Performance analysis of two Different types of routing protocols for two Different mobility models

GROUP MEMBERS: ASIF ALI CHANNA 2K12/TCT/12IMAMUDDIN MAHAR 2K12/TCT/32IQRA ANWAR ARIAN 2K12/TCT/91ASGHAR ALI NAPAR 2K12/TCT/11

SUPERVISOR NAME: NISAR AHMED MEMONASSISTANT PROFESSER

INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF SINDH, JAMSHORO

1

2Contents

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

3Introduction

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.

4Aims 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

5Scope of Project

Applying Routing Protocols1) 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

6Design and Development Methodology

Topology based protocols

Ad-hoc on demand distance VectorAlso known as Reactive (On-Demand)

protocol,

Destination Sequenced Distance VectorAlso known as Proactive (Table-Driven)

protocol,

7

We have used some tools in this project

NS2 NSG Cygwin Call load generator MS excel

Methodology Continue

8

Packet Delivery RatioPacket 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

Three Quality of service parameters

Quality of Service Parameter

9Mobility Model

Reference Point Group Mobility Model (RPGM)

The Manhattan Gird Model (MG)

10Scenario No:01

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

12Scenario No:02

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

14Reference 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

15The Manhattan Mobility Model

A grid road topology Every node moves just on predefined path Arguments –u & -v 

# of blocks

16Call load generator

17End 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

18Throughput 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

19PDR of AODV and DSDV

AODV

AOVD PDR of RGMP and Manhannten Mobility

Destination Sequenced Distance Vector PDR of RGMP and Manhannten Mobility

20Conclusion

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.

21Future 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.

22References

[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.