performance evaluation of manet routing protocols ...

Amar Nath Muraw et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF MANET ROUTING PROTOCOLS GRP, DSR AND AODV BASED ON PACKET SIZE AMAR NATH MURAW Amity School of Engineering & Technology Amity University Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226010, India [email protected]

Dr. DEEPAK ARORA Amity School of Engineering & Technology, Amity University Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226010, India [email protected]

SHASHWAT SHUKLA Amity School of Engineering & Technology, Amity University Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226010, India [email protected] VINEET SINGH Amity School of Engineering & Technology, Amity University Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226010, India [email protected] Abstract: Mobile Ad hoc Networks has become an essential part of interest of researchers in last couple of years. A Mobile Ad-Hoc Network is a collection of independent wireless mobile nodes having no any centralized accesspoint, infrastructure and any centralized administration. In order to communicate with other nodes inside the network, a routing protocol is used to find out best possible routes among nodes. The most important goal of adhoc network routing protocol is to discover, validate and establish route between a couples of nodes, for appropriate, fast and reliable message delivery. In this research work authors have analyzed the performance of three most popular MANET routing protocols GRP, DSR and AODV under different parameters like throughput, Network delay and network load. Authors have performed entire analysis to study the behaviour of these protocols under different test measures based on packet size as a key parameter. Authors have also given their test results by using OPNET as a testing tool and demonstrated all the simulations in this work. Keywords: MANET; GRP; DSR; AODV; OPNET; Packet Size. 1. INTRODUCTION Nowadays mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is one of the most popular Wireless Network as it provides liberty to its user from the most critical network administration issues, while giving the flexibility of distributed environment and removes the hurdles of managing network infrastructure. MANET provides a platform, through which nodes in a network can perform their routing discovery and its maintenance in a self-organized way [1, 2]. In the last couple of years, the use of wireless networks has become more and more popular. Due to rapidly deploy capability MANET, which can be applied to different applications including battlefield communications, emergency relief scenarios, law enforcement, public meeting, virtual class room and other security-sensitive computing environments. In MANET, each node can communicate with node in its range and those which are beyond the range can communicate using the concept of multi hop communication in which other node relay the packets [3]. In the MANET the network topology can be change rapidly and randomly. To deals with this, nodes exchange information about network topology. So the functioning of the ad hoc network depends on the trust and cooperation between nodes.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012

2849


2. BACKGROUND Wireless mobile ad-hoc networks have no fixed infrastructure. A dynamic routing protocol is needed to function properly on a frequently changing network topology. Here the node itself acts as both client and server, forwarding and receiving packets to or from other nodes. Routing in ad-hoc networks has become a challenging issue. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), MANET working group is working continuously to ensure standardization of routing protocols. The purpose of this working group is to standardize IP routing protocol functionality suitable for wireless routing application within both static and dynamic topologies [4]. GRP [5] follows hop by hop routing type and make periodical frequency updates. It doesn’t provide multiple routes and in cause full flooding in worst case. The AODV [6] routing protocol shares features of both DSDV [7] and DSR [7] algorithms. The Ad-hoc OnDemand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol is designed for use in ad-hoc mobile networks. AODV allows mobile nodes to obtain routes quickly for new destinations, and does not require nodes to maintain routes to destinations that are not in active communication. It uses traditional routing tables, one entry per destination, and sequence numbers to determine whether routing information is up to-date and to prevent routing loops. The advantage of AODV is that it tries to minimize the number of required broadcasts. It creates the routes on a ondemand basis, as opposed to maintain a complete list of routes for each destination. Whenever there exists a valid route between two communication peers, AODV Route Discovery is not used. Therefore, the authors of AODV classify it as a pure on-demand route acquisition system [8]. The dynamic Source Routing (DSR) is an on-demand routing protocol that is based on the idea of source routing. Mobile nodes are required to retain route caches that contain the source routes of which the mobile is aware. Entries in the route cache are repeatedly updated as new routes are learned. The Dynamic Source Routing protocol (DSR) is an easy and resourceful routing protocol designed particularly for use in multihop wireless ad hoc networks of mobile nodes. When some source node originates a packets which is new and forward to the destination node in the packet header it place a source route , giving the sequence or the number of the hopes that the packet would move on the way to the destination. The source node will get a exact source route through route cache of the paths or the routes that are learned previously, but if in the cache the route or the path is not found the initiation of the route discovery protocol is done to find another route to the destination dynamically [9]. The present work is focused to resolve some serious issues like Routing, Security and Reliability, Quality of Service (QoS), Power Consumption. Authors have designed a network environment with the help of OPNET simulation software through which the performance of different protocols can be analyzed and monitored [1011]. 3. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP FOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs) refer to a family of routing protocols developed to route traffic through mobile wireless networks. These networks place special requirements on routing protocols due the unpredictable nature of the radio links and changing network topology due to node mobility. OPNET provides several MANET routing protocol models that are integrated with the IP and wireless LAN models. In addition, a MANET framework is available for rapid development of new MANET protocol models. The engine of the OPNET Modeler is a finite state machine model in combination with an analytical model. Modeler can model protocols, devices and behaviors with about 400 special-purpose modeling functions [12].OPNET (Optimized Network Engineering Tool) provides a comprehensive development environment for the specification, simulation and performance analysis of communication networks. A large range of communication systems from a single LAN to global satellite networks can be supported. Discrete event simulations are used as the means of analyzing system performance and their behaviour. Authors have designed Network scenario parameters with respect to four different packet sizes. The essential configuration details are as follows: Network Parameters Network Size Nodes Packet Size Transmit Power Data Rate Pause Time(sec) Speed (metres/sec) Mobility Model IP addressing Duration

ISSN : 0975-5462

Values 1000X1000 meters 46 Exponential(1024,2048,3072and 4096) 0.005 11 Mbps 100 10 Random way point IPV4 20 minutes


2850


3.1. PERFORMANCE METRICS Authors have chosen different parameters to conduct this study. Test results under different network scenarios are as follows: 3.1.1. Throughput Throughput is the average rate of successful message delivery over a communication channel. It is usually measured in bit per second. Throughput of AODV, GRP and DSR with packet size 1024, 2048, 3072 and 4096 are given in Fig 1.

Fig. 1. Packet size-exponential (1024, 2048, 3072 and 4096 respectively)

The difference in the graph given in fig. 1 can be seen clearly as in case of packet size like 1024 byte and 2048 byte the performance of AODV is very good as compare to DSR and GRP but if we increase packet size to 3072 byte and 4096 byte, then GRP shows slightly better results than AODV and DSR. Any changes in packet size, directly affects the performance of AODV in terms of throughput but in case of DSR and GRP only slight change has been noticed. The overall throughput performance of AODV is very high when the packet size is 2048 byte compare to DSR. For the larger packet size like 4096 byte GRP performs very well and DSR has shown a slight growth

3.1.2. Network load (bits/sec) Network load refers to the amount of data (traffic) being carried by the network. Network Load of AODV, GRP and DSR with packet size 1024, 2048, 3072 and 4096 are given in Fig 2.


In Fig 2. Packet size of 1024 and 2048 bytes, the Network load of AODV is very high as compare to DSR and GRP but in case of packet size of 3072 and 4096 bytes, GRP shows good results compare to AODV and DSR. AODV have shown higher Network load in case, where packet size is 2048 bytes. In case of packet size 3072 and 4096 bytes, AODV have shown better results than DSR and GRP. Similarly when the packet size is 1024 and 2048 bytes, DSR has shown less Network load than AODV and GRP

3.1.3. Delay The delay of a network specifies how long it takes for a bit of data to travel across the network from one node or endpoint to another. Delay of AODV, GRP and DSR with packet size 1024, 2048, 3072 and 4096 are given in Fig 3.


ISSN : 0975-5462


2851


In Fig 3.packet size 1024, 2048, 3072 and 4096 bytes the delay in DSR is initially on the higher end as compare to AODV and GRP, where as in case of packet size 3072 and 4096 the delay in AODV is very high. GRP has shown almost neutral results. In case of packet size 1024 and 2048 bytes, AODV shows less delay. 4. CONCLUDING REMARKS AND FUTURE SCOPE Authors have performed simulation experiment in order to evaluate the performance of three most popular protocols AODV, DSR and GRP under three different performance parameters i.e.Throughput, Network load and Delay. It is noticeable that in terms of throughput, performance of AODV and DSR is directly proportional to increase or decrease in packet size up to the medium size packets but shows unsatisfactory performance in case of larger packet size. In case of Network load, the performance of AODV is slightly higher than DSR and GRP for the larger size packets greater than 2048 bytes whereas DSR and GRP show unsatisfactory results. In case of delay GRP shows better results compare to AODV and DSR but most of the time change is negligible. Since MANET follows dynamic configurations and its design, development and implementation is quite dependent on requirement of different application scenarios. So the selection of desired MANET protocol may be major point of discussion for any large organization. The performance evaluation of AODV, DSR and GRP, will help others to choose an appropriate routing protocol with respect to various key parameters like packet size. This work can be extend by considering some other important parameters like network size, number of nodes, which can further be useful to conduct study of these protocols under different network scenarios and configurations. Acknowledgement The authors are very thankful to their respected Mr. Aseem Chauhan, Chairman, Amity University, Lucknow, Maj. Gen. K.K. Ohri, AVSM (Retd.), Pro-Vice Chancellor, Amity University, Lucknow, India, for providing excellent computation facilities in the University campus. Authors also pay their regards to Prof. S.T.H. Abidi, Director and Brig. U.K. Chopra, Deputy Director, Amity School of Engineering, Amity University, Lucknow for giving their moral support and help to carry out this research work. REFERENCES [1]

S. Corson and J. Macker, “Mobile ad hoc networking(manet): Routing protocol performance issues and evaluation considerations (rfc2501),” January (1999),http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2501.txt. [2] C. E. Perkins, Ed., Ad Hoc Networking. Boston: Addison-Wesley, (2001). [3] Alekha Kumar Mishra1, Bibhu Dutta Sahoo2" Analysis of Security Attacks for AODV Protocol in Manet”. [4] http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/manet-charter.html. [5] Subir Kumar Sarkar, T. G. Basavaraju, and C. Puttamadappa, Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks: Principles, Protocols and Applications. 1st ed. Auerbach Publications, (2008). [6] S. R. Das, C. E. Perkins, and E. M. Royer, “ Performance Comparison of Two On-Demand Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Networks “, IEEE Personal Communications Magazine, Special Issue on Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, Vol. 8, No. 1, February (2001), pp. 16-29. [7] D. Johnson, D. Maltz, and J. Jetcheva, “The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks “,Internet Draft,draftietf-manet-dsr-07.txt, work in progress, (2002). [8] C. E. Perkins and E. M. Royer, “Ad-hoc on demand distance vector routing,” in Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications (WMCSA’99),vol. 3, New Orleans, LA, USA, February (1999), pp. 90–100. [9] Request for Comments: 4728, “The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol (DSR) for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks for IPV4,” Network Working Group, Feb (2007). [Online]. Available http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4728.txt [Accessed: Aug. 18, 2009] [10] Chlamtac, I., Conti, M., and Liu, J. J.-N. Mobile ad hoc networking: imperatives and challenges. Ad Hoc Networks, 1(1), (2003), pp. 13–6. [11] HaoYang, Haiyun & Fan Ye ― Security in mobile ad-hoc networks: Challenges and solutions, , Pg. 38-47, Vol 11, issue 1, Feb (2004). [12] OPNET Users' Manual, OPNET Architecture, OV.415.http://forums.opnet.com.

ISSN : 0975-5462


2852