1 / 40

ENHANCING AND EVALUATION OF AD-HOC ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN VANET.

ENHANCING AND EVALUATION OF AD-HOC ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN VANET. Group Members. Mohammad Ahnaf Zaman FA08-BCE-072 Usman Basharat FA08-BCE-060 Bilal Sarwar FA08-BCE-015. PROJECT DESCRIPTION. Evaluation and Enhancing of Protocols for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks’ (VANET’s)

fauve
Download Presentation

ENHANCING AND EVALUATION OF AD-HOC ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN VANET.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ENHANCING AND EVALUATION OF AD-HOC ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN VANET.

  2. Group Members • Mohammad Ahnaf Zaman FA08-BCE-072 • Usman Basharat FA08-BCE-060 • Bilal Sarwar FA08-BCE-015

  3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Evaluation and Enhancing of Protocols for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks’ (VANET’s) • Routing protocols are: • AODV • DSDV • DYMO • DSR • FSR • OLSR

  4. Main Softwares • NS simulator. • MATLAB. • Nam • MOVE • SUMO • CONBUILD (developed for Project requirement)

  5. MANET • MANET is Mobile Ad-Hoc networks. • Self configuring networks of devices connected by wireless links • MANET move independently in any direction. • Works without a base station. • Nodes also act as routers as they forward traffic for other MANET nodes.

  6. VANET • VANET is vehicular Ad hoc network. • Enhanced form of MANET. • Uses moving vehicles as nodes for communication. • Nodes should be between 100 to 300 meters range. • Communication can be between moving vehicles or any base stations.

  7. cont VANET Scope. • Safer roads. • Vast areas are accessible. Factors affecting VANETS • Vehicle Density. • Communication range. • Proportion of equipped vehicles.

  8. Applications of VANET. • Safety alerts. • Access of internet. • Drivers are alarmed of different road conditions. • Communication between cars and road side can be performed by VANET.

  9. The Routing Protocols: • Reactive – AODV (Ad-Hoc On Demand Distance Vector) DYMO (Dynamic MANET On-demand ) DSR (Dynamic Source Routing ) • Proactive – FSR (Fish Eye State Routing ) OLSR (Optimized Link State Routing Algorithm) DSDV (Destination-Sequenced Distance Vector routing )

  10. AODV • AODV is Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector • Generates routes on-demand • Type of Distance Vector Routing protocol • Uses Ring Search Algorithm for route discovery • Node maintains its increasing sequence number • Provides unicast, multi-cast and broadcast communication

  11. Pros and Cons • Sequence number ensures that only latest route is selected • Generates routes on-demand to reduce overheads • Uses both unicast, and broadcast communication • Control overhead increases, when multiple route reply packets are received in response to single RREQ

  12. DYMO • DYMO also refers to as Dynamic MANET On-Demand routing protocol is a reactive protocol. • It is the successor of Ad-Hoc on-demand Distance Vector routing protocol. • DYMO protocol uses source routing. • Basic operations of DYMO are route discovery and management. • DYMO uses sequence numbers to ensure loop free.

  13. Pros and Cons • Average end to end delay reduces when there is increase in speed and mobility. • No link repair present, if link breaks it has to again find new route. • Consumes more bandwidth and energy

  14. DSR • DSR is Dynamic Source Routing Protocol. • The routing approach of DSR is Source routing. • “Eavesdrop” on routes contained in headers • Reduces need for route discovery • Piggyback Route Reply onto new Route Request to prevent infinite loop • Source includes identification number in Route Request

  15. Pros and Cons • Routes maintained only between nodes who need to communicate, reduces overhead. • Single route discovery yield many routes to destination, due to intermediate nodes replying from local caches • Packet header size grows with route length due to source routing • Increased overhead if too many route replies come back.

  16. FSR • FSR is fisheye state routing protocol • FSR is similar to link state (LS) routing • Distance between source and destination is inversely proportional to accuracy • Relative to each node the network is divided in different scopes. • Fisheye technique used to present data precisely

  17. Pros and Cons • Scales well to large network sizes • Control traffic overhead is manageable • Route table size still grows linearly with network size • As mobility increases routes to remote destinations become less accurate

  18. OLSR • OLSR stands for Optimized Link State Routing • Type of Link State Routing protocol • All nodes elect group of nodes as Multipoint Relays (MPRs) only which broadcast routing table • Nodes broadcast list of MPRs to all neighbors • Mobility causes frequent route changes, Topology Control (TC) messages are sent

  19. Pros and Cons • Best for large and dense networks • Less Average End to End delay • Time increases in re-discovering broken link

  20. DSDV • DSDV is destination sequence distance vector • It uses distance vector protocol • Routing is done hop by hop • The neighbour checks the best route from its own table and forwards to neighbour. • Routing tables are maintained by periodically broadcasting the tables stored in each node.

  21. Pros and Cons • DSDV is an efficient protocol for route discovery. • Hence, latency for route discovery is very low. • DSDV also guarantees loop-free paths. • DSDV send lots of control messages.

  22. Modifications.

  23. Modifications

  24. Evaluation Metrics.. • Throughput: ratio of total number of packets received by destination to total number of packets transmitted by source node in a given timeframe • End to end Delay: average end to end delay of data packets from sender to receiver. • NRL: is the number of data packets transmitted by routing protocols for a single data packet to be delivered successfully at the destination.

  25. Simulation Results AE2ED Communication session AODV-M is better than AODV DSR-M behaves same as DSR OLSR better than OLSR-M

  26. Simulation Results AODV-M is better than AODV DSR-M better than DSR OLSR-M better than OLSR

  27. Simulation Results NRL Communication session AODV is better than AODV-M DSR-M is better than DSR OLSR-M same as OLSR

  28. Simulation Results NRL Node Density AODV-M is better than AODV DSR-M and DSR remains same. OLSR-M is less efficient than original OLSR

  29. Simulation Results Communication session PDR AODV is better than AODV-M DSR-M is same as DSR OLSR better than OLSR-M

  30. Simulation Results PDR Node Density AODV is better than AODV-M DSR-M is better than DSR OLSR-M better than OLSR

  31. Trade-off Table

  32. Simulation Results FSR is better then FSR-M. DSDV-M better than DSDV DYMO-M Performs better than DYMO

  33. Simulation Results FSR-M is better then FSR DSDV-M better than DSDV DYMO performs better than DYMO-M

  34. Simulation Results FSR is better then FSR-M. DSDV-M better than DSDV DYMO-M Performs better than DYMO

  35. Simulation Results FSR is better then FSR-M. DSDV-M better than DSDV DYMO-M Performs better than DYMO

  36. Simulation Results FSR-M is better then FSR. DSDV-M better than DSDV DYMO-M Performs better than DYMO

  37. Simulation Results FSR-M is better then FSR DSDV-M better than DSDV DYMO-M performs better than DYMO

  38. Trade-off Table

More Related