.
Effect of node mobility onaomdv protocol in manetijwmn
In this paper, we have analyzed the effect of node mobility on theperformance of AOMDV multipath routing
protocol. This routing protocol in ad hoc network has been analyzed with random way point mobility model
only. This is not sufficient to evaluate the behavior of a routing protocol. Therefore, in this paper, we
have considered Random waypoint, Random Direction and Probabilistic Random Walk mobility Model for
performance analysis of AOMDV protocol. The result reveals that packet delivery ratio decreases with the
increasing node mobility forall mobility models. Also, average end-to-end delay is also vary with varying
node speed, initially upto 20 nodes in all mobility models delay is minimum.
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.
Performance evaluation of proactive, reactive and hybrid routing protocols wi...eSAT Journals
Abstract Our work mainly focused on the performance and effects of different mobility models like Random Waypoint, Reference Point Group, and Manhattan mobility models in different aspects to improve and analyze the behavior of Optimized Link-State Routing (OLSR), Temporally-Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA) and Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) routing protocols. These three routing protocols can be classified into the following three general categories, based on the timing when the routes are discovered and updated-proactive (OLSR), reactive (TORA) and hybrid (ZRP). In literature various researchers have discussed the performance issues in AODV, DSDV and DSR routing protocols in Random Waypoint mobility model on Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs) is not satisfactory due to link failure and late acknowledgement. To resolve the specified issue, we have come up with other alternatives like Reference Point Group, and Manhattan mobility model and also other routing protocols like OSLR, TORA and ZRP. A simulation was carried out in NS2 and Bonnmotion for above said protocols and mobility models in Constant Bit Rate (CBR) traffic to analyzed using various metrics like packet delivery fraction, end to end delay and normalized routing load. In our simulation it was shown that few mobility model performed better in different routing protocols. In our simulation results, we got a high Normalized Routing Load for Random Waypoint compared to Reference Point Group, and Manhattan mobility model in both DRP and OSLR protocols. Index Terms: MANET, CBR, Routing protocols, Mobility models, NS2
This document analyzes the performance of the Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) in mobile ad hoc networks using the OPNET simulator. It provides an overview of ZRP, including that it is a hybrid routing protocol that uses a proactive approach within routing zones and a reactive approach between zones. The document describes simulating ZRP with 20, 40, and 60 nodes and measuring its throughput, load, data dropped, and delay. The results showed that as node count increased, ZRP's throughput, load, and data dropped increased, while delay also rose with more nodes. ZRP thus performed best with fewer nodes and worse with more nodes in the simulated mobile ad hoc networks.
Mobility is one of the basic features that define an ad hoc network, an asset that leaves the field free for the
nodes to move. The most important aspect of this kind of network turns into a great disadvantage when it
comes to commercial applications, take as an example: the automotive networks that allow communication
between a groups of vehicles. The ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) routing protocol, designed
for mobile ad hoc networks, has two main functions. First, it enables route establishment between a source
and a destination node by initiating a route discovery process. Second, it maintains the active routes, which
means finding alternative routes in a case of a link failure and deleting routes when they are no longer
desired. In a highly mobile network those are demanding tasks to be performed efficiently and accurately.
In this paper, we focused in the first point to enhance the local decision of each node in the network by the
quantification of the mobility of their neighbours. Quantification is made around RSSI algorithm a well
known distance estimation method.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKSijcax
A Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of mobile nodes that want to communicate without any pre-determined infrastructure and fixed organization of available links. Each node in MANET operates as a router, forwarding information packets for other mobile nodes. There are many routing protocols that possess different performance levels in different scenarios. The main task is to evaluate the existing routing
protocols and finding by comparing them the best one. In this article we compare AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR and DYMO routing protocols in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) to specify the best operational conditions for each MANETs protocol. We study these five MANETs routing protocols by different simulations in NS-2 simulator. We describe that pause time parameter affect their performance. This performance analysis is measured in terms of Packet Delivery Ratio, Average End-to-End Delay, Normalized Routing Load and Average Throughput.
This document analyzes the performance of different routing protocols (AODV, DSR, DSDV) under various mobility models (random waypoint, random direction, random walk) and node speeds in mobile ad hoc networks. It finds that reactive protocols like AODV and DSR generally have higher packet delivery ratios than proactive DSDV, but end-to-end delays vary depending on the mobility model and node speed. The document proposes an algorithm to select the best routing protocol based on whether data delivery or time is the higher priority, and whether nodes are stationary or mobile. DSDV is preferred when data delivery is most important, while DSR performs better for time-critical applications.
Performance Evalution of MANET Routing Protocols using Reference Point Group ...ijasuc
An ad hoc network is often defined as an “infrastructureless” network, meaning a network without the
usual routing infrastructure like fixed routers and routing backbones. Typically, the ad hoc nodes are
mobile and the underlying communication medium is wireless. Each ad hoc node may be capable of acting
as a router.it’s charactrizied by multihop wireless connection and frequently changing networks.we
compare the performance of on-demand routing protocols for mobile ad-hoc networks are distributed
cache updating for the dynamic source routing protocol(DSR) and ad hoc on-demand distance vector
routing (AODV).the simulation model of the medium access control(MAC) layer is evaluting the
performance of MANET protocols.DSR and AODV protocols share similar behavours.we evalute the
both on demand protocols DSR and AODV based on packet delivery ratio , packet delivery latency,mobility
variation with total number of errors, packet and normalized routing overhead,end-to-end delay by varying
in node density.the performance and characterictics are explained by the graph models.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
IJERD (www.ijerd.com) International Journal of Engineering Research and Devel...IJERD Editor
This document summarizes a study that evaluates the performance of four routing protocols - FSR, STAR-LORA, DYMO, and DSR - in a mobile ad hoc network (MANET) simulation using QualNet. Two scenarios were tested: one with constant bit rate (CBR) client traffic and one with CBR server traffic. Performance metrics like throughput, average end-to-end delay, and average jitter were measured for 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 nodes. The results showed that reactive protocols DYMO and DSR generally had lower delay but higher jitter than proactive protocols FSR and STAR-LORA. This study aims to help identify the most efficient routing
Efficient Routing Protocol in the Mobile Ad-hoc Network (MANET) by using Gene...IOSR Journals
This document discusses using a genetic algorithm to improve routing in mobile ad hoc networks. It begins with background on mobile ad hoc networks and common routing protocols. It then introduces genetic algorithms and how they work by simulating natural evolution. The document proposes using a genetic algorithm with the AODV routing protocol to find optimal paths between source and destination nodes. It describes implementing this approach and comparing its performance to traditional AODV routing. The results showed the genetic algorithm approach performed better in terms of quality of service and throughput.
This document proposes a new fuzzy logic-based routing protocol for mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs) that considers path stability, residual energy of nodes, and bandwidth for optimal path selection at the source node. It also proposes adjusting the transmission rate at the source node based on end-to-end delay and packet loss ratio measured at the destination node. This cross-layer approach uses two fuzzy logic systems - one for path selection based on stability and bandwidth, and another for transmission rate adjustment based on delay and packet loss. The goal is to select stable paths and prevent congestion for more efficient data transmission in MANETs.
Performance analysis of aodv, olsr, grp and dsr routing protocols with databa...eSAT Journals
Abstract
Wireless Technology has an enormous use these days and is still becoming popular from times immemorial. It is at its peak when we
talk about research. This is because of the latest technological demands now days arising from Laptops, Wireless devices such as
Wireless local area networks (WLANs) etc. Because of its fast growing popularity day by day, it has led wireless technology data rates
higher and it has made its price cheaper, which is why wireless Technology is growing so fast. In this paper we have presented some
most commonly used routing protocols in MANET and compared the performance of AODV, OLSR, GRP and DSR routing protocol
by using OPNET simulator 14.5. The performance is evaluated under different parameters like Delay, Load, and Media access delay,
Network Load, Retransmission and Throughput for Database load.
Keywords— MANET, Peak Value, Protocol, Drop value
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.
ENHANCEMENT OF OPTIMIZED LINKED STATE ROUTING PROTOCOL FOR ENERGY CONSERVATIONcscpconf
Mobile Ad-hoc network (MANET) is infrastructure less network in which nodes are mobile, self
reconfigurable, battery powered. As nodes in MANET are battery powered, energy saving is an
important issue. We are using routing protocol to save energy so as to extend network lifetime.
We have extended original Optimized Linked State Routing (OLSR) protocol by using two
algorithms and named it as Enhancement in OLSR using Residual Energy approach (EOLSRRE)
and Enhancement in OLSR using Energy Consumption approach (EOLSR-EC). To analyze
relative performance of modified protocol EOLSR-RE and EOLSR-EC over OLSR, we
performed various trials using Qualnet simulator. The performance of these routing protocols is
analyzed in terms of energy consumption, control overheads, end to end delay, packet delivery
ratio. The modified OLSR protocol improves energy efficiency of network by reducing 20 %
energy consumption and 50% control overheads.
P ERFORMANCE C OMPARISON OF R OUTING P ROTOCOLS IN M OBILE A D H OC N E...ijujournal
Routing protocols have
an important
role in any
Mobile Ad Hoc Network
(MANET).
Researchers
have
elaborated several routing protocols that possess different performance levels
. In this
p
aper
we
give a
performance evaluation of
AODV,
DSR,
DSDV
, OLSR and DYMO
routing protocol
s
in
Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks
(MANETS)
to
determine
the best
in different scenarios
. We
analyse
these
MANET
routing
protocols by
using
NS
-
2 simulator
. We specify how
the
Number of No
d
es
parameter influences
their
performance. In this study
,
performance is
calculated
in terms
of Packet Delivery Ratio,
Average
End to
End Delay, Normalised Routing Load and Average Throughput
Performance comparison of routing protocols in mobile ad hoc networksijujournal
Routing protocols have an important role in any Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET). Researchers have elaborated several routing protocols that possess different performance levels. In this paper we give a performance evaluation of AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR and DYMO routing protocols in Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks (MANETS) to determine the best in different scenarios. We analyse these MANET routing protocols by using NS-2 simulator. We specify how the Number of Nodes parameter influences their performance. In this study, performance is calculated in terms of Packet Delivery Ratio, Average End to End Delay, Normalised Routing Load and Average Throughput.
Comparative and Behavioral Study on VANET Routing ProtocolsIOSR Journals
This document provides a summary and comparison of various routing protocols for vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs). It discusses topology-based protocols like CGSR and DSDV, reactive protocols like DSR, and position-based protocols like GSR, A-STAR, GPCR, VADD, CAR, DIR, and B-MFR. The position-based protocols are considered the best for handling issues in VANETs like packet delay, traffic congestion, and throughput. The paper analyzes the characteristics and behaviors of different VANET routing protocols and concludes that position-based protocols are most suitable for the dynamic environment of vehicular networks.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF AOMDV PROTOCOL BASED ON VARIOUS SCENARIO AND TRAFFI...IJCSEA Journal
A MANET is an interconnection of mobile devices by wireless links, which forms a dynamic topology. Routing protocols play a vital role in transmission of data across the network. The two major classifications of routing protocols are unipath and multipath. In this paper, we have evaluated the performance of a widely used on-demand multipath routing protocol called AOMDV. This protocol has been selected due to its edge over other protocols in various aspects, such as reducing delay, routing load etc. The evaluation of AOMDV protocol is carried out in terms of four scenario patterns such as RWM, RPGM, MGM, and GMM in two different traffic patterns such as CBR and TCP using NS2 and Bonn Motion.
Performance of dsdv protocol based on different propagation model with variIAEME Publication
This document discusses the performance of the DSDV routing protocol under different propagation models and topologies in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It first provides background on MANET routing protocols including DSDV and describes two propagation models - free space and two ray ground. It then discusses a simulation study comparing the performance of DSDV using these propagation models with various network topologies. The results show that the propagation model has a significant impact on routing protocol performance in MANETs.
Performance Comparison of AODV, DSR and LAR1 in Mobile Ad-hoc Network based o...IOSR Journals
Abstract: In the last couple of years, the use of wireless networks has become more and more popular. A
MANET is a collection of self-organizing mobile nodes which is infrastructure less, autonomous, and standalone
networks. Each node in a MANET is free to move independently in any direction and will therefore change its
links to other devices frequently. Each must forward traffic unrelated to its own use and therefore be a router.
Simulation result has been obtained by a performance comparison of three routing protocols i.e. Ad hoc Ondemand
Distance Vector (AODV), Dynamic Source Routing (DSR), Location Aided Routing (LAR1) against
Simulation time. The Result is obtained using QualNet simulator version 6.1. Different protocols are evaluated
based on measures such as Average End to End delay (s), Average Jitter(s), and Packet delivery ratio.
Keywords: MANET, AODV, DSR, LAR1, QualNet 6.1
Welcome to International Journal of Engineering Research and Development (IJERD)IJERD Editor
This document summarizes a simulation-based performance analysis of three routing protocols (CBRP, DSR, AODV) for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) under different node densities. The analysis varies the number of data sources and evaluates the protocols based on packet delivery ratio, average end-to-end delay, and normalized routing load. The simulation is conducted using the NS-2 network simulator for dense and sparse network topologies with 50 nodes each, varying node speeds and transmission ranges. Results show that CBRP performs better than DSR and AODV in terms of normalized routing load for more than 15 sources in both dense and sparse topologies, while AODV has lower delay than CBR
A Simulation Based Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols (Reactive and ...IOSR Journals
This document compares the performance of three routing protocols - AODV, DSDV, and OLSR - under the random waypoint mobility model using network simulation. Simulation results with 30 and 50 nodes found that OLSR performed better than AODV and DSDV in terms of packet receive rate and packets received with 30 nodes and a simulation time of 100 seconds. DSDV performed better than the other protocols with 50 nodes and a simulation time of 200 seconds. Overall, AODV showed the poorest performance in both scenarios. The document analyzes these routing protocols and the random waypoint mobility model to evaluate their performance under different parameters.
A Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc NetworksIJERA Editor
Mobile Ad hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of mobile nodes in which the wireless links are frequently broken down due to mobility and dynamic infrastructure. Routing is a significant issue and challenge in ad hoc networks. Many routing protocols have been proposed like OLSR, AODV so far to improve the routing performance and reliability. In this paper, we describe the Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR) and the Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV). We evaluate their performance through exhaustive simulations using the Network Simulator 2 (ns2) by varying conditions (node mobility, network density).
Mobility is one of the basic features that define an ad hoc network, an asset that leaves the field
free for the nodes to move. The most important aspect of this kind of network turns into a great
disadvantage when it comes to commercial applications, take as an example: the automotive
networks that allow communication between a groups of vehicles. The ad hoc on-demand
distance vector (AODV) routing protocol, designed for mobile ad hoc networks, has two main
functions. First, it enables route establishment between a source and a destination node by
initiating a route discovery process. Second, it maintains the active routes, which means finding
alternative routes in a case of a link failure and deleting routes when they are no longer
desired. In a highly mobile network those are demanding tasks to be performed efficiently and
accurately. In this paper, we focused in the first point to enhance the local decision of each node
in the network by the quantification of the mobility of their neighbours. Quantification is made
around RSSI algorithm a well known distance estimation method.
Interference management in lte downlink networksijwmn
Two major challenges for evolving LTE (Long Term Evolution) networks are to achieve enhanced system capacity and cell coverage compared with WCDMA (Wideband Code Division Multiple Access) system. Effective utilization of radio resources as well as dense spectrum reuse are at the core to attain these targets. However, dense frequency reuse may increase inter-cell interference, which in turn severely limits the capacity of users in the system. Inter-cell interference can restrict overall system performance in terms of throughput and spectral efficiency, especially for the users located at the cell edge area. Hence, careful management of inter-cell interferences becomes crucial to improve LTE system performance. In this paper, interference mitigation schemes for LTE downlink networks are investigated.
SENSOR SELECTION SCHEME IN TEMPERATURE WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKijwmn
In this paper, we propose a novel energy efficient environment monitoring scheme for wireless sensor
networks, based on data mining formulation. The proposed adapting routing scheme for sensors for
achieving energy efficiency from temperature wireless sensor network data set. The experimental
validation of the proposed approach using publicly available Intel Berkeley lab Wireless Sensor Network
dataset shows that it is possible to achieve energy efficient environment monitoring for wireless sensor
networks, with a trade-off between accuracy and life time extension factor of sensors, using the proposed
approach.
Connectivity aware and adaptive multipath routing algorithm for mobile adhoc ...ijwmn
We propose in this paper a connectivity-aware routing algorithm and a set of related theorems. This algorithm allows nodes in Mobile Adhoc and Sensor Networks (MASNets) to provide the highest connectivity life time to a specific destination since the issuance of data becomes a necessity for MASNets. In the proposed Solution, nodes in MASNets are able to specify the disjointness degree of the available paths allowing the discovery of the optimal set of backup routes and consequently enhance the survivability of the connectivity. These nodes perform an on-demand discovery and a generation of a set of routes, by specifying a disjointness threshold, representing the maximal number of nodes shared between any two paths in the set of k established paths. The proposed multipath routing algorithm, is adaptive, secure, and uses labels to carry the disjointness-threshold between nodes during the route discovery. A set of security mechanisms, based on the Watchdog and the digital signature concepts, is used to protect the route discovery process.
This document analyzes the performance of different routing protocols (AODV, DSR, DSDV) under various mobility models (random waypoint, random direction, random walk) and node speeds in mobile ad hoc networks. It finds that reactive protocols like AODV and DSR generally have higher packet delivery ratios than proactive DSDV, but end-to-end delays vary depending on the mobility model and node speed. The document proposes an algorithm to select the best routing protocol based on whether data delivery or time is the higher priority, and whether nodes are stationary or mobile. DSDV is preferred when data delivery is most important, while DSR performs better for time-critical applications.
Performance Evalution of MANET Routing Protocols using Reference Point Group ...ijasuc
An ad hoc network is often defined as an “infrastructureless” network, meaning a network without the
usual routing infrastructure like fixed routers and routing backbones. Typically, the ad hoc nodes are
mobile and the underlying communication medium is wireless. Each ad hoc node may be capable of acting
as a router.it’s charactrizied by multihop wireless connection and frequently changing networks.we
compare the performance of on-demand routing protocols for mobile ad-hoc networks are distributed
cache updating for the dynamic source routing protocol(DSR) and ad hoc on-demand distance vector
routing (AODV).the simulation model of the medium access control(MAC) layer is evaluting the
performance of MANET protocols.DSR and AODV protocols share similar behavours.we evalute the
both on demand protocols DSR and AODV based on packet delivery ratio , packet delivery latency,mobility
variation with total number of errors, packet and normalized routing overhead,end-to-end delay by varying
in node density.the performance and characterictics are explained by the graph models.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is an open access online peer reviewed international journal that publishes research and review articles in the fields of Computer Science, Neural Networks, Electrical Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Plastic Engineering, Food Technology, Textile Engineering, Nano Technology & science, Power Electronics, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Computational mathematics, Image processing, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, VLSI Testing & Low Power VLSI Design etc.
IJERD (www.ijerd.com) International Journal of Engineering Research and Devel...IJERD Editor
This document summarizes a study that evaluates the performance of four routing protocols - FSR, STAR-LORA, DYMO, and DSR - in a mobile ad hoc network (MANET) simulation using QualNet. Two scenarios were tested: one with constant bit rate (CBR) client traffic and one with CBR server traffic. Performance metrics like throughput, average end-to-end delay, and average jitter were measured for 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 nodes. The results showed that reactive protocols DYMO and DSR generally had lower delay but higher jitter than proactive protocols FSR and STAR-LORA. This study aims to help identify the most efficient routing
Efficient Routing Protocol in the Mobile Ad-hoc Network (MANET) by using Gene...IOSR Journals
This document discusses using a genetic algorithm to improve routing in mobile ad hoc networks. It begins with background on mobile ad hoc networks and common routing protocols. It then introduces genetic algorithms and how they work by simulating natural evolution. The document proposes using a genetic algorithm with the AODV routing protocol to find optimal paths between source and destination nodes. It describes implementing this approach and comparing its performance to traditional AODV routing. The results showed the genetic algorithm approach performed better in terms of quality of service and throughput.
This document proposes a new fuzzy logic-based routing protocol for mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs) that considers path stability, residual energy of nodes, and bandwidth for optimal path selection at the source node. It also proposes adjusting the transmission rate at the source node based on end-to-end delay and packet loss ratio measured at the destination node. This cross-layer approach uses two fuzzy logic systems - one for path selection based on stability and bandwidth, and another for transmission rate adjustment based on delay and packet loss. The goal is to select stable paths and prevent congestion for more efficient data transmission in MANETs.
Performance analysis of aodv, olsr, grp and dsr routing protocols with databa...eSAT Journals
Abstract
Wireless Technology has an enormous use these days and is still becoming popular from times immemorial. It is at its peak when we
talk about research. This is because of the latest technological demands now days arising from Laptops, Wireless devices such as
Wireless local area networks (WLANs) etc. Because of its fast growing popularity day by day, it has led wireless technology data rates
higher and it has made its price cheaper, which is why wireless Technology is growing so fast. In this paper we have presented some
most commonly used routing protocols in MANET and compared the performance of AODV, OLSR, GRP and DSR routing protocol
by using OPNET simulator 14.5. The performance is evaluated under different parameters like Delay, Load, and Media access delay,
Network Load, Retransmission and Throughput for Database load.
Keywords— MANET, Peak Value, Protocol, Drop value
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.
ENHANCEMENT OF OPTIMIZED LINKED STATE ROUTING PROTOCOL FOR ENERGY CONSERVATIONcscpconf
Mobile Ad-hoc network (MANET) is infrastructure less network in which nodes are mobile, self
reconfigurable, battery powered. As nodes in MANET are battery powered, energy saving is an
important issue. We are using routing protocol to save energy so as to extend network lifetime.
We have extended original Optimized Linked State Routing (OLSR) protocol by using two
algorithms and named it as Enhancement in OLSR using Residual Energy approach (EOLSRRE)
and Enhancement in OLSR using Energy Consumption approach (EOLSR-EC). To analyze
relative performance of modified protocol EOLSR-RE and EOLSR-EC over OLSR, we
performed various trials using Qualnet simulator. The performance of these routing protocols is
analyzed in terms of energy consumption, control overheads, end to end delay, packet delivery
ratio. The modified OLSR protocol improves energy efficiency of network by reducing 20 %
energy consumption and 50% control overheads.
P ERFORMANCE C OMPARISON OF R OUTING P ROTOCOLS IN M OBILE A D H OC N E...ijujournal
Routing protocols have
an important
role in any
Mobile Ad Hoc Network
(MANET).
Researchers
have
elaborated several routing protocols that possess different performance levels
. In this
p
aper
we
give a
performance evaluation of
AODV,
DSR,
DSDV
, OLSR and DYMO
routing protocol
s
in
Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks
(MANETS)
to
determine
the best
in different scenarios
. We
analyse
these
MANET
routing
protocols by
using
NS
-
2 simulator
. We specify how
the
Number of No
d
es
parameter influences
their
performance. In this study
,
performance is
calculated
in terms
of Packet Delivery Ratio,
Average
End to
End Delay, Normalised Routing Load and Average Throughput
Performance comparison of routing protocols in mobile ad hoc networksijujournal
Routing protocols have an important role in any Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET). Researchers have elaborated several routing protocols that possess different performance levels. In this paper we give a performance evaluation of AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR and DYMO routing protocols in Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks (MANETS) to determine the best in different scenarios. We analyse these MANET routing protocols by using NS-2 simulator. We specify how the Number of Nodes parameter influences their performance. In this study, performance is calculated in terms of Packet Delivery Ratio, Average End to End Delay, Normalised Routing Load and Average Throughput.
Comparative and Behavioral Study on VANET Routing ProtocolsIOSR Journals
This document provides a summary and comparison of various routing protocols for vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs). It discusses topology-based protocols like CGSR and DSDV, reactive protocols like DSR, and position-based protocols like GSR, A-STAR, GPCR, VADD, CAR, DIR, and B-MFR. The position-based protocols are considered the best for handling issues in VANETs like packet delay, traffic congestion, and throughput. The paper analyzes the characteristics and behaviors of different VANET routing protocols and concludes that position-based protocols are most suitable for the dynamic environment of vehicular networks.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF AOMDV PROTOCOL BASED ON VARIOUS SCENARIO AND TRAFFI...IJCSEA Journal
A MANET is an interconnection of mobile devices by wireless links, which forms a dynamic topology. Routing protocols play a vital role in transmission of data across the network. The two major classifications of routing protocols are unipath and multipath. In this paper, we have evaluated the performance of a widely used on-demand multipath routing protocol called AOMDV. This protocol has been selected due to its edge over other protocols in various aspects, such as reducing delay, routing load etc. The evaluation of AOMDV protocol is carried out in terms of four scenario patterns such as RWM, RPGM, MGM, and GMM in two different traffic patterns such as CBR and TCP using NS2 and Bonn Motion.
Performance of dsdv protocol based on different propagation model with variIAEME Publication
This document discusses the performance of the DSDV routing protocol under different propagation models and topologies in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It first provides background on MANET routing protocols including DSDV and describes two propagation models - free space and two ray ground. It then discusses a simulation study comparing the performance of DSDV using these propagation models with various network topologies. The results show that the propagation model has a significant impact on routing protocol performance in MANETs.
Performance Comparison of AODV, DSR and LAR1 in Mobile Ad-hoc Network based o...IOSR Journals
Abstract: In the last couple of years, the use of wireless networks has become more and more popular. A
MANET is a collection of self-organizing mobile nodes which is infrastructure less, autonomous, and standalone
networks. Each node in a MANET is free to move independently in any direction and will therefore change its
links to other devices frequently. Each must forward traffic unrelated to its own use and therefore be a router.
Simulation result has been obtained by a performance comparison of three routing protocols i.e. Ad hoc Ondemand
Distance Vector (AODV), Dynamic Source Routing (DSR), Location Aided Routing (LAR1) against
Simulation time. The Result is obtained using QualNet simulator version 6.1. Different protocols are evaluated
based on measures such as Average End to End delay (s), Average Jitter(s), and Packet delivery ratio.
Keywords: MANET, AODV, DSR, LAR1, QualNet 6.1
Welcome to International Journal of Engineering Research and Development (IJERD)IJERD Editor
This document summarizes a simulation-based performance analysis of three routing protocols (CBRP, DSR, AODV) for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) under different node densities. The analysis varies the number of data sources and evaluates the protocols based on packet delivery ratio, average end-to-end delay, and normalized routing load. The simulation is conducted using the NS-2 network simulator for dense and sparse network topologies with 50 nodes each, varying node speeds and transmission ranges. Results show that CBRP performs better than DSR and AODV in terms of normalized routing load for more than 15 sources in both dense and sparse topologies, while AODV has lower delay than CBR
A Simulation Based Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols (Reactive and ...IOSR Journals
This document compares the performance of three routing protocols - AODV, DSDV, and OLSR - under the random waypoint mobility model using network simulation. Simulation results with 30 and 50 nodes found that OLSR performed better than AODV and DSDV in terms of packet receive rate and packets received with 30 nodes and a simulation time of 100 seconds. DSDV performed better than the other protocols with 50 nodes and a simulation time of 200 seconds. Overall, AODV showed the poorest performance in both scenarios. The document analyzes these routing protocols and the random waypoint mobility model to evaluate their performance under different parameters.
A Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc NetworksIJERA Editor
Mobile Ad hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of mobile nodes in which the wireless links are frequently broken down due to mobility and dynamic infrastructure. Routing is a significant issue and challenge in ad hoc networks. Many routing protocols have been proposed like OLSR, AODV so far to improve the routing performance and reliability. In this paper, we describe the Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR) and the Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV). We evaluate their performance through exhaustive simulations using the Network Simulator 2 (ns2) by varying conditions (node mobility, network density).
Mobility is one of the basic features that define an ad hoc network, an asset that leaves the field
free for the nodes to move. The most important aspect of this kind of network turns into a great
disadvantage when it comes to commercial applications, take as an example: the automotive
networks that allow communication between a groups of vehicles. The ad hoc on-demand
distance vector (AODV) routing protocol, designed for mobile ad hoc networks, has two main
functions. First, it enables route establishment between a source and a destination node by
initiating a route discovery process. Second, it maintains the active routes, which means finding
alternative routes in a case of a link failure and deleting routes when they are no longer
desired. In a highly mobile network those are demanding tasks to be performed efficiently and
accurately. In this paper, we focused in the first point to enhance the local decision of each node
in the network by the quantification of the mobility of their neighbours. Quantification is made
around RSSI algorithm a well known distance estimation method.
Interference management in lte downlink networksijwmn
Two major challenges for evolving LTE (Long Term Evolution) networks are to achieve enhanced system capacity and cell coverage compared with WCDMA (Wideband Code Division Multiple Access) system. Effective utilization of radio resources as well as dense spectrum reuse are at the core to attain these targets. However, dense frequency reuse may increase inter-cell interference, which in turn severely limits the capacity of users in the system. Inter-cell interference can restrict overall system performance in terms of throughput and spectral efficiency, especially for the users located at the cell edge area. Hence, careful management of inter-cell interferences becomes crucial to improve LTE system performance. In this paper, interference mitigation schemes for LTE downlink networks are investigated.
SENSOR SELECTION SCHEME IN TEMPERATURE WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKijwmn
In this paper, we propose a novel energy efficient environment monitoring scheme for wireless sensor
networks, based on data mining formulation. The proposed adapting routing scheme for sensors for
achieving energy efficiency from temperature wireless sensor network data set. The experimental
validation of the proposed approach using publicly available Intel Berkeley lab Wireless Sensor Network
dataset shows that it is possible to achieve energy efficient environment monitoring for wireless sensor
networks, with a trade-off between accuracy and life time extension factor of sensors, using the proposed
approach.
Connectivity aware and adaptive multipath routing algorithm for mobile adhoc ...ijwmn
We propose in this paper a connectivity-aware routing algorithm and a set of related theorems. This algorithm allows nodes in Mobile Adhoc and Sensor Networks (MASNets) to provide the highest connectivity life time to a specific destination since the issuance of data becomes a necessity for MASNets. In the proposed Solution, nodes in MASNets are able to specify the disjointness degree of the available paths allowing the discovery of the optimal set of backup routes and consequently enhance the survivability of the connectivity. These nodes perform an on-demand discovery and a generation of a set of routes, by specifying a disjointness threshold, representing the maximal number of nodes shared between any two paths in the set of k established paths. The proposed multipath routing algorithm, is adaptive, secure, and uses labels to carry the disjointness-threshold between nodes during the route discovery. A set of security mechanisms, based on the Watchdog and the digital signature concepts, is used to protect the route discovery process.
A SEMI BLIND CHANNEL ESTIMATION METHOD BASED ON HYBRID NEURAL NETWORKS FOR UP...ijwmn
The paper describes how to improve channel estimation in Single Carrier Frequency Division Multiple
Access (SC-FDMA) system, using a Hybrid Artificial Neural Networks (HANN). The 3rd Generation
Partnership Project (3GPP) standards for uplink Long Term Evolution Advanced (LTE-A) uses pilot based
channel estimation technique. This kind of channel estimation method suffers from a considerable loss
ofbitrate due to pilot insertion; all data frame sent contains reference signal. The HANN converts data
aided channel estimator to semi blind channel estimator. To increase convergence speed, HANN uses some
channel propagation Fuzzy Rules to initialize Neural Network parameters before learning instead of a
random initialization, so its learning phase ismore rapidly compared to classic ANN.HANN allows more
bandwidth efficient and less complexity. Simulation results show that HANN has better computational
efficiency than the Minimum Mean Square Error (MMSE) estimator and has faster convergence than
classic Neural Networks estimators.
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have become very popular recently for both civil uses and potential commercial uses, such as law enforcement, crop survey, grocery delivery, and photographing, although they were mainly used for military purposes before. Researchers need the help of simulations when they design and test new protocols for UAV networks because simulations can be done for a network of a size
that a test bed can hardly approach. In the simulation of an UAV network it is important to choose a radio propagation model for the links in the network. We study the shadowing radio propagation model in this paper and compare it with the free space model, both of which are available in the ns2 network simulation package. We also show how the choice of the parameters of the shadowing model would impact on the
network performance of a UAV network.
Steganography is a technology used since years for the communication of messages secretly. These secret messages are put inside honest carriers. Carriers can be digital images, audio files, video files and so on. The limitation in sending concealed longer messages has been overcoming by the inclusion of video files as carriers. Popular internet services such as Skype, BitTorrent, Google Suggest, and
WLANs are targets of information hiding techniques. Nowadays, plotters are not only using the carriers but also the protocols for communication that regulate the path of the carrier through the Internet. This technique is named Network Steganography.
B ENCHMARKING OF C ELL T HROUGHPUT U SING P ROPORTIONAL F AIR S CHEDULE...ijwmn
The proportional fair (PF) scheduling algorithm com
promises between cell throughput and fairness. Many
research findings have been published by various re
searchers about PF algorithm based on mathematical
model and simulations. In this paper we have taken
the practical route to analyse the algorithm based
on
three types of subscription. In this benchmarking s
tudy, the user subscriptions are differentiated as
Gold,
Silver and Bronze schemes and they are provisioned
with certain throughputs. Apart from subscriptions
plans, the channel condition also plays a major rol
e in determining the throughput. So in order to ens
ure
fairness among different subscriptions even in the
bad channel conditions and to deliver the provision
ed
throughputs certain priorities are attached with th
e subscriptions. As per the subscription plans Gold
subscribers are assigned with 50% of the speed offe
red by the network as maximum based on CAT3 speed
(100 Mbps in DL and 50 Mbps in UL), Silver is assig
ned with 25% of the max speed and Bronze is
assigned with 12% of the max speed. The priorities
assigned to subscribers determines the fairness in
the
unfavourable channel conditions - Bronze (high), Si
lver and Gold (medium). In this paper, an
benchmarking tests have been performed with all of
three types of subscribers for nearly two hours in
the
live single cell network without any heterogeneous
cells influencing it. Furthermore, the results are
compared with the simulation results.
DEVICE-TO-DEVICE (D2D) COMMUNICATION UNDER LTE-ADVANCED NETWORKSijwmn
Device-to-Device (D2D) communication is a new technology that offer many advantages for the LTEadvanced
network such us wireless peer-to-peer services and higher spectral efficiency. It is also
considered as one of promising techniques for the 5G wireless communications system and used in so
many different fields such as network traffic offloading, public safety, social services and applications such
as gaming and military applications . The goal of this paper is to present advances on the current 3GPP
LTE-advanced system related to Device-to-Device (D2D). In this paper, we provide an overview of the
D2D types based on the communication spectrum of D2D transmission, namely Inband D2D
communication and Outband D2D communication. Then we present the advantages and disadvantages of
each D2D mode. Moreover, architecture and protocol enhancements for D2D communications under
LTE-A network are described.
Effective Road Model for Congestion Control in VANETSijwmn
Congestion on the roads is a key problem to deal with, which wastes valuable time.. Due to high mobility
rate and relative speed link failure occur very often. VANET is used to tackle the problem of congestion,
and make decisions well in advance to avoid traffic congestion. In this paper we proposed a solution to
detect and control the traffic congestion by using of both (V2V) and (V2I), as a result the drivers become
aware of the location of congestion as well as way to avoid getting stuck in congestion. The congestion is
detected by analyzing the data obtained by vehicular communication and road side units to avoid the
traffic. Our proposition system is competent of detecting and controlling traffic congestion in real-time.
V2V and V2I communication network is used to receive and send the messages. We simulate the result by
using Congestion Detection and Control Algorithm (CDCA), and show that this is one effective way to
control congestion. The Proposed methodology ensures reliable and timely delivery of messages to know
about congestion and avoid it.
Energy balanced on demand clustering algorithm based on leach-cijwmn
The proposed algorithm aims to improve energy efficiency in wireless sensor networks. It uses a centralized k-means clustering algorithm to form clusters based on minimizing total energy. The base station calculates relevant information for each node, including total network energy, distance to neighbor nodes, and cluster assignment. Nodes then use this information to probabilistically elect cluster heads within each cluster in a distributed manner. The algorithm considers both energy levels and communication distances to select optimal cluster heads. Simulation results show the proposed algorithm outperforms LEACH-C in network lifetime, stability period, and energy efficiency.
System level simulation for two tier macro femto cellular networksijwmn
LTE is an emerging wireless communication technology to provide high- speed data service for the mobile
phones and data terminals. To improve indoor coverage and capacity Femtocells are included in 3GPP
since Release 8. There is no common simulation platform is available for performance justification of LTEFemtocells.
LTE-Sim is an object-oriented open source simulator which incorporates a complete protocol
stack can be used for simulating two-tier macro-femto scenarios. To the best of our knowledge no paper
provides the guideline to perform system level simulation of Femtocell networks. Here, in this paper
Femtocells performance is evaluated in multi-Macrocells and multi-Femtocells environment with
interference from Microcells and Macrocell users along with the scripting.
A fuzzy congestion controller to detect and balance congestion in wsnijwmn
This document proposes a fuzzy logic-based approach to detect and control congestion in wireless sensor networks (WSNs). The approach divides the WSN into grids monitored by designated Monitor Nodes. These nodes use fuzzy logic and three input metrics (transmission delay, grid density, dropped packets) to determine the congestion level of their grid. Based on the congestion level, packets are either forwarded through the grid or through alternative relay nodes to avoid congestion. Simulation results show this approach achieves higher packet delivery and lower packet loss compared to an existing baseline approach.
ENERGY EFFICIENT GRID AND TREE BASED ROUTING PROTOCOLijwmn
In Wireless Sensor Network, a large number of sensor nodes are deployed and they mainly consume energy
in transmitting data over long distances. Sensor nodes are battery powered and their energy is restricted.
Since the location of the sink is remote, considerable energy would be consumed if each node directly
transmits data to the base station. Aggregating data at the intermediate nodes and transmitting using multihops
aids in reducing energy consumption to a great extent. This paper proposes a hybrid protocol
“Energy efficient Grid and Tree based routing protocol” (EGT) in which the sensing area is divided into
grids. The nodes in the grid relay data to the cell leader which aggregates the data and transmits to the
sink using the constructed hop tree. Simulation results show that EGT performs better than LEACH.
L shaped slot loaded semicircular patch antenna for wideband operation ijwmn
This document summarizes a research paper that analyzes a dual-band semicircular microstrip patch antenna loaded with an L-shaped slot. Introducing the L-shaped slot creates two resonant frequencies for wideband operation. Parametric studies using MATLAB and HFSS simulation software show that the slot dimensions affect the lower resonance frequency more than the upper frequency, while the notch dimensions have more impact on the upper frequency. Radiation patterns are presented for both resonance frequencies, demonstrating dual-band behavior. The proposed antenna design achieves size reduction compared to other techniques for obtaining multiple bands in microstrip antennas.
BEHAVIOUR OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKS INVESTIGATED FOR EME...ijwmn
Mobile Ad hoc Networks are open, shared, dynamic and self-organized networks. These distinct nature
lead to efficient use in emergency and recue scenarios where the sharing of information is necessary. In
order to share information within the network, a proper routing protocol is required to establish routes
between nodes. This article discusses which of the routing protocols such as reactive or proactive has
better performance in such scenario. In order to implement the test bed, we choose a real area in
Uttarakhand state, India where the disaster occurred recently hence so many civilizations had vanished
due to lack of communication and failure in recovery. Our aim is to choose an optimum routing protocol
that is correct and used for efficient route establishment between nodes so that message could be delivered
on time without loss and it will be implemented and used in future based on the model that we propose.
AN ADVANCED QOS ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION METHOD FOR MOBILE INTERNET ACCESS ijwmn
The paper proposes a new method for the analysis and evaluation of the Quality of Service (QoS) in a
mobile Internet access scenario. In particular, the paper proposes a throughput evaluation method based
on PathChirp algorithm. The end-to-end bandwidth was estimated by means of the Self Loading of Periodic
Streams (SloPS) technique. The obtained measurements were then analyzed by estimating the degree of
correlation with other parameters that characterize the data transmission such as power, round trip time,
etc. Finally, in order to have greater spatial resolution performance guaranteed by an Internet service
provider, a 3D reconstruction method based on using drones is proposed and some preliminary results are
discussed.
Mobility Contrast Effect on Environment in Manet as Mobility ModelIOSR Journals
The document discusses mobility models in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It describes several types of mobility models including:
1) Random mobility models like the random waypoint, random walk, and random direction models.
2) Group mobility models like the referential point group, nomadic community, and column models.
3) Map-based models like the Manhattan and freeway models.
4) Particle-based models like the pedestrian mobility model. The models have different characteristics that affect the performance of routing protocols in MANETs.
Mobility models for delay tolerant network a surveyijwmn
Delay Tolerant Network (DTN) is an emerging networking technology that is widely used in the
environment where end-to-end paths do not exist. DTN follows store-carry-forward mechanism to route
data. This mechanism exploits the mobility of nodes and hence the performances of DTN routing and
application protocols are highly dependent on the underlying mobility of nodes and its characteristics.
Therefore, suitable mobility models are required to be incorporated in the simulation tools to evaluate DTN
protocols across many scenarios. In DTN mobility modelling literature, a number of mobility models have
been developed based on synthetic theory and real world mobility traces. Furthermore, many researchers
have developed specific application oriented mobility models. All these models do not provide accurate
evaluation in the all scenarios. Therefore, model selection is an important issue in DTN protocol
simulation. In this study, we have summarized various widely used mobility models and made a comparison
of their performances. Finally, we have concluded with future research directions in mobility modelling for
DTN simulation.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF GRID-BASED ROUTING PROTOCOL FOR UNDERWATER WIRELESS...ijwmn
In this paper, we have conducted a simulation study to evaluate Multipath Grid-Based Geographic Routing
Protocol (MGGR) under different selected mobility models. The protocol has been evaluated under three
mobility models (i.e. Random Way Point, Reference Point Group and Meandering Current Mobility Model)
using Aqua-Sim NS2-based simulator. An Extensive number of experiments have been conducted to assess
the packet delivery ratio, the end-to-end-delay and power consumption under different operating
conditions. We have noticed that the performance of MGGR is only marginally affected by the mobility
behavior of nodes especially with the condition where the speed of nodes movements increased.
Nevertheless, the evaluation has also shown that MGGR exhibit only average performance when used in
coastal areas. This is evident as the MCMM (used primarily to model the movement of nodes in coastal
areas) gave the lowest performance compared to other models.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKSijcax
This document compares the performance of five routing protocols (AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR, DYMO) in mobile ad hoc networks through simulations. It describes the key characteristics and mechanisms of each protocol. Simulations are conducted in the NS-2 simulator using the random waypoint mobility model. Performance is evaluated under varying pause times based on four metrics: packet delivery ratio, average end-to-end delay, normalized routing load, and average throughput. The results aim to determine the best operational conditions for each protocol.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKSijcax
This document compares the performance of five routing protocols (AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR, DYMO) in mobile ad hoc networks through simulations. It summarizes each protocol and discusses the simulation setup. The protocols are categorized as reactive, proactive, or hybrid. Key performance metrics like packet delivery ratio, end-to-end delay, and routing load are evaluated under varying pause times using the NS-2 simulator. The analysis seeks to determine the best operational conditions for each protocol in mobile ad hoc networks.
This document discusses mobility management in mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs). It begins by introducing MANETs and explaining that they are temporary networks formed spontaneously via wireless communication between mobile nodes without centralized administration. It then discusses the need for mobility management, including location management and handoff management routing protocols. It also discusses different types of node mobility and mobility models for predicting node movement patterns over time in MANETs. The document categorizes mobility models as trace-based (using real movement data) or synthetic-based (simulating realistic movement), and lists examples of models within each category like the random waypoint and reference point group mobility models.
The document evaluates the performance of 5 routing protocols (AODV, DSR, TORA, OLSR, GRP) in a mobile ad hoc network (MANET) using the OPNET simulator. Simulations were run with 30, 60, and 90 nodes using email and video conferencing applications. Performance was analyzed based on throughput, delay, load, and data dropped. In general, GRP and OLSR had the lowest delay, DSR and GRP had the lowest load, and OLSR and AODV had the highest throughput, while TORA often had the worst performance based on the metrics. The evaluation provides insights into the relative performance of the routing protocols under different conditions in a MANET
Comparing: Routing Protocols on Basis of sleep modeIJMER
The architecture of ad hoc wireless network consists of mobile nodes for communication
without the use of fixed-position routers. The communication between them takes place without
centralized control. Routing is a very crucial issue, so to deal with this routing algorithms must deliver
the packet in significant delay. There are different protocols for handling the mobile environment like
AODV, DSR and OLSR. But this paper will focus on performance of AODV and OLSR routing protocols.
The performance of these protocols is analyzed on two metrics: time and throughput
A detailed study of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks usingIAEME Publication
This document discusses routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks. It analyzes the performance of several routing protocols including OLSR, DSR, AODV, ZRP and LAR using Qualnet simulator 6.1. The protocols are classified as proactive, reactive or hybrid. Proactive protocols maintain up-to-date routing tables while reactive protocols discover routes on demand. The paper evaluates and compares the protocols based on metrics like average jitter, end-to-end delay, and throughput under different numbers of stationary and mobile nodes.
A detailed study of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks usingIAEME Publication
This document discusses and compares several routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It evaluates the performance of the Optimized Link State Routing protocol (OLSR), Dynamic Source Routing (DSR), Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector routing (AODV), Location Aided Routing (LAR) and Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) using the Qualnet simulator. The performance is evaluated based on average end-to-end delay, average jitter, and throughput under scenarios with 45 stationary and mobile nodes. The results show that protocols perform differently depending on node mobility, with OLSR and AODV generally having better performance than DSR, LAR and ZRP in terms of lower delay and
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKSijujournal
Routing protocols have an important role in any Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET). Researchers have
elaborated several routing protocols that possess different performance levels. In this paper we give a
performance evaluation of AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR and DYMO routing protocols in Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks (MANETS) to determine the best in different scenarios. We analyse these MANET routing
protocols by using NS-2 simulator. We specify how the Number of Nodes parameter influences their
performance. In this study, performance is calculated in terms of Packet Delivery Ratio, Average End to
End Delay, Normalised Routing Load and Average Throughput.
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKSijujournal
This document presents a performance comparison of routing protocols in mobile ad hoc networks. It summarizes previous research evaluating AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR and DYMO protocols. The document then describes the routing protocols and simulation setup used to analyze the performance metrics of packet delivery ratio, average end-to-end delay, normalized routing load, and average throughput under varying numbers of nodes.
QOS ROUTING AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FOR MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKS USING OLSR ...ijasuc
Mobile Ad-Hoc network is a collection of mobile nodes in communication without using infrastructure.
As the real-time applications used in today’s wireless network grow, we need some schemes to provide
more suitable service for them. We know that most of actual schemes do not perform well on traffic which
is not strictly CBR. Therefore, in this paper we have studied the impact, respectively, of mobility models
and the density of nodes on the performances (End-to-End Delay, Throughput and Packet Delivery ratio)
of routing protocol (Optimized Link State Routing) OLSR by using in the first a real-time VBR (MPEG-4)
and secondly the Constant Bit Rate (CBR) traffic. Finally we compare the performance on both cases.
Experimentally, we considered the three mobility models as follows Random Waypoint, Random
Direction and Mobgen Steady State. The experimental results illustrate that the behavior of OLSR change
according to the model and the used traffics.
Evaluating the performance of manet routing protocolsIAEME Publication
This document evaluates the performance of different MANET routing protocols under random walk mobility. It simulates AODV, DSR, OLSR, and ZRP using the OPNET simulator. The key metrics examined are throughput, retransmission attempts, network load, and media access delay. The results show that the hybrid ZRP protocol has the best overall performance in terms of throughput, retransmission attempts and network load. However, the proactive OLSR protocol performs best for media access delay since routes are predefined.
Analysis of FSR, LANMAR and DYMO under MANETidescitation
A movable ad hoc system (MANET) is a self-configuring communications set of
connections of mobile procedure associated by wireless. Each mechanism in a MANET is
free to move independently in some way, and will therefore modify its relations to other
devices frequently [2]. The primary purpose of any ad-hoc network routing protocol is to
meet the challenges of the dynamically changing topology and establish an efficient route
connecting every two nodes. In this paper three protocols FSR, LANMAR and DYMO are
compared by using random waypoint mobility in few nodes with varying packet sizes in
CBR traffic. The parameters or metrics are used to assess the performance of protocols with
and without Black Hole attack, that are data Packet Delivery ratio and Average Jitter with
varying data traffic CBR (Constant Bit Ratio) using Qual Net 5.0.2 simulator.
International Journal of Engineering Inventions (IJEI) provides a multidisciplinary passage for researchers, managers, professionals, practitioners and students around the globe to publish high quality, peer-reviewed articles on all theoretical and empirical aspects of Engineering and Science.
The peer-reviewed International Journal of Engineering Inventions (IJEI) is started with a mission to encourage contribution to research in Science and Technology. Encourage and motivate researchers in challenging areas of Sciences and Technology.
A SURVEY OF ENHANCED ROUTING PROTOCOLS FOR MANETspijans
This document summarizes and surveys several enhanced routing protocols that have been developed for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). It begins by providing background on routing challenges in MANETs and classifications of routing protocols. It then describes several traditional and widely used routing protocols, including DSDV, OLSR, TORA, DSR, and AODV. The document focuses on summarizing several new routing protocols that have been proposed to improve upon existing protocols. It discusses protocols such as BAWB-DSR, CCSR, RAMP, AODV-SBA, CBRP-R, and CBTRP - noting techniques, advantages, and disadvantages of each. The overall purpose is to review
A Survey of Enhanced Routing Protocols for Manetspijans
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs) form a class of dynamic multi-hop networks consisting of a set of
mobile nodes that intercommunicate on shared wireless channels. MANETs are self-organizing and selfconfiguring multi-hop wireless networks, where the network structure changes dynamically due to the node
mobility. There exists no fixed topology due to the mobility of nodes, interference, multipath propagation
and path loss. Hence efficient dynamic routing protocols are required for these networks to function
properly. Many routing protocols have been developed to accomplish this task. In this paper we survey
various new routing protocols that have been developed as extensions or advanced versions of previously
existing routing protocols for MANETs such as DSR, AODV, OLSR etc.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is a team of researchers not publication services or private publications running the journals for monetary benefits, we are association of scientists and academia who focus only on supporting authors who want to publish their work. The articles published in our journal can be accessed online, all the articles will be archived for real time access.
Our journal system primarily aims to bring out the research talent and the works done by sciaentists, academia, engineers, practitioners, scholars, post graduate students of engineering and science. This journal aims to cover the scientific research in a broader sense and not publishing a niche area of research facilitating researchers from various verticals to publish their papers. It is also aimed to provide a platform for the researchers to publish in a shorter of time, enabling them to continue further All articles published are freely available to scientific researchers in the Government agencies,educators and the general public. We are taking serious efforts to promote our journal across the globe in various ways, we are sure that our journal will act as a scientific platform for all researchers to publish their works online.
ON THE PROBABILITY OF K-CONNECTIVITY IN WIRELESS AD HOC NETWORKS UNDER DIFFER...graphhoc
The document analyzes the probability of k-connectivity in wireless ad hoc networks under different mobility models. It compares the Random Waypoint, City Section, and Manhattan mobility models. Simulations show that the Random Waypoint model yields the highest probability of k-connectivity for most node densities and velocities. The probability of k-connectivity decreases as k increases and increases as node density increases, for all three models.
Similar to Impact of random mobility models on olsr (20)
Let's Integrate MuleSoft RPA, COMPOSER, APM with AWS IDP along with Slackshyamraj55
Discover the seamless integration of RPA (Robotic Process Automation), COMPOSER, and APM with AWS IDP enhanced with Slack notifications. Explore how these technologies converge to streamline workflows, optimize performance, and ensure secure access, all while leveraging the power of AWS IDP and real-time communication via Slack notifications.
5th LF Energy Power Grid Model Meet-up SlidesDanBrown980551
5th Power Grid Model Meet-up
It is with great pleasure that we extend to you an invitation to the 5th Power Grid Model Meet-up, scheduled for 6th June 2024. This event will adopt a hybrid format, allowing participants to join us either through an online Mircosoft Teams session or in person at TU/e located at Den Dolech 2, Eindhoven, Netherlands. The meet-up will be hosted by Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e), a research university specializing in engineering science & technology.
Power Grid Model
The global energy transition is placing new and unprecedented demands on Distribution System Operators (DSOs). Alongside upgrades to grid capacity, processes such as digitization, capacity optimization, and congestion management are becoming vital for delivering reliable services.
Power Grid Model is an open source project from Linux Foundation Energy and provides a calculation engine that is increasingly essential for DSOs. It offers a standards-based foundation enabling real-time power systems analysis, simulations of electrical power grids, and sophisticated what-if analysis. In addition, it enables in-depth studies and analysis of the electrical power grid’s behavior and performance. This comprehensive model incorporates essential factors such as power generation capacity, electrical losses, voltage levels, power flows, and system stability.
Power Grid Model is currently being applied in a wide variety of use cases, including grid planning, expansion, reliability, and congestion studies. It can also help in analyzing the impact of renewable energy integration, assessing the effects of disturbances or faults, and developing strategies for grid control and optimization.
What to expect
For the upcoming meetup we are organizing, we have an exciting lineup of activities planned:
-Insightful presentations covering two practical applications of the Power Grid Model.
-An update on the latest advancements in Power Grid -Model technology during the first and second quarters of 2024.
-An interactive brainstorming session to discuss and propose new feature requests.
-An opportunity to connect with fellow Power Grid Model enthusiasts and users.
AI 101: An Introduction to the Basics and Impact of Artificial IntelligenceIndexBug
Imagine a world where machines not only perform tasks but also learn, adapt, and make decisions. This is the promise of Artificial Intelligence (AI), a technology that's not just enhancing our lives but revolutionizing entire industries.
Ivanti’s Patch Tuesday breakdown goes beyond patching your applications and brings you the intelligence and guidance needed to prioritize where to focus your attention first. Catch early analysis on our Ivanti blog, then join industry expert Chris Goettl for the Patch Tuesday Webinar Event. There we’ll do a deep dive into each of the bulletins and give guidance on the risks associated with the newly-identified vulnerabilities.
HCL Notes and Domino License Cost Reduction in the World of DLAUpanagenda
Webinar Recording: https://www.panagenda.com/webinars/hcl-notes-and-domino-license-cost-reduction-in-the-world-of-dlau/
The introduction of DLAU and the CCB & CCX licensing model caused quite a stir in the HCL community. As a Notes and Domino customer, you may have faced challenges with unexpected user counts and license costs. You probably have questions on how this new licensing approach works and how to benefit from it. Most importantly, you likely have budget constraints and want to save money where possible. Don’t worry, we can help with all of this!
We’ll show you how to fix common misconfigurations that cause higher-than-expected user counts, and how to identify accounts which you can deactivate to save money. There are also frequent patterns that can cause unnecessary cost, like using a person document instead of a mail-in for shared mailboxes. We’ll provide examples and solutions for those as well. And naturally we’ll explain the new licensing model.
Join HCL Ambassador Marc Thomas in this webinar with a special guest appearance from Franz Walder. It will give you the tools and know-how to stay on top of what is going on with Domino licensing. You will be able lower your cost through an optimized configuration and keep it low going forward.
These topics will be covered
- Reducing license cost by finding and fixing misconfigurations and superfluous accounts
- How do CCB and CCX licenses really work?
- Understanding the DLAU tool and how to best utilize it
- Tips for common problem areas, like team mailboxes, functional/test users, etc
- Practical examples and best practices to implement right away
Building Production Ready Search Pipelines with Spark and MilvusZilliz
Spark is the widely used ETL tool for processing, indexing and ingesting data to serving stack for search. Milvus is the production-ready open-source vector database. In this talk we will show how to use Spark to process unstructured data to extract vector representations, and push the vectors to Milvus vector database for search serving.
GraphRAG for Life Science to increase LLM accuracyTomaz Bratanic
GraphRAG for life science domain, where you retriever information from biomedical knowledge graphs using LLMs to increase the accuracy and performance of generated answers
In the rapidly evolving landscape of technologies, XML continues to play a vital role in structuring, storing, and transporting data across diverse systems. The recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) present new methodologies for enhancing XML development workflows, introducing efficiency, automation, and intelligent capabilities. This presentation will outline the scope and perspective of utilizing AI in XML development. The potential benefits and the possible pitfalls will be highlighted, providing a balanced view of the subject.
We will explore the capabilities of AI in understanding XML markup languages and autonomously creating structured XML content. Additionally, we will examine the capacity of AI to enrich plain text with appropriate XML markup. Practical examples and methodological guidelines will be provided to elucidate how AI can be effectively prompted to interpret and generate accurate XML markup.
Further emphasis will be placed on the role of AI in developing XSLT, or schemas such as XSD and Schematron. We will address the techniques and strategies adopted to create prompts for generating code, explaining code, or refactoring the code, and the results achieved.
The discussion will extend to how AI can be used to transform XML content. In particular, the focus will be on the use of AI XPath extension functions in XSLT, Schematron, Schematron Quick Fixes, or for XML content refactoring.
The presentation aims to deliver a comprehensive overview of AI usage in XML development, providing attendees with the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions. Whether you’re at the early stages of adopting AI or considering integrating it in advanced XML development, this presentation will cover all levels of expertise.
By highlighting the potential advantages and challenges of integrating AI with XML development tools and languages, the presentation seeks to inspire thoughtful conversation around the future of XML development. We’ll not only delve into the technical aspects of AI-powered XML development but also discuss practical implications and possible future directions.
Generating privacy-protected synthetic data using Secludy and MilvusZilliz
During this demo, the founders of Secludy will demonstrate how their system utilizes Milvus to store and manipulate embeddings for generating privacy-protected synthetic data. Their approach not only maintains the confidentiality of the original data but also enhances the utility and scalability of LLMs under privacy constraints. Attendees, including machine learning engineers, data scientists, and data managers, will witness first-hand how Secludy's integration with Milvus empowers organizations to harness the power of LLMs securely and efficiently.
Monitoring and Managing Anomaly Detection on OpenShift.pdfTosin Akinosho
Monitoring and Managing Anomaly Detection on OpenShift
Overview
Dive into the world of anomaly detection on edge devices with our comprehensive hands-on tutorial. This SlideShare presentation will guide you through the entire process, from data collection and model training to edge deployment and real-time monitoring. Perfect for those looking to implement robust anomaly detection systems on resource-constrained IoT/edge devices.
Key Topics Covered
1. Introduction to Anomaly Detection
- Understand the fundamentals of anomaly detection and its importance in identifying unusual behavior or failures in systems.
2. Understanding Edge (IoT)
- Learn about edge computing and IoT, and how they enable real-time data processing and decision-making at the source.
3. What is ArgoCD?
- Discover ArgoCD, a declarative, GitOps continuous delivery tool for Kubernetes, and its role in deploying applications on edge devices.
4. Deployment Using ArgoCD for Edge Devices
- Step-by-step guide on deploying anomaly detection models on edge devices using ArgoCD.
5. Introduction to Apache Kafka and S3
- Explore Apache Kafka for real-time data streaming and Amazon S3 for scalable storage solutions.
6. Viewing Kafka Messages in the Data Lake
- Learn how to view and analyze Kafka messages stored in a data lake for better insights.
7. What is Prometheus?
- Get to know Prometheus, an open-source monitoring and alerting toolkit, and its application in monitoring edge devices.
8. Monitoring Application Metrics with Prometheus
- Detailed instructions on setting up Prometheus to monitor the performance and health of your anomaly detection system.
9. What is Camel K?
- Introduction to Camel K, a lightweight integration framework built on Apache Camel, designed for Kubernetes.
10. Configuring Camel K Integrations for Data Pipelines
- Learn how to configure Camel K for seamless data pipeline integrations in your anomaly detection workflow.
11. What is a Jupyter Notebook?
- Overview of Jupyter Notebooks, an open-source web application for creating and sharing documents with live code, equations, visualizations, and narrative text.
12. Jupyter Notebooks with Code Examples
- Hands-on examples and code snippets in Jupyter Notebooks to help you implement and test anomaly detection models.
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 6DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 6. In this session, we will cover Test Automation with generative AI and Open AI.
UiPath Test Automation with generative AI and Open AI webinar offers an in-depth exploration of leveraging cutting-edge technologies for test automation within the UiPath platform. Attendees will delve into the integration of generative AI, a test automation solution, with Open AI advanced natural language processing capabilities.
Throughout the session, participants will discover how this synergy empowers testers to automate repetitive tasks, enhance testing accuracy, and expedite the software testing life cycle. Topics covered include the seamless integration process, practical use cases, and the benefits of harnessing AI-driven automation for UiPath testing initiatives. By attending this webinar, testers, and automation professionals can gain valuable insights into harnessing the power of AI to optimize their test automation workflows within the UiPath ecosystem, ultimately driving efficiency and quality in software development processes.
What will you get from this session?
1. Insights into integrating generative AI.
2. Understanding how this integration enhances test automation within the UiPath platform
3. Practical demonstrations
4. Exploration of real-world use cases illustrating the benefits of AI-driven test automation for UiPath
Topics covered:
What is generative AI
Test Automation with generative AI and Open AI.
UiPath integration with generative AI
Speaker:
Deepak Rai, Automation Practice Lead, Boundaryless Group and UiPath MVP
Best 20 SEO Techniques To Improve Website Visibility In SERPPixlogix Infotech
Boost your website's visibility with proven SEO techniques! Our latest blog dives into essential strategies to enhance your online presence, increase traffic, and rank higher on search engines. From keyword optimization to quality content creation, learn how to make your site stand out in the crowded digital landscape. Discover actionable tips and expert insights to elevate your SEO game.
Skybuffer SAM4U tool for SAP license adoptionTatiana Kojar
Manage and optimize your license adoption and consumption with SAM4U, an SAP free customer software asset management tool.
SAM4U, an SAP complimentary software asset management tool for customers, delivers a detailed and well-structured overview of license inventory and usage with a user-friendly interface. We offer a hosted, cost-effective, and performance-optimized SAM4U setup in the Skybuffer Cloud environment. You retain ownership of the system and data, while we manage the ABAP 7.58 infrastructure, ensuring fixed Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) and exceptional services through the SAP Fiori interface.
Your One-Stop Shop for Python Success: Top 10 US Python Development Providersakankshawande
Simplify your search for a reliable Python development partner! This list presents the top 10 trusted US providers offering comprehensive Python development services, ensuring your project's success from conception to completion.
Fueling AI with Great Data with Airbyte WebinarZilliz
This talk will focus on how to collect data from a variety of sources, leveraging this data for RAG and other GenAI use cases, and finally charting your course to productionalization.
1. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
DOI : 10.5121/ijwmn.2014.6607 87
IMPACT OF RANDOM MOBILITY MODELS ON OLSR
P. S. Vinayagam
Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science,
Pondicherry University Community College, Puducherry, India
ABSTRACT
In ad hoc networks, routing plays a pertinent role. Deploying the appropriate routing protocol is very
important in order to achieve best routing performance and reliability. Equally important is the mobility
model that is used in the routing protocol. Various mobility models are available and each can have
different impact on the performance of the routing protocol. In this paper, we focus on this issue by
examining how the routing protocol, Optimized Link State Routing protocol, behaves as the mobility model
is varied. For this, three random mobility models, viz., random waypoint, random walk and random
direction are considered. The performance metrics used for assessment of Optimized Link State Routing
protocol are throughput, end-to-end delay and packet delivery ratio.
KEYWORDS
OLSR, Mobility model, Random Waypoint, Random Walk, Random Direction
1. INTRODUCTION
Wireless networks can be classified into infrastructure based and infrastructure less networks. In
the case of infrastructure based networks, Access Points are used for communication. They act as
routers for the nodes within their communication range. Whereas, in infrastructure less networks,
also known as, ad hoc networks, nodes act as routers. That is, such networks do not have
predesignated routers and nodes connect in a dynamic manner. A node cannot connect to all other
available nodes using single hop as the transmission range of nodes is limited and hence data is
transmitted using multi hop. A mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is a type of ad hoc network in
which nodes can change locations. It is a self configuring infrastructure less network of mobile
devices connected by wireless links [1].
The routing protocols in MANET are broadly classified into three categories, namely, proactive
protocols, reactive protocols and hybrid protocols. Proactive protocols, also known as table-
driven protocols, maintain routing information in the routing table of each node. The routing table
is populated in a proactive manner and the routing table information is transmitted to other
neighboring nodes at fixed time intervals. Few examples of proactive routing protocols are
Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) Protocol, Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector
(DSDV) Routing Protocol.
Reactive routing protocols are also known as demand driven protocols. In these protocols, prior
route information to other nodes is not maintained. Whenever a node (source node) needs to
transmit data to a destination node, the route is determined on demand. The node initiates a route
discovery process only if it has data destined to a particular node. For other nodes for which no
data is to be transmitted, routes are not computed. Examples of reactive routing protocols are
2. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
88
Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) Protocol, Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing
Protocol etc.
The third category, hybrid routing protocols, are a combination of both proactive and reactive
routing protocols. For example, proactive routing may be used to communicate with neighbors
and reactive may be used to communicate with distant nodes. Examples of hybrid routing
protocols are Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP), Core Extraction Distributed Ad Hoc Routing
(CEDAR) Protocol etc.
The performance of the varied routing protocols may be dependent on various factors; one such
key parameter that could impact routing protocols is the mobility model. The mobility model is
the one that is used to describe the pattern in which mobile users move. It also describes how the
location and velocity of the nodes change over time. Based on the mobility model being used, the
performance of a routing protocol can vary.
In this paper, we assess the impact of the various random mobility models on OLSR protocol
using the performance metrics, throughput, end-to-end delay and packet delivery ratio. The rest of
the paper is organized as follows. The OLSR protocol and the various mobility models are briefly
discussed in section 2. Section 3 consolidates the related work on the performance of routing
protocols using various mobility models. The simulation environment, performance metrics and
the simulation results are discussed in section 4. Section 5 concludes the paper.
2. OLSR AND MOBILITY MODELS
2.1. Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) Protocol
OLSR protocol is a proactive type of routing protocol. It uses Multipoint Relay (MPR) sets for
routing. For each node, a set of its neighbor nodes that have symmetric links are selected as
MPRs, which alone forward the control traffic. When a node is selected as multipoint relay, it
announces this information in the control messages at periodic intervals. Using this, routes are
formed from a given node to various destinations. Nodes that belong to MPR set cover all
symmetric strict 2-hop neighbor nodes.
In OLSR, HELLO messages and topology control messages are used. HELLO messages are
transmitted at regular intervals and they are never forwarded. The HELLO messages help in link
sensing, neighbor detection and MPR selection signaling. Link-state information of each and
every node is transmitted to all other nodes in the network via the topology control messages.
This helps the nodes to compute their routing table. Topology control messages are sent using the
MPRs.
2.2. Mobility Models
Mobility models are generally classified into five categories [2]. They are random mobility
models, mobility models with temporal dependency, mobility models with spatial dependency,
mobility models with geographic restrictions and hybrid mobility models. This classification is
summarized in figure 1 [1, 2].
In random mobility models, the nodes move independently by choosing a random direction and
speed. In the case of mobility models with temporal dependency, the movement of nodes is
affected by their movement history. In the mobility models with spatial dependency, the
movement of nodes is correlated in nature. If the mobility model limits the movement of nodes
owing to streets or obstacles, then such models fall under mobility models with geographic
3. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
89
restriction [1]. In hybrid mobility models, mobility models with spatial dependencies, temporal
dependencies and geographic restrictions are integrated [2].
Figure 1. Classification of mobility models in MANET
Of the various mobility models, three random mobility models, viz., Random Waypoint, Random
Walk and Random Direction model are considered in this study to assess the performance of
OLSR under varying mobility pattern. In the next section we elaborate on these three mobility
models.
2.2.1. Random Waypoint Mobility Model
In the Random Waypoint Mobility Model, a node selects a random position (x, y) in the
simulation area. This point serves as the destination point. A velocity (v) is chosen from a
uniformly distributed range [minspeed, maxspeed]. The node travels to the destination point with
speed v. Upon reaching the destination point, the node pauses for a specified pause time. Then
again the node repeats the above process by choosing a new destination and speed [3].
2.2.2. Random Walk Mobility Model
In random walk mobility model, nodes move by randomly choosing a speed and direction in
constant time intervals (∆t). The speed is determined from the range [minspeed, maxspeed] and
the direction (t) is chosen from the range [0, 2]. The node moves with the velocity vector (v(t)
cos(t), v(t) sin(t)). When the node reaches the simulation boundary, it bounces back to the
Hybrid
Models
Random
Waypoint
Model
Random
Walk Model
Random
Direction
Model
Gauss-
Markov
Model
Smooth
Random
Mobility
Model
Reference
Point Group
Model
Set of
Correlated
Models
Pathway
Mobility
Model
Obstacle
Mobility
Model
Mobility Models
Models with
Spatial
Dependency
Models with
Geographic
Restriction
Random
Models
Models with
Temporal
Dependency
4. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
90
simulation area. The angle of bouncing is (t) or – (t). This effect is called as border effect.
This model is also referred to as the Brownian Motion Mobility Model or Brownian Walk.
Random Walk model can also be considered as Random Waypoint model with zero pause time
[1, 3].
2.2.3. Random Direction Mobility Model
In the case of Random Direction Mobility Model, a node chooses a random direction uniformly
within the range [0, 2]. The velocity is also chosen uniformly from within the range [minspeed,
maxspeed]. Node then moves in the chosen direction until it arrives at the boundary of the
simulation area. At this point the node pauses for a specified pause time and again selects a new
direction from within the range [0, ]. Since the node is on the boundary of the simulation area,
the direction is limited to [3].
3. RELATED WORK
Various studies have been conducted so far to assess the performance of routing protocols in the
context of different mobility models.
A survey of various mobility models in cellular networks and multi-hop networks has been
carried out in [4]. Reference point group mobility model has been applied to two different
network protocol scenarios, clustering and routing. The performance of the network with different
mobility patterns and for different protocols has been studied. It is found that the performance of
the protocols varies with different mobility patterns used. In AODV and Hierarchical State
Routing (HSR), the throughput improves when the communications are restricted within the
scope of a group, whereas DSDV is not affected by group mobility and localized
communications.
The performance of DSR and AODV with reference to varying network load, mobility and
network size has been analyzed in [5]. DSR is found to outperform AODV in small networks
with low load and/or mobility, whereas AODV is more efficient with increased load and/or
mobility. However routing load is less in DSR compared to AODV. It is observed that using
congestion-related metrics and aged packets removal can improve the performance of both DSR
and AODV. The authors conclude that the interplay between routing and MAC layers affects the
performance of the protocols significantly.
The authors in [6] have studied the performance of DSR using random walk, random waypoint,
random direction and reference point group mobility models. It is observed that the performance
of the protocols varies with the different mobility models and even with the same mobility model
but with different parameters.
To create realistic movement scenarios, the authors in [7] have used obstacles to restrict node
movement and wireless transmissions. Also pathways have been constructed using Voronoi path
computation. It is observed that the obstacles and pathways affect the performance of the
protocols. AODV has been used to study the performance of routing protocol using obstacle
model and random waypoint mobility model. It is observed that the mobility model chosen
affects connectivity of the nodes, network density, packet delivery and routing overhead.
Various protocol independent metrics have been proposed to capture mobility characteristics
including spatial and temporal dependence and geographic restrictions in [8]. Random waypoint,
group mobility, freeway and Manhattan mobility models have been used to study the performance
5. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
91
of DSR, AODV and DSDV. The results indicate that different mobility patterns affect the
performance of the routing protocols. The mobility pattern influences the connectivity graph
which affects the performance of the protocol. A preliminary investigation of the common
building blocks of routing protocols was also attempted.
In [9] the authors introduced GEMM, a tool to generate mobility models that happen to be more
realistic and heterogeneous. They have compared the performance of AODV, OLSR and ZRP
with various mobility scenarios. It is observed that GEMM can generate more realistic mobility
patterns than random waypoint. Mobility pattern influences the performance of the protocols.
In [10] the authors observe that high node degree can be both an asset and a liability. On one hand
high node degree can affect scalability. On the other hand high node degree provides multiple
routing options.
The performance of DSR and AODV using various mobility models has been studied in [11].
They observe that the mobility pattern affects the performance of routing protocols and that
mobility metrics, connectivity and performance are related. When relative speed increases with
similar average spatial dependency, there is decrease in link duration and hence routing overhead
increases and throughput decreases. In the case of similar average relative speed, the spatial
dependence increases and the link duration increases, and hence there is an increase in the
throughput and a decrease in the routing overhead. DSR and AODV have highest throughput and
least overhead when reference point group mobility model is used. They conclude that mobility
pattern influences the connectivity graph which impacts the performance of the routing protocol.
In [12] the performance of AODV routing protocol using pursue group and random based entity
mobility models is studied. Pursue group mobility model has performed better than random based
entity model.
The effect of mobility models on the performance of the protocols has been analyzed in [13] both
analytically and through simulation. They present an analytical framework for the
characterization of link and use it to describe lifetime of the path and stability of the topology.
The framework describes link, path and topology dynamics as a function of node mobility. They
find that there is a diminishing effect on the protocols with increase in mobility.
The performance of On-Demand Multicast Routing Protocol, Multicast Ad hoc On-Demand
Distance Vector Routing Protocol and Adaptive Demand driven Multicast Routing Protocol have
been studied using random way point, reference point group and Manhattan mobility models in
[14]. It is evident from their results that with different mobility patterns the ranking of protocols
differ.
In [15] the authors have used Levy-Walk mobility model and Gauss-Markov model to compare
Adhoc On Demand Multipath Distance Vector (AOMDV) and OLSR routing protocols. They
observe that AOMDV gives higher packet delivery and throughput, whereas OLSR has less delay
and routing overhead in the context of varying node density. Also OLSR performs better than
AOMDV under Levy-Walk mobility model.
The authors in [16] have studied the performance of AODV, DSR, DSDV, OLSR and Dynamic
MANET On-Demand (DYMO) routing protocols using various mobility models. A fair
comparison of the capabilities and limitations of different mobility patterns has been attempted.
The performance of AODV and DSR using reference region group mobility model has been
examined in [17]. The reference region group mobility model is used to mimic group operations
6. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
92
such as group partitions and mergers. It is found that the group partitions have an impact on the
performance of the routing protocols. Frequent group partitions can downgrade the performance
of both the routing protocols under consideration. Comparatively AODV is able to tackle better
the group operations than DSR. Further AODV is more adaptive to high speed environment,
while DSR is more suitable for networks with less mobility.
The authors in [18] have compared different hierarchical (position and non-position based)
protocols using different mobility models. Position based routing protocols have performed better
compared to their counterparts with reference to packet delivery. It is observed that non-position
based routing protocols provide low packet delivery ratio and high packet loss. Further the
authors conclude that the network performance can be enhanced in the presence of a recovery
mechanism.
The authors in [19] have studied the impact of swarming behavior of nodes on the performance of
routing protocols both analytically and through simulation, and they have also proposed a Markov
swarm mobility model to characterize time-dependent changes in the network topology. They
observe that owing to swarm movement of nodes in a collaborative manner, the routing overhead
and average end-to-end delay is significantly reduced.
In [20] the authors have evaluated structured and unstructured content discovery protocols with
various mobility models. It is evident from their work that movement patterns which exhibit more
uniform distribution of nodes provide better efficiency. Limitations reduce the efficiency of the
network. Increase in node speed does not have a considerable effect on path availability. They
conclude that path availability is the most important factor affecting the efficiency of content
delivery protocols. Hence mobility is not of much concern in implementation of efficient overlay
networks. In the case of structured protocols which are not efficient for MANETs, the mobility
has a negative effect on performance. Performance is dependent on stability and optimality of
overlay in the case of structured protocols. In the case of unstructured protocols, alternative paths
can be replaced in the case of link failure and hence unstructured protocols perform better.
Three distinctive mobility models in terms of node movement behaviour have been studied by the
authors in [21]. A new measurement technique called probability or route connectivity has been
used. This metric quantifies the success rate of route established by the routing protocol.
The performance of DSR, Location Aided Routing (LAR) and Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP)
have been studied with reference to random waypoint mobility model, reference point group
mobility model, Manhattan Grid mobility model and Gauss-Markov mobility model in [22]. It is
found that the performance of routing protocols varies significantly with the mobility model
being used and also the node speed affects the network performance. Location-based routing
protocols exhibit good performance with various mobility patterns.
The authors in [23] have compared the performance of AODV, OLSR and DSDV with respect to
reference point group mobility and random waypoint mobility models. It is found that, in the case
of random waypoint mobility model, AODV shows maximum packet delivery ratio, least routing
load and MAC load. As mobility increases, OLSR performs better with respect to delay. In
reference point group mobility model, AODV has higher packet delivery ratio and lowest routing
load, whereas OLSR exhibits least delay and maximum MAC load.
The performance of AODV and DSDV using random waypoint, reference point group mobility,
Freeway and Manhattan mobility models have been analyzed in [24]. It is observed that AODV
has stable performance in all the mobility models studied. It performs best with group mobility
model and freeway model. Performance of DSDV is unstable with random waypoint, Freeway
7. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
93
and Manhattan mobility models. Performance is best in the case of Reference Point Group
Mobility model for both the protocols. AODV has high throughput and low end-to-end delay,
whereas both AODV and DSDV have relatively same packet delivery ratio. DSDV suffers from
high packet drop compared to the other protocol under consideration.
In [25] the authors have compared AODV, DSR, OLSR, DSDV and Temporally Ordered Routing
Algorithm (TORA) routing protocols using reference point group mobility (RPGM), column
mobility model (CMM) and random waypoint (RWP) mobility models. The results show that
reactive protocols perform better than proactive protocols with reference to packet delivery ratio,
end-to-end delay, normalized routing load and throughput. OLSR has got the minimum delay
whereas it is maximum in the case of DSR. Throughput is found to be maximum in AODV.
DSDV performs better in the case of packet dropper whereas it is worst in the case of AODV.
Increasing the number of nodes impacts the performance which varies based on protocols and
mobility models. DSR shows degradation as the number of nodes increases. TORA’s
performance is very minimal.
In [26] the authors have studied AODV, DSR, LAR and OLSR routing protocols with random
waypoint, reference point group mobility, Gauss Markov and Manhattan Grid mobility models.
They report that there is significant impact on the performance of the routing protocols based on
the mobility model being used. The protocols have exhibited considerable difference for different
mobility models. The choice of the mobility model has most impact on DSR and OLSR.
The performance of AODV, OLSR and gathering-based routing protocol (GRP) using random
waypoint and vector mobility models has been evaluated in [27]. OLSR performs better in terms
of throughput and end-to-end delay. In all the routing protocols studied, vector mobility model
outperforms random waypoint mobility model.
The effect of random waypoint mobility model and group mobility model for both constant bit
rate and variable bit rate traffic has been studied in [28]. They have used AODV, OLSR and ZRP
for comparison. With respect to throughput, end-to-end delay and jitter, OLSR performs better
than AODV and ZRP. Performance of ZRP is found to be the least among the three protocols.
In [29] the authors have studied the performance of random waypoint and vector mobility model
with reference to AODV, OLSR and GRP. They have concluded that OLSR performs better in
terms of throughput and end-to-end delay. It is also observed that AODV has lesser network load
in both the mobility models used for simulation.
The performance of OLSR, TORA and ZRP with reference to random waypoint mobility model,
reference point group mobility model and Manhattan mobility model has been analyzed in [30].
They have concluded that different factors such as pause time, node density and scalability affect
the performance and efficiency of the protocols. They also state that no single protocol gives
optimum efficiency.
In [31] the authors have evaluated the performance of AODV, DSR and DSDV with respect to
different network loads and various mobility models. They found that the performance of routing
protocols varies with different mobility models. DSR protocol exhibits better performance with
random waypoint mobility model but in the case of Manhattan Grid Mobility model its
performance is fair. The end-to-end delay is lowest in the case of RPGM model and it exhibits
best performance in DSDV. The authors observed that DSR routing protocol with random
waypoint mobility model is better compared to the other combinations.
8. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
94
The authors in [32] have analyzed the performance of AOMDV using random waypoint, random
direction and probabilistic random walk mobility models. Their results show that packet delivery
ratio decreases with increasing node mobility in all the mobility models. Average end-to-end
delay is also affected with varying node speed. With reference to packet delivery ratio and
average end-to-end delay, AOMDV performs better with random waypoint mobility model.
In [33] the authors have examined the performance of AODV, DSR, OLSR, DSDV and TORA
with reference to reference point group mobility model, column mobility model and random walk
mobility model. It is found that delay is least in the case of OLSR and maximum in DSR. AODV
shows high throughput whereas DSDV performs better with reference to packet dropper.
Performance of DSR declines with increase in the number of nodes, while that of TORA is very
poor compared to the other protocols under consideration.
The impact of mobility models and traffic patterns on AODV, DSDV and OLSR has been studied
using both CBR and TCP traffic patterns with respect to reference point group and Manhattan
Grid mobility models in [34]. The performance metrics used are packet delivery ratio, throughput
and end-to-end delay. It is observed that the relative ranking of protocols varies based on the
mobility model, node speed and the traffic patterns used. The authors conclude that AODV
performed better with TCP-Vegas compared to the two other protocols under consideration. Also
the performance was better with TCP traffic patterns compared to CBR traffic pattern. The end-
to-end delay was better in DSDV and OLSR when CBR traffic pattern and reference point group
mobility model is used.
Performance of AODV, OLSR and TORA using random walk mobility model and random
waypoint mobility model is compared in [35]. Different types of traffic have been used to arrive
at the results. They conclude that OLSR gives best performance in terms of throughput and load,
but has higher delay than the other two protocols. In the case of mobility model, random
waypoint mobility model is found to be better than random walk mobility model in all the three
routing protocols that have been compared.
Random waypoint and reference point group mobility models have been used to study the
performance of DSR, OLSR and TORA in [36]. The results show that reactive protocols are
better than proactive protocols in terms of packet delivery fraction, end-to-end delay and
throughput. DSR has performed better than OLSR and TORA, whereas performance of TORA is
the least among the three protocols considered. OLSR has exhibited average performance in both
the mobility models whereas DSR has performed better in random waypoint mobility model.
In this paper, we assess the impact of random waypoint, random walk and random direction
mobility models on OLSR protocol with reference to performance metrics, viz., throughput, end-
to-end delay and packet delivery ratio.
4. SIMULATION RESULTS
4.1. Simulation Environment and Performance Metrics
Simulations have been carried out using NS3, a discrete event network simulator [37]. Random
waypoint, random walk and random direction mobility models have been used to evaluate their
impact on OLSR. Simulation is run for a total of 300 seconds using 50 nodes spread over an area
of 1000m x 1000m. The speed of the nodes is varied from 10m/s to 50m/s in steps of 10m/s and
the pause time is 10 seconds. The packet size is 512 bytes and the channel capacity is 5.5 Mbps.
The MAC protocol used is 802.11b.
9. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
95
Three performance metrics, viz., throughput, end-to-end delay and packet delivery ratio (PDR)
are examined. Throughput refers to the average rate at which data packet is delivered successfully
from one node to another. It is usually measured in bits per second. End-to-end delay is the time
taken for a data packet to reach its destination. It is the difference between the time a packet is
sent and the time the packet is received. Packet delivery ratio is the ratio of data packets
successfully delivered to the destinations to those generated by the sources. It is calculated by
dividing the number of packets received by the destination by the number of packets sent by the
source.
4.2. Result Analysis
4.2.1. Performance of OLSR using the three mobility models over varying node speed
The simulation results obtained using OLSR with random waypoint, random walk and random
direction mobility models over varying node speed are shown in figures 2, 3 and 4. Figure 2
presents the results of throughput for varying node speed from 10 m/s to 50 m/s. From the figure,
it is evident that the performance of OLSR with respect to throughput using random waypoint and
random walk mobility models is almost similar with very little difference. But as the node speed
increases the throughput using random waypoint mobility model is found to be consistent
whereas random walk shows decline in the throughput. In the case of random direction mobility
model, as the node speed increases there is substantial drop in the throughput.
Figure 2. Throughput of OLSR using three mobility models over varying speed
The delay incurred by OLSR protocol using the three mobility models under consideration is
shown in figure 3. With reference to end-to-end delay, the OLSR protocol using random
waypoint mobility model exhibits least delay and it is consistent with increase in speed. In the
case of random walk mobility model, delay is greater than random waypoint mobility model, but
it is far better than random direction mobility model, which exhibits high end-to-end delay as the
node speed increases.
10. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
96
Figure 3. End-to-end delay in OLSR using three mobility models over varying speed
Figure 4 depicts the packet delivery ratio of OLSR protocol under the three mobility models. As
is evident from the figure, random direction mobility model provides better packet delivery ratio
than the other two mobility models, but at the cost of low throughput and high end-to-end delay.
Among the other two mobility models, random walk provides better packet delivery ratio than
random waypoint. The performance of random waypoint mobility model with reference to packet
delivery ratio improves with increase in node speed, whereas random walk exhibits inconsistent
packet delivery ratio with varying speed.
Figure 4. Packet Delivery Ratio in OLSR using three mobility models over varying speed
4.2.2. Performance of OLSR using the three mobility models over the simulation time
The results obtained for node speed 50m/s over the entire period of simulation time with respect
to throughput, end-to-end delay and packet delivery ratio is depicted in figures 5, 6 and 7
respectively. As is evident from figure 5, random waypoint mobility model and random walk
11. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
97
mobility model are comparatively similar with reference to throughput. But the throughput using
random waypoint mobility model is consistent, while that of random walk shows gradual decline
over time. End-to-end delay, as shown in figure 6, is lowest in the case of random waypoint
mobility model and highest when random direction mobility model is used. Random walk is
better than random direction with respect to end-to-end delay and with the passage of time
decrease in end-to-end delay is observed. From the results of packet delivery ratio shown in
figure 7, random direction seems to outperform the other two mobility models under
consideration, but it exhibits low throughput and high end-to-end delay. Random walk mobility
model provides better Packet Delivery Ratio than random waypoint mobility model.
Figure 5. Throughput of OLSR using three mobility models over simulation time
Figure 6. End-to-end Delay in OLSR using three mobility models over simulation time
12. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
98
Figure 7. Packet Delivery Ratio in OLSR using three mobility models over simulation time
5. CONCLUSION
The impact of the various random mobility models, viz., random waypoint, random walk and
random direction, on OLSR protocol with respect to throughput, end-to-end delay and packet
delivery ratio has been examined. From the simulation results, it is clear that each of the mobility
models outperforms the other two with respect to any one of the parameters throughput, end-to-
end delay and packet delivery ratio. Considering the three parameters together, the performance
of random direction mobility model does not seem to be better than the other two mobility
models. It provides better packet delivery, but at the cost of lower throughput and higher end-to-
end delay. As far as random walk and random waypoint is considered, OLSR with random
waypoint provides good throughput and low end-to-end delay. But with respect to packet delivery
ratio, random walk outperforms random waypoint mobility model.
It is evident from the results that the performance of OLSR under various metrics varies from one
mobility model to another. There is significant impact of the mobility model on the routing
protocol. In the future, random waypoint can be compared with group mobility models to see its
effect on the routing protocol.
REFERENCES
[1] Fan Bai and Ahmed Helmy, “A Survey of Mobility Models,” in Wireless Adhoc Networks.
Available: http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~helmy/papers/Survey-Mobility-Chapter-1.pdf
[2] Nils Aschenbruck, Elmar Gerhards-Padilla, and Peter Martini, (2008) “A survey on mobility models
for performance analysis in tactical mobile networks”, Journal of Telecommunications and
Information Technology, No. 2, pp. 54-61.
[3] Emre Atsan and Oznur Ozkasap, “A Classification and Performance Comparison of Mobility
Models for Ad Hoc Networks,” in Ad-Hoc, Mobile, and Wireless Networks, Springer-Verlag Berlin
Heidelberg, 2006, pp. 444-457.
[4] Xiaoyan Hong, Mario Gerla, Guangyu Pei, and Ching-Chuan Chiang, (1999) “A Group Mobility
Model for Ad HocWireless Networks”, in Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Workshop on
Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile systems (MSWiM '99), pp. 53-60.
13. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
99
[5] Charles E. Perkins, Elizabeth M. Royer, Samir R. Das, and Mahesh K. Marina, (2001) “Performance
Comparison of Two On-Demand Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Networks”, IEEE Personal
Communications, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 16-28.
[6] Tracy Camp, Jeff Boleng, and Vanessa Davies, (2002) “A Survey of Mobility Models for Ad Hoc
Network Research”, Wireless Communication & Mobile Computing, Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 483-502.
[7] Amit Jardosh, Elizabeth M. Belding-Royer, Kevin C. Almeroth, and Subhash Suri, (2003) “Towards
Realistic Mobility Models For Mobile Ad hoc Networks”, in Proceedings of the 9th Annual
International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom ’03), pp. 217-229.
[8] Fan Bai, Narayanan Sadagopan, and Ahmed Helmy, (2003) “The IMPORTANT framework for
analyzing the Impact of Mobility on Performance Of RouTing protocols for Adhoc NeTworks”, Ad
Hoc Networks, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 383-403.
[9] Michael Feeley, Norman Hutchinson, and Suprio Ray, “Realistic Mobility for Mobile Ad Hoc
Network Simulation”, in Ad-Hoc, Mobile, and Wireless Networks, Springer-Verlag Berlin
Heidelberg, 2004, pp. 324–329.
[10] Brent Ishibashi and Raouf Boutaba, (2005) “Topology and mobility considerations in mobile ad hoc
networks”, Ad Hoc Networks, Vol. 3, No. 6, pp. 762-776.
[11] Geetha Jayakumar and Gopinath Ganapathi, (2008) “Reference Point Group Mobility and Random
Waypoint Models in Performance Evaluation of MANET Routing Protocols”, Journal of Computer
Systems, Networks, and Communications, Vol. 2008.
[12] S H Manjula, C N Abhilash, Shaila K, K R Venugopal, and L M Patnaik, (2008) “Performance of
AODV Routing Protocol using Group and Entity Mobility Models in Wireless Sensor Networks”, in
Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists Vol II
IMECS 2008.
[13] Xianren Wu, Hamid R. Sadjadpour, J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, and Hui Xu, (2008) “A hybrid view of
mobility in MANETs: Analytical models and simulation study”, Computer Communications, Vol.
31, No. 16, pp. 3810–3821.
[14] R. Manoharan and E. Ilavarasan, (2010) “Impact of Mobility on the Performance of Multicast
Routing Protocols in MANET”, International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN),
Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 110-119.
[15] S. Gowrishankar, Subir Kumar Sarkar, and T.G. Basavaraju, (2010) “Analysis of AOMDV and
OLSR Routing Protocols Under Levy-Walk Mobility Model and Gauss-Markov Mobility Model for
Ad Hoc Networks”, International Journal on Computer Science and Engineering (IJCSE), Vol. 2,
No. 4, pp. 979-986.
[16] F. Maan and N. Mazhar, (2011) “MANET routing protocols vs mobility models: A performance
evaluation”, in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future
Networks (ICUFN), pp. 179-184.
[17] Yan Zhang, Chor Ping Low, and Jim Mee Ng, (2011) “Performance Evaluation of Routing Protocols
on the Reference Region Group Mobility Model for MANET”, Wireless Sensor Network, Vol. 3,
No. 3, pp. 92-105.
[18] Atta ur Rehman Khan, Shahzad Ali, Saad Mustafa, and Mazliza Othman, (2012) “Impact of mobility
models on clustering based routing protocols in mobile WSNs”, in Proceedings of the 10th
International Conference on Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), pp. 366-370.
[19] Jun Li, Yifeng Zhou, Louise Lamont, F. Richard Yu, and Camille-Alain Rabbath, (2012) “Swarm
mobility and its impact on performance of routing protocols in MANETs”, Computer
Communications, Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 709-719.
[20] Mahmood Fathy, Kaamran Rahemifar, Hamideh Babaei, Morteza Romoozi, and Reza Berangy,
(2012) “Impact of Mobility on Performance of P2P Content Discovery Protocols Over MANET”,
Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 10, pp. 642-649.
[21] Megat Zuhairi, Haseeb Zafar, and David Harle, (2012) “The Impact of Mobility Models on the
Performance of Mobile Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocol”, IETE Technical Review, Vol. 29, No. 5,
pp. 414-420.
[22] Misbah Jadoon, Sajjad Madani, Khizar Hayat, and Stefan Mahlknecht, (2012) “Location and Non-
Location based Ad-Hoc Routing Protocols using Various Mobility Models: A Comparative Study”,
The International Arab Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 418-427.
[23] Neha Rani, Preeti Sharma, and Pankaj Sharma, (2012) “Performance Comparison of Various
Routing Protocols in Different Mobility Models”, International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor &
Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC), Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 73-85.
14. International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2014
100
[24] R. Mohan, C. Rajan, and N. Shanthi, (2012) “A Stable Mobility Model Evaluation Strategy for
MANET Routing Protocols”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and
Software Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 12, pp. 58-65.
[25] Sunil Kumar Kaushik, Kavita Chahal, Sukhbir Singh, and Sandeep Dhariwal, (2012) “Performance
Evaluation of Mobile Ad Hoc Networks with Reactive and Proactive Routing Protocols and
Mobility Models”, International Journal of Computer Applications, Vol. 54, No. 17, pp. 28-35.
[26] K.P. Hrudya, Brajesh Kumar, and Prabhakar Gupta, (2013) “Impact of Mobility on Different
Routing Approaches in MANETs”, International Journal of Computer Applications, Vol. 67, No.
23, pp. 18-22.
[27] Narinder Pal and Renu Dhir, (2013) “Analyze the Impact of Mobility on Performance of Routing
Protocols in MANET Using OPNET Modeller”, International Journal of Advanced Research in
Computer Science and Software Engineering, Vol. 3, No. 6, pp. 768-772.
[28] Shubhangi Mishra, Ashish Xavier Das, and A.K. Jaisawal, (2013) “Effect of Mobility and Different
Data Traffic in Wireless Ad-hoc Network through QualNet”, International Journal of Engineering
and Advanced Technology (IJEAT), Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 364-368.
[29] Sohajdeep Singh and Parveen Kakkar, (2013) “Investigating the Impact of Random Waypoint AND
Vector Mobility Models on AODV, OLSR and GRP Routing Protocols in MANET”, International
Journal of Computer Applications, Vol. 63, No. 3, pp. 30-34.
[30] Sunil Kumar Singh, Rajesh Duvvuru, and Amit Bhattcharjee, (2013) “Performance Evaluation of
Proactive, Reactive and Hybrid Routing Protocols With Mobility Model in MANETs”, International
Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology (IJRET), Vol. 2, No. 8, pp. 254-259.
[31] Abdul Karim Abed, Gurcu Oz, and Isik Aybay, (2014) “Influence of mobility models on the
performance of data dissemination and routing in wireless mobile ad hoc networks”, Computers and
Electrical Engineering, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 319-329.
[32] Indrani Das, D.K Lobiyal, and C.P Katti, (2014) “Effect of Node Mobility on AOMDV Protocol in
MANET”, International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN), Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 91-99.
[33] Karmveer Singh and Vidhi Sharma, (2014) “Performance Analysis of MANET with Reactive and
Proactive Routing Protocols and Mobility Models”, International Journal for Research in Applied
Science and Engineering Technology (IJRASET), Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 304-312.
[34] Mohamed Wahed, Hassan Al-Mahdi, Tarek M Mahmoud, and Hassan Shaban, (2014) “The Effect
of Mobility Models and Traffic Patterns on the Performance of Routing Protocols in MANETs”,
International Journal of Computer Applications, Vol. 101, No. 9, pp. 52-58.
[35] Ramanpreet Kaur and Rakesh Kumar, (2014) “Comparison Study of Routing Protocol by Varying
Mobility and Traffic (CBR, VBR and TCP) Using Random Walk & Random Way Point Models”,
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 177-183.
[36] Vasudha Sharma and Sanjeev Khambra, (2014) “Performance Comparison of DSR, OLSR and
TORA Routing Protocols”, International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, Vol. 3, No.
8, pp. 411-415.
[37] NS3, Network Simulator 3, http://www.nsnam.org.