This document analyzes the performance of two routing protocols (AODV and DSDV) under two mobility models (Manhattan grid model and RPGM model) in a vehicular ad hoc network. A group of students conducted simulations in NS2 to evaluate the protocols based on three quality of service parameters (packet delivery ratio, network throughput, end-to-end delay) under different scenarios. The results showed that AODV performed much better than DSDV in all parameters, with DSDV being highly affected by node mobility. Future work could involve analyzing another routing protocol instead of DSDV and increasing the voice call duration in simulations.

1. Performance analysis of two
Different types of routing protocols
for two Different mobility models
GROUP MEMBERS:
ASIF ALI CHANNA 2K12/TCT/12
IMAMUDDIN MAHAR 2K12/TCT/32
IQRA ANWAR ARIAN 2K12/TCT/91
ASGHAR ALI NAPAR 2K12/TCT/11
SUPERVISOR NAME:
NISAR AHMED MEMON
ASSISTANT PROFESSER
INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY,
UNIVERSITY OF SINDH, JAMSHORO
1

2. Contents
 Introduction
 Aims and Objectives
 Scope of Project
 Development Methodology
 Final Results
 Conclusion and Future Work
 References.
2

3. Introduction
 VANET are created by applying the principle of MANET.
 Vehicular ad hoc network (VANET) is an example of mobile ad-hoc
network where vehicle are used as a node communication that is
wireless infrastructure-less network where no any concept of any fixed
radio connected centrally with mobile nodes.
 Vehicular ad hoc network which use vehicles as mobile nodes are a
subclass of mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) to provide
communications among nearby vehicles and between vehicles.
3

4. Aims and Objectives
 To design scenario for Vehicular ad-hoc Network
according different situation
 To analyze the behavior of protocol when constant load
of nodes with different mobility pattern of nodes
 Use Constant Bit Rat application for voice-like data traffic
4

5. Scope of Project
 Applying Routing Protocols
1) Ad-hoc on demand distance Vectors
2) destination Sequenced Distance Vector
 Multiple movement of vehicles are used in to two different scenarios of i.e.
Manhattan and Random group mobility.
 We evaluate the performance of the delivery of the voice-like data through
multi-hop wireless paths of Vehicular Ad-hoc Network.
 Specifically, the test consisting of voice traffic over the User data gram
protocols simultaneously that has not much studied.
 Number of node150
 Three of Quality of service parameter
5

6. Design and Development
Methodology
 Topology based protocols
 Ad-hoc on demand distance Vector
 Also known as Reactive (On-Demand) protocol,
 Destination Sequenced Distance Vector
 Also known as Proactive (Table-Driven) protocol,
6

7. We have used some tools in this project
 NS2
 NSG
 Cygwin
 Call load generator
 MS excel
7
Methodology Continue

8.  Packet Delivery Ratio
Packet delivery ratio the ratio of the number of delivered data packet to
the destination.
 Network Throughput
Network throughput is the rate of successful message delivery over a
communication channel.
 End to End Delay
End-to-end delay refers to the time taken for a packet to be transmitted
across a network from source to destination
8
Three Quality of service parameters
Quality of Service Parameter

9. Mobility Model
 Reference Point Group Mobility Model (RPGM)
 The Manhattan Gird Model (MG)
9

10. 10
Scenario No:01

11. 11
Nodes 150
Environment Area Size 2000f, 700m
MAC 802.11
Antenna Height 1.5
Antenna Type Omni Antenna
Channel Radio Wireless Channel
Agent UDP with Null
Queue type Drop tail
Queue size 50
Mobility Model Manhattan
Simulation Time 300sec
Traffic source CBR
Routing protocols AODV/DSDV
Table of Scenario No:01

12. 12
Scenario No:02

13. 13
Nodes 150
Group of Node 25
Group Member 5
MAC 802.11
Antenna Height 1.5
Antenna Type Omni Antenna
Channel Wireless channel
Agent UDP with Null
Queue Type Drop tail
Queue Size 50
Mobility Model RPGM
Simulation Time 300sec
Traffic CBR
Routing Protocol AODV/DSDV
Table of Scenario No:02

14. 14
Reference Point Group Mobility Model
 Each individual mobile node (MN) within the group
 The group identified
 the logical center
 of all the mobility behavior of other nodes.
 Group leader (Vt)
 the time of movement
 group positions are changed with respect to the group leader
 Individual reference points move from time t0 to t0 + ∆t
T=t0 Vt
Vt
T=t0 + ∆t

15. 15
The Manhattan Mobility Model
 A grid road topology
 Every node moves just on predefined path
 Arguments –u & -v
 # of blocks

16. 16
Call load generator

17. 17
End to End Delay of AODV and DSDV
AODV
End to End to delay Ad hoc on-
Demand Distance Vector
RGMP, Manhannten Mobility
model
End to End to Delay Destination
Sequenced Distance Vector RGMP,
Manhannten mobility model

18. 18
Throughput of AODV and DSDV
Throughput destination
sequenced distance vector of
RGMP and Manhannten
Mobility
Throughput ad hoc on-demand
distance vector of RGMP and
Manhannten Mobility

19. 19
PDR of AODV and DSDV
AODV
AOVD PDR of RGMP and
Manhannten Mobility
Destination Sequenced Distance
Vector PDR of RGMP and
Manhannten Mobility

20. Conclusion
 The ad hoc on-demand distance vector performance remained much better than
that of destination sequenced distance vector in all QoS parameters.
 we have evaluated the performance of ad hoc on-demand distance vector and
destination sequenced distance vector protocols in VANET when put into stress to
transfer general data between running vehicles
 The destination sequenced distance vector protocol was found very affected with
the mobility. with high mobility the performance of destination sequenced distance
vector was embarrassingly low.
20

21. Future work
 DSDV is highly affected to speed so another routing
protocol can be analyzing instead of DSDV.
 We have limited voice calls e.g. 10 sec for emergency
message, in future it can be increased. Common traffic
may also use the voice can facility for communication to
each other.
21

22. References
 [1] Xu, Shouzhi, et al. "QoS evaluation of VANET routing protocols."
Journal of Networks 8.1 (2013): 132-139.
 [2] Liang, Wenshuang, et al. "Vehicular ad hoc networks: architectures,
research issues, methodologies, challenges, and trends." International
Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks (2014).
 [3] Agrawal, C. P., O. P. Vyas, and Manoj Kumar Tiwari. "Evaluation of
Varrying Mobility Models & Network loads on destination sequenced
distance vector protocol of MANETs." arXiv preprint
arXiv:0912.2284 (2009).
 [4] Ababneh, Nedal, and Houda Labiod. "A performance analysis of
VANETs routing protocols using different mobility models." Wireless
Communications, Networking and Information Security (WCNIS), 2010
IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 2010.
22