Technical Review on Different Applications, Challenges and Security in VANET

JoMTRA (2017) 21-30 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 21
Journal of Multimedia Technology & Recent Advancements
ISSN: 2349-9028 (Online)
Volume 4, Issue 3
www.stmjournals.com
Technical Review on Different Applications, Challenges
and Security in VANET
Pallavi Agarwal*
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Madhav Institute of Technology and Science,
Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India
Abstract
Vehicular ad-hoc networks (VANETs) technology has turned out as a vital research field
throughout the most recent couple of years. VANETs are the likely an impacting way to deal
with giving security of driver and different applications for the activity conditions and
additionally travelers. Being dynamic in nature, it created the network, according to the
condition and requirement of the users and provides consistent communication between the
vehicles. Due to its excessive advantages, it is highly susceptible to numerous attacks and
security in VANET should be taken into consideration. This paper presented the security
issues such as authenticity, integrity, availability, confidentiality, anonymity and non-
repudiation to provide the secure communication between Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) and
Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I). Numerous research works have been done to recover the
performance and security of this network. The fundamental point of this paper is the several
security challenges and the applications of VANETs.
Keywords: MANET, Overview of VANETs, ITS, Applications, Challenges and Security
*Author for Correspondence E-mail: pallaviagarwal015@gmail.com
INTRODUCTION
VANET might be a specific category of
Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) that offers
communication between the vehicles and the
vehicles and roadside infrastructure. VANET
differs from MANET because it provides
advanced quality of nodes, bigger scale
networks, geographically unnatural topology
and frequent network fragmentation. There are
no fixed infrastructure networks and have
confidence the vehicles themselves for
implementing any network practicality. A
VANET may be a reorganized network as each
node accomplishes the functions of host and
router.
It is the technology [1] of building a secure
network between vehicles, i.e., vehicles
communicate to every alternative and pass
information to another vehicle. The most
favorable position of VANET communication
is the enhanced driver's safety by virtue of
exchanging warning messages among vehicles.
VANET security is essential because of an
inadequately planned VANET is vulnerable to
organize to network attacks and this
successively compromises the protection of
drivers. Security systems have to make sure
that transmission comes from an approved
source and not interfered in the path by
different sources. Security frameworks need to
ensure that transmission originates from an
approved source and not altered in the course
by various sources.
Accidents can be avoided if the vehicles follow
the traffic rules and road limit. The malicious
node could spread out spam messages and send
false messages to make matters like false data
of collision and theft and heavy traffic.
VANET has become a rising space of
investigation. Researchers have put lots of
efforts [2] in this field to create the robust plan
and the implementation of VANET network
environment. With the expanding amount of
the vehicles, streets can most likely get more
rushful. Therefore, it is exceptionally important
to expand street protection and decrease
movement blockage. In VANET, the
communication is built up by exchanging the
refreshed data about the street and movement
conditions to avoid road accidents and efficient
result of traffic. VANET is utilized to give the
assurance and movement reports to the clients

Technical Review on Different Applications in VANET Pallavi Agarwal
about congested driving conditions,
earthquake, tsunami, etc. for lessening the road
accidents, fuel consumption and provides safe
driving atmosphere. Figure 1. shows the
infrastructure of MANET and VANET.
OVERVIEW OF VANET
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSs)
In intelligent transportation systems, each
vehicle broadcast data [3] to the vehicular
network or transportation company by having
the part of the sender, receiver, and the router
by using the data to authenticate safe, free-flow
of traffic. Vehicles should be equipped with a
few variations of radio interface or Onboard
Unit (OBU) for communication to occur
between vehicles and Road Side Units (RSUs)
that enables ad hoc short-range wireless
networks to be created [4]. Vehicles should
even be fitted with hardware that permits the
data with the precise location of the vehicle
such as Global Positioning System (GPS) or a
Differential Global Positioning System
(DGPS) receiver. RSUs are immobile and are
associated with the backbone network, which
should be in place to encourage
communication. The distribution and number
of roadside units should be relying on the
communication protocol is to be used. Be that
as it may, a few protocols need roadside units
to be allocated similarly throughout the full
road network, some need roadside units
exclusively at intersections, while others
require roadside units solely at region borders.
In spite of the fact that it's safe to expect that
infrastructure exists to some extent and
vehicles have access to that occasionally.
The probable communication structure of
intelligent transportation frameworks integrates
inter-vehicle and vehicle-to-roadside
communications. Inter-vehicle and vehicle-to-
roadside communications rely upon exact and
forward information with respect to the
neighboring geographical area, which in turn,
needs the employment of accurate positioning
systems and elegant communication protocols
for exchanging data. In this network, the
communication medium [5] is shared,
extremely undependable, and with constrained
bandwidth. The elegant communication
protocols should guarantee quick and reliable
delivery of information to all or any vehicles
within the section. It's worth remarkable that
Intra vehicle communication uses technologies
such as IEEE 802.15.1 (Bluetooth), IEEE
802.15.3 (Ultra-wide Band) and IEEE 802.15.4
(Zigbee) that may be used to support wireless
communication within a vehicle, however, this
can be outside the scope of this paper and
cannot be mentioned additional.
Fig. 1: Architecture of MANET and VANET.

Volume 4, Issue 3
Inter-vehicle Communication
The inter-vehicle communication design
utilizes multi-hop multi-cast/broadcast to
spread traffic activity associated data over
numerous hops to an extensive number
receiver. In an intelligent transportation
system, vehicles want to solely be concerned
with activity on the road ahead and very rates
and increased delivery times [6]. Intelligent
broadcasting with implicit acknowledgment
addresses the issues characteristic in naïve
broadcasting by limiting the quantity of
messages broadcast for a given emergency
event. If the event-detecting vehicle receives an
analogous message from behind, it accepts that
a smallest of one vehicle has received it in the
back and ceases broadcasting. The idea is that
the vehicle in the back will be liable for
moving the message on to the remainder of the
vehicles. If a vehicle receives a message from a
lot of than one supply it'll act on the primary
message solely.
Vehicle-to-roadside Communication
The vehicle-to-roadside communication
configuration characterizes one-hop broadcast
wherever the roadside unit sends a broadcast
message to all or any equipped vehicles in the
segment. Vehicle-to-roadside communication
configuration offers a high bandwidth link
between vehicles and roadside units. The
roadside units could also be placed each
kilometer or less, enabling higher data rates to
be maintained in serious traffic. Let's say, once
broadcasting dynamic speed limits, the
roadside unit can verify the acceptable
regulation, according to its internal timetable
and traffic conditions. The roadside unit can
periodically broadcast a message containing
the regulation and can compare any geographic
or directional limits with vehicle knowledge to
see if a speed limit warning applies to any of
the vehicles within the section. If a vehicle
violates the specified regulation, a broadcast is
delivered to the vehicle within the type of
auditory or visual warning, requesting that the
driver reduce his speed.
APPLICATIONS OF VANET
Safety Applications
Examples of vehicle-to-vehicle safety
communication might include collision
warning, road obstacle warning, cooperative
driving, intersection collision warning, and
lane modification assistance [7]. There are two
varieties of safety messages flow into within
the control channel, (e.g., of DSRC) and might
be classified depending on, however, they're
generated: event-driven and periodic. The
primary ones are the results of the detection of
an unsafe position, (e.g., an automobile crash,
the proximity of vehicles at high speed, etc.).
Periodic messages instead may be seen as
preventive messages in terms of safety, and
their info can also be utilized by alternative
(non-safety) applications, (e.g., traffic
monitoring) or protocols, (e.g., routing).
Periodic message exchange (also known as
beaconing) is required to form vehicles aware
of their surroundings. Thus, they'll be ready to
avoid an emergency or unsafe thing even
before they seem. Therefore, beacon messages
primarily contain the state of the sending
vehicle, i.e., position, direction, speed, etc., and
also aggregated information relating to the state
of their neighbors. It is affordable to assume
that these periodic messages can be sent in a
very broadcast fashion since the messages'
content will be helpful for all vehicles around.
Within the following, we tend to return to
discuss the previous connected works making
an attempt to provide safety applications.
MAC Layer Issues
As stated before, event-driven messages have
to have higher priority than periodic and
comfort messages. Therefore, some
mechanisms for service differentiation and
admission management are required. Within
the alternative words, we tend to may outline
three levels of priority: event-driven safety
messages, beaconing safety messages and
comfort messages, in decreasing order.
Therefore, in the beginning, the analysis and
trade community should have standardized
typical for MAC layer in VANETs. There are
some promising MAC techniques for future
VANETs [8].
Message Dissemination
As a result of specific characteristics of safety
messages, broadcasting might be the single
possible means for message exchange.
Therefore, it might be possible to have
complete coverage of all or any relevant

vehicles. Message forwarding will enable to
spread the warning message to all vehicles
outside the radio transmission range of a single
hop [9].
Clustering
A neighbor of the vehicles should be clustered
into manageable units, is crucial to realize
economical and reliable safety
communications. Without boundary lines
among vehicles:
• Several vehicles will interfere with one
another in contention for transmissions in
radio bandwidth.
• All messages might propagate all over,
flooding the system with messages.
Although within the literature [10] there are
several clustering algorithms planned in a
vehicle network, wherever nodes could also be
densely settled and lined on roadways, the
traditional clustering methods might not be
effective to make economical groups and
organize vehicles in clusters. Chen and Cai
[11] planned a completely unique grouping
(clustering) technique for VANETs called
Local Peer Groups (LPG). There are two
alternatives for the proposed grouping they are
static and dynamic LPG. Also, application
level clustering has been mentioned by
Reumerman et al. [12] that considers the
concern of cluster managing in the application
layer.
Power Assignment
However, mobile nodes exchange information
with their neighbors and network topology is
formed. The topology varies with time as users
move, radio channel characteristics vary and
users might be a part of or leave the network.
It's accepted that once user density is low, a
high proportion of nodes could also be isolated
or form isolated clusters. It's possible to
influence this problem by increasing
transmission power, so the nodes can
communicate in less population. On the other
hand, if the user density is just too high, nodes
have to compete for radio transmission
resources and also the average quantity of
radio capacity per user could also be too small.
This problem will be approached by reducing
the transmission power so, in a given area,
fewer nodes can compete for the radio
channel.
Security Applications
Besides above applications, there are many
other applications which are also related to the
safety of the vehicles or the drivers. These
applications handle all safety connected
problems like road conditions, atmospheric
condition, monitor alternative vehicles within
the network, etc. Some of the security
applications are mentioned below:
Emergency Electronic Brake Light (EEBL)
The Emergency Electronic brake light (EEBL)
application permits a vehicle to broadcast a
self-generated emergency event to encompass
vehicles. Upon receiving the event data, the
receiving vehicle determines the relevancy of
the event and if applicable, provides a warning
to the driver so as to avoid a crash. This
application is especially helpful once the
driver's line of sight is blocked by alternative
vehicles or terrible weather conditions, (e.g.,
fog, significant rain).
Fig. 2: Emergency Braking.

Volume 4, Issue 3
Once a vehicle brake toughly, the EEBL
application conveys this data to
surrounding vehicles via one or additional
Basic Safety Messages. The current brake
lamp goes on once the driver applies the
brake (Figure 2). The EEBL application won't
solely enhance the range, however, conjointly
may give necessary information like
acceleration/deceleration rate and time taken.
At present, brake lamps do not differentiate
levels of speed and are solely helpful as so
much rearward as the line of sight permits.
This application is extremely crucial to
prevent the crash. First two cars concerned in
an accident could take profit from EEBL,
however, the remainder of the cars within the
network will avoid the crash.
Post Crash Notifications
Vehicles met with accidents will broadcast
messages about its position to neighboring
vehicles (Figure 3). It will send messages to
the highway patrol for seeking more help
[13].
Collision Avoidance
Improving collision avoidance application
reduces road accidents to a good extent. By
mounting sensors at the RSU information are
often collected, processed and warning
messages are often forwarded to the vehicles
to avoid a collision. Various ways are often
followed to avoid collision like to warn
vehicles concerning violating traffic signals,
low bridge warning, wrong side driving alert
etc.
Road Hazard Control Notification
This application informs the vehicles
concerning the geographical features of the
road resembling having a pointy curve ahead
or occurrence of a landslide, etc. Sensors are
often mounted on RSU to capture data
concerning wild animals within the roads
running through forests. There could also be
cases, once dangerous animals cross the road
or halt on the road the data are often broadcast
to the encircling vehicles so the vehicles will
be prevented from moving ahead.
Cooperative Collision Warning
Cooperative Collision Warning (CCW), that
provides a dynamic safety mechanism for
vehicles on highways, is enforced by
exchanging static and dynamic vehicle
parameters with neighboring vehicles through
inter-vehicle wireless communications.
Received info isn't solely used for calculating
the relative safety distance between
neighboring (Figure 4). The CCW conception
provides warnings or position awareness
displays to drivers based on info concerning
the motions of neighboring vehicles obtained
by wireless communications from those
vehicles, while not use any sensors. Collision
Warning Systems share a typical need: the
vehicle must realize the locations and motions
of all the neighboring vehicles, representing
the state of the vehicle neighborhood.
Slow/Stop Vehicle Advisor
A slow or a halted vehicle will send warning
signals/messages to the encircling vehicles
within the network [13].
Fig. 3: Post Warning.

Fig. 4: Cooperative Warning.
Comfort Applications
Generally, four services that have immediate
application for comfort problems are unicast,
multi-cast, anycast and scan. Consider a
vehicle want to get information regarding
some remote region, the vehicle/controller
needing the knowledge initial queries its own
proximity (multi-cast) to see if a nearby
vehicle happens to have this info. Any vehicle
having such info can respond (unicast with
approximate/precise location). If no one
replies among an explicit quantity of your
time, the vehicle/controller sends a question to
any vehicle within the remote region (anycast).
Receivers within the remote region with this
information will respond. The response is
disseminated as unicast with the
approximate/precise location, or multi-cast if
caching is desired.
Another application is mobile web access.
Fixed location web gateways could also be
placed on roads. A vehicle wants to access the
net initial propagates a question through a
locality for gateways (scan). Gateways
receiving the query will reply to the requesting
vehicle (unicast with approximate location).
The requesting vehicle picks one responder
and begins to move with it. The
communication from the vehicle to the
gateway is unicast with precise location while
the reverse direction is unicast with an
approximate location. Because of distinctive
networking characteristics of VANETs as
represented before in this paper, data
dissemination, especially, comfort messages
come in the shadow of a category of routing
methods which treat the matter in distributed
networks. Within the following, we tend to in
short introduce these algorithms and
investigate their relevance to VANETs. Data
delivery in ad-hoc network heavily depends on
the routing protocol, that has been extensively
studied for several years.
Since the network diameter in VANETs is
comparatively tiny, there have to be alternative
methods for information delivery in-vehicle
networks and ancient algorithms are not
applicable. To manage disconnections on
distributed ad hoc networks, researchers [14]
adopt the concept of carrying and forward,
wherever nodes carry the packet once routes
do not exist, and forward the packet to the new
receiver that moves into its section. There
exist three vital classes of information delivery
protocols which might be utilized in
companion with carrying and forward
mechanism in VANETs: Geographical
forwarding, Trajectory Forwarding,
Opportunistic forwarding, that are mentioned
in short in following. In addition, recently
some algorithms are conferred that use the mix
of 2 or 3 of the mentioned mechanisms
[15,16].
Geographic Forwarding
Geographic routing uses nodes’ positions as

Volume 4, Issue 3
their addresses, and forwards packets (when
possible) in a very greedy manner towards the
destination. The most broadly illustrious
proposal is GFG/GPSR [17]. One in all the
key challenges in geographic routing is the
method to accomplish dead-ends, wherever
greedy routing fails as a result of a node has
no neighbor closer to the destination; a range
of ways (such as perimeter routing in
GPSR/GFG) is projected for this. A lot of
recently, GOAFR+ [18] proposes a technique
for routing around voids that's each
asymptotically worst case ideal in addition to
average case economical. Geographic routing
is scalable, as nodes solely keep state for his or
her neighbors, and supports an entirely general
any-to-any communication pattern without
explicit path formation. This forwarding
strategy can be utilized in VANETs for each
unicasting and multi-casting [19].
Trajectory Forwarding
This mechanism [20] directs messages on
predefined trajectories. It absolutely was
presented to work well in a very dense
network. Despite their sparseness, V2V
networks have to be a natural application of
trajectory-based forwarding as a result of
messages are moving on the road graph.
Trajectory forwarding will facilitate limit
information propagation in specific ways and
therefore, scale back message overhead. A
forwarding trajectory is such as a path covering
from the source to the destination area. The
street organize is preoccupied with a
coordinated chart with hubs speaking to
crossing points and edges speaking to street
fragments. Geological sending tries to draw the
message topographically closer to the goal. For
a specially appointed system conveyed in an
extremely two-dimensional space,
topographical separation is regularly delineated
as Cartesian separation [21]. In any case, in
V2V systems geological separation ought to be
sketched out as diagram remove [22].
Opportunistic Forwarding
This system as instructed by Chen et al. [23],
targets networks wherever an end-to-end path
cannot be accepted to exist. Messages are
holding on and forwarded as opportunities
present themselves. Once a message is
forwarded to a different node, a duplicate
could stay with the original and be forwarded
once later to enhance reliability. Some
straightforward implementations, e.g., two
nodes exchange information whenever they
will communicate [24], work well if the
information needs to be propagated to
everyone. However, they're inefficient if a
message is to be delivered to some specific
receivers, e.g., those in a very sure region.
During this case, it's a lot of economical to
forward messages in a very methodical that
they migrate nearer to the eventual destination,
and not others.
SECURITY CHALLENGES IN
VANETS
The challenges of security should have
throughout the design of VANET
architectures, security protocols,
cryptographic, algorithms, etc. There are some
security challenges in VANET.
Real-time Constraint
VANET is time essential where security
associated message must be conveyed with
100 ms transmission delay. Hence fast
cryptographic algorithm must be utilized to
realize real-time constraint.
Data Consistency Liability
VANET even validate node will perform
malicious activities that can cause accidents or
disturb the network. Consequently, the
correlation between the received information
from an alternate node on particular
information could maintain a strategic distance
from this kind of irregularity.
Low Tolerance for Error
A number of the protocols are designed with
the idea of possibility. VANET uses life
essential information on that action is
performed in terribly short time and little error
in probabilistic algorithmic could cause
damage.
Key Distribution
All the VANET security mechanisms that are
enforced are dependent on keys. The messages
have to be required to be encrypted and
decrypt at receiver side either with the same
key or different key. Additionally, the
completely different manufacturer will install

keys in several ways and public key
infrastructure trust on CA becomes a major
issue. Thus, the distribution of keys among
vehicles may be a major challenge in coming
up with a security protocol.
Incentives
Manufacturers need to make applications that
client like most. Only a few of the customers
can consider a vehicle that automatically
reports any traffic rule violation. Hence
successful consumption of vehicular networks
will require incentives for vehicle makers,
consumers and therefore, the government may
be a challenge to implement security in
VANET.
SECURITY REQUIREMENTS IN
VANET
In this segment, we deliver security
requirements for VANETs. In order to possess
a secure and dependable network, a variety of
security needs should be considered. An
amount of these security requirements is
identical for all networks, however, some are
valid and precise to vehicular networks solely.
There are numerous essential necessities for
achieving security in VANETs [25].
Authentication
Vehicles have to respond solely to the message
transmitted by the legitimate member of the
network, authentication ensures that the
message is generated by the legitimate user.
Thus, it is very important to certify the sender
of a message. Despite the shortage of
confidentiality, network nodes should be
authenticated so as to be ready to send
messages through the network. Before
responding to messages and events a vehicle
should check the authenticity of the message
and its sender, so there's a desire for
authentication. While no authentication,
illegitimate and malicious users will inject
false messages into the network and confuse
different vehicles by distributing false
information. With authentication, vehicles will
merely drop messages from unauthenticated
users.
Privacy
The profile or a driver’s personal details must
be maintained against unauthorized access.
Driver privacy is a very important issue in
communications. Drivers do not wish their
personal and private info to be accessible by
others. Since the vehicle info similar to
location, speed, time and other vehicle
knowledge are transmitted via wireless
communication. Among this information,
driver's location and tracing vehicle
movements are a lot of sensitive and should be
taken into consideration carefully.
Non-Repudiation
A sender should not deny that he/she does not
transmit the message whenever an
investigation or the identity of a vehicle is
needed. For, e.g., when the message is sent,
the vehicle didn’t deny sending the message
this can be referred to as sender non-
repudiation. Additionally, when receiving a
message, the vehicle shouldn't deny having
received the message this can be referred to as
receiver non-repudiation.
Availability
The network has to be accessible even if it is
controlled by an attacker while not affecting
its performance. For, e.g., the services
provided by the RSU have to be accessible to
the vehicles whenever it is needed.
Confidentiality
Since safety in networks is related to security,
all network users have to usually have full
access to network information, i.e. traffic
information, road conditions, etc. in order to
form informed action. Since messages in
VANETs do not contain any sensitive info and
are not confidential, there's no want for secret
writing and confidentiality isn't a very
important issue. Therefore, vehicular networks
do not have to be protected against
eavesdropping. However, network data have to
be sent from an authenticated node and this
could be done by source authentication.
Integrity
All messages that are sent and received on the
network should be protected against alteration
attacks. A protected vehicular network has to
suggest protection against message alteration.
A message will be transformed in numerous
ways throughout its transfer from source to
destinations.

Volume 4, Issue 3
Authorization
Authorization is on a better level enforced by
access control that it is outlined by network
policies. Authorization defines the role of a
node within the network which includes the
kinds of messages a node will read or write on
the network, actions it's allowed to require and
generally the protocols that it will execute.
Anonymity
Anonymity defines the requirement that
network nodes must not be prepared to
suppose if a node achieved or can accomplish
some specific action in the future. So as to
stop such inferences, there should be an equal
probability of doing a selected action by all
nodes or have robust probabilistic anonymity,
with the chances being equal for all nodes. By
not necessitating a vehicle to authenticate with
its authentic identity to dissimilar vehicles to
which it sends data.
CONCLUSION
VANET provides the communication within
the network and there are various methods
which are used to deliver the messages among
the vehicles. In this paper, we considered the
outline of the VANET which defines the
communication systems. Security is one of the
chief matters in the field of communication
and to implement in the VANET. In this
paper, the various applications related to the
VANET, security challenges and requirements
and challenges to employing the measure of
security in the VANET. Among all
prerequisite authentication and privacy are the
main matters in VANET. However,
confidentiality is not essential in the VANET
because normally packets on the network do
not comprise any confidential information.
The main goals of the structure of VANETs
should be broad applicability, node privacy,
strong authentication, proficient group
management, and data verification.
REFERENCES
1. Md Mahbubul Haque, Jelena Misic,
Vojislav Misic, et al. Vehicular Network
Security, Encyclopedia of Wireless and
Mobile Communications, second edition,
2013.
2. Sabih ur Rehman, Arif Khan M, Tanveer
A. Zia, et al. Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks
(VANETs) - An Overview and
Challenges, J Wireless Netw Commun.
2013; 3(3): 29–38p.
3. Jinyuan S, Chi Z, Yuguang F. An ID-
based Framework Achieving Privacy and
Non-repudiation, In Proceedings of IEEE
vehicular ad hoc networks, military
communications conference (MILCOM
2007), October 2007, 1–7p.
4. Antonios Stampoulis, Zheng Chai, A
Survey of Security in Vehicular Networks,
Available at:
http://zoo.cs.yale.edu/~ams257/projects/wi
reless-survey.pdf, (2007).
5. Balon N. Introduction to Vehicular ad hoc
Networks and the Broadcast Storm
Problem, Available at:
http://www.csie.ntpu.edu.tw/~yschen/cour
se/96-2/Wireless/papers/broadcast-5.pdf,
(2006).
6. Bickel G. Inter/intra-vehicle wireless
communication, Available at:
http://userfs.cec.wustl.edu/~gsb1/index.ht
ml#toc2008.
7. Yang X, Liu J, Zhao F. A Vehicle-to-
Vehicle Communication Protocol for
Cooperative Collision Warning,
MobiQuitous'04, 2004.
8. Borgonovo F, Campelli L, Cesana M, et
al. MAC for Ad-Hoc Inter-Vehicle
Network: Services and Performance, IEEE
VTC, 2003.
9. Ming-Fong Tsai, Yung-Cheng Chao, Lien-
Wu Chen, et al. Cooperative Emergency
Braking Warning System in Vehicular
Networks, EURASIP J Wireless Commun
Netw, DOI: 10.1186/s13638-015-0262-0,
February 2015.
10. Yu JY, Chong PHJ. A Survey of
Clustering Schemes for Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks, IEEE Communications Surveys
and Tutorials, First Quarter 2005, 7(1):
32–48p.
11. Chen W, Cai S. Ad Hoc Peer-to-Peer
Network Architecture for Vehicle Safety
Communications, IEEE Communications
Magazine, April 2005; 43(4): 100–107p.
12. Hans J. Reumerman, Roggero M, Ruffini
M. The Application-based Clustering
Concept and Requirements for
Intervehicle Networks, IEEE
Communications Magazine, April 2005;
43(4): 108–113p.

13. Bharathi Mishra, Security in Vehicular Ad
Hoc Networks: A Survey, Proceedings of
the 2011 International Conference on
Communication, Computing & Security,
2011, 590–595p.
14. Davis J, Fagg A, Levine B. Wearable
Computers as Packet Transport
Mechanisms in Highly-partitioned ad-hoc
Networks, in International Symposium on
Wearable Computing, October 2001.
15. Zhao J, Cao G. VADD- Vehicle-Assisted
Data Delivery in Vehicular Ad Hoc
Networks, IEEE INFOCOM 2006.
16. Wu H, Fujimoto R, Guensler R, et al.
MDDV: Mobility-centric Data
Dissemination Algorithm for Vehicular
Networks, In ACM's VANET, 2004,
Proceedings of the 1st ACM International,
Workshop on Vehicular ad hoc Networks,
47–56p.
17. Bose P, Morin P, Stojmenovic I, et al.
Routing with Guaranteed Delivery in Ad-
Hoc Wireless Networks, ACM Wireless
Netw. November 2001; 7(6): 609–616p.
18. Kuhn F, Wattenhofer R, Zhang Y, et al.
Geometric Ad-Hoc Routing: Of Theory
and Practice, in Principles of Distributed
Computing, 2003.
19. Maihofer C, Eberhardt R. Geocast in
Vehicular Environments Caching and
Transmission Range Control for Improved
Efficiency, IEEE Intelligent Vehicles
Symposium, Italy. June 14-17, 2004.
20. Dragos Niculescu, Badri Nath, Trajectory
Based Forwarding and Its Applications, in
MobiCom'03, (2003).
21. Mauve M, Widmer A, Hartenstein H. A
Survey on Position-Based Routing in
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, IEEE Network,
15(6), 2001.
22. Tian J, Stepanov I, Rothermel K. Spatial
Aware Geographic Forwarding for Mobile
Ad Hoc Networks, University of Stuttgart,
2002.
23. Zong Da Chen, Kung HT, Dario Vlah, Ad
Hoc Relay Wireless Networks over
Moving Vehicles on Highways, MobiHoc,
2001, 247–250p.
24. Abdelmajid Khelil, Christian Becker, Jing
Tian, et al. An Epidemic Model for
Information Diffusion in MANETs, in
MSWiM'02, Proceedings of the 5th ACM
international workshop on Modeling
analysis and simulation of wireless and
mobile systems, 2002, 54–60p.
25. Swapnil G. Deshpande, Classification of
Security Attack in Vehicular Adhoc
Network: A Survey, Int J Emerg Trends
Tech Comp Sci. March–April 2013; 2(2):
371–377p.
Cite this Article
Pallavi Agarwal. Technical Review on
Different Applications, Challenges and
Security in VANET. Journal of
Multimedia Technology & Recent
Advancements. 2017; 4(3): 21–30p.

Technical Review on Different Applications, Challenges and Security in VANET

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Technical Review on Different Applications, Challenges and Security in VANET

More from Pallavi Agarwal

Recently uploaded

Technical Review on Different Applications, Challenges and Security in VANET