slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
ENHANCING AND EVALUATION OF AD-HOC ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN VANET. PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
ENHANCING AND EVALUATION OF AD-HOC ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN VANET.

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 40

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


  • 165 Views
  • Uploaded on

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)

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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