An Extensive Analysis of Open Source Wireless Network Simulators 1Koushik Banerjee, 2Hemant Sharma

1Research Scholar, ITM University, Gwalior. 2 Research Scholar, ITM University, Gwalior

E-mail: 1koushik_banerjee21@yahoo.in, 2sharmahemant1289@gmail.com

Abstract

Now a day it has been observed that most of the

researchers are busy in building new simulators or

extending the existing simulation tools so that analysis of

protocols can be done and conclusions can be drawn

whether the protocols is workable in the real world. To

evaluate the performance of protocols on real network is

too much hectic in terms of cost and complexity. So

simulators are needed for reducing cost as well as

complexity. Network simulations are widely used by

researchers to test their own hypothesis and protocols on

networks without implementing in the real world. This approach saves the combination of cost, complexity and

time. There are various types of simulators available in

market among which some are general purpose simulator

others are special purpose simulators. Each simulator has

its own pros and cons therefore the researcher uses

different simulators or emulators for specific research. In

this paper, explanations and comparison of some available

network simulators like NS-2, NS-3, GloMoSim, Avrora,

COOJA, J-SIM and SENSE on the basis of multiple

parameters is presented. The aim of this paper is to identify

an effective simulator for research in Wireless sensor

network.

1. Introduction Simulation of a proposed technology is a matter of prime

importance, in order to study the impact of proposed work

a real environment is required, but testing of the proposed

technique in a real environment is too costly and restricted

in terms of flexibility, scalability etc.. Simulators provide

researchers a platform where they can design, configure,

run, analyze and draw a conclusion without implementing

their methodology on the real environment. Therefore,

researchers can easily draw a conclusion after testing their

concerned area of research. The main focus of this research

paper is to focus on parameters such as open-source,

scalability, platforms, GUI etc. For this we have designed a

comparison table which will aid researchers to easily

choose a simulator as per their requirement. The network simulators are available in a wide range which can be

compared on various parameters specifying the nodes in

term of power capacity and the links among the nodes,

traffic in the network, specifying even every tiny detail

regarding protocols, graphical user interface allows user to

visualize the movement of data packets, connectivity etc..

On the basis of simulation result one can easily analyze

their methodology.

2. RELATED WORK Researchers need a profound and analytical study for the

selection of a simulator through which they can visualize

and simulate their methodology and techniques. Different

researchers are busy testing different simulators in terms of

routing protocols [1]. Each simulator has its own merits

and demerits in terms of cost, scalability, execution

processing to evaluate the performance of network on

different parameters [2]. There are many available surveys

in the field of wireless network simulators. We have

categorized them under comparative and descriptive

papers. Some of these are provided in table-I as short

overview.

Table 1. Previous Surveys on Simulator

Ref

Number

Type Simulators

[1] comparison Opnet, NS-2, OMNeT++, SSFNet, QualNet, J-SIM, Totem

[4] description NS-2, GloMoSim, Opnet, SensorSim, J-SIM, Sense, OMNeT++, Sidh, Sens,

TOSSIM, ATEMU, Avrora, EmStar

[5] description OMNeT++, REAL, NS-2, C++Sim,

cnet, SSFNet, CLASS, SMURPH

[6] comparison SSF, SWANS, J-SIM, NCTUns, NS-

2, OMNeT++, Ptolemy, ATEMU,

Em- Star, SNAP, TOSSIM

[7] description GloMoSim, NS-2, DIANEmu, GT- NetS, J-SIM, Jane, NAB, PDNS, OM-

NeT++, Opnet, QualNet, SWANS

[8] comparison NS-2, TOSSIM

[9] comparison NS-2, Avrora, Opnet, GloMoSim

[10] comparison NS-2, cnet, JNS, Opnet, AdventNet, NCTUns

[11] comparison Opnet, NS-2

3. SIMULATORS

3.1. NS-2 NS-2[12] is a discrete event network simulator, designed

at the University of California, Berkley, which supports

wired and wireless network many network objects such as

protocols, applications and traffic source behavior. NS-2 is

open source and is a part of the software of the VINT

Koushik Banerjee et al, Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 5 (4),1375-1379

IJCTA | July-August 2014 Available online@www.ijcta.com

1375

ISSN:2229-6093

project that is supported by DARPA since 1995. NS-2 is an

object oriented simulator and more popular among

researchers. It is written in C++ and it has an OTcl

interpreter which serves as a front end. Ns-2 supports a

class hierarchy (compiled hierarchy) in C++ as well as a

very much alike class hierarchy in the OTcl interpreter.

Those hierarchies are interrelated to each other. NS-2 uses

two languages for doing two different kinds of things. NS-2

provides, detailed simulations of protocols using a systems

programming language which provide user to do

manipulation of the packet, header and bytes as well as

implementation of algorithms that run over huge data. NS-2

have reduced OSI layer model in which the presentation

and session layers are omitted. NS-2 offers a wide number

of features. Graphs can be easily generated using Xgraph or

Tracegraph. It has movement and traffic patterns and an

energy model which can be easily generated. However

traffic and mobility are typically produced before the actual

simulation start and not an integral part of NS-2’s

architecture. The main disadvantage of NS-2 is scalability

and time taking analysis. Again addition or implementation

of any new protocol is complex [11, 13]

3.2. NS-3 NS-3 is also an open source discrete-event network

simulator designed primarily for researchers to assist in

research and education. It is licensed under the GNU

GPLv2 license and freely available. The ns-3 project [14]

was started in mid of 2006 and is yet under massive

development. NS-3 is prepended as a replacement of NS-2,

not an extension [15]. NS-3 does not have an OTcl API. It

is written in C++ and python languages. In order to

simulate a methodology or technology NS-3 supports C++

and python. NS-3.20 is the latest version of NS-3. NS-3 has

enhanced characteristic and inbuilt support for parallel

simulation. NS-3 is currently supports only IPv4, which

can be considered as a limitation.

3.3. GloMoSiM GloMoSiM [16] is widely known as Global Mobile

Information System Simulator. It is a simulation

environment typically used for large scale wireless

networks. GloMoSiM is based on Parsec. GloMoSiM uses

parallel discrete-event simulation [17]. In addition, Parsec

compiler is used in GloMoSiM for compiling the

simulation of protocols [16]. The node aggregation

technique is introduced, which actually became one of its

plus points, into GloMoSim to produce significant benefits

to the simulation performance. In GloMoSim, each node

depicts a geographical area of the simulation. GloMoSim

has various choices based on its assets for CSMA MAC

protocols, wireless routing protocols and implementations

of TCP and UDP. GloMoSiM supports only wireless

network protocol.

3.4. Avrora Avrora, is an open-source, platform independent,

accurate simulator for embedded sensing programs

developed by UCLA Compilers Group. It is implemented

in Java, which helps flexibility and portability. One of the

distinguished characters of Avrora is its accuracy and

scalability. It is indeed a very powerful simulator for the

real hardware platform on which actual and real time

sensor programs run. Avrora is operating system as well as

language independent. Avrora gives an infrastructure for

analytical research as well as a framework which allows

static checking of embedded software. Avrora can

simulates a network of motes, runs the real time

microcontroller and performs actual simulations of the

devices [18]. Mica2 and MicaZ are two typical platforms

which can be easily emulated and it is also capable of

running AVR elf-assembly or binary codes. Avrora is

efficient in simulating real sensor network with accuracy. It

uses the software stack provided in TinyOS, which allow

nodes to communicate via the radio. It provides an

extension which help to simulate different sensor network

with different orientation and different number of nodes.

Developers claim that Avrora can simulate a network of up

to ten thousand nodes and its performance is very faster

than most of the other simulators [19]. On the other hand

clock drift is not modelled here, which is the major

drawback.

3.5. COOJA

COOJA [19] is a simulator which runs in the Contiki

Operating System [19] and particularly developed for

wireless networks which comprises sensors running this

particular OS. Instant Contiki [20] (a virtual machine

containing Contiki development environment) also utilize

this tool in every aspect. First things first, the simulator

operates at three layers of abstraction. The top layer is

called the networking layer, at which users not only

implement various applications but also routing protocols.

The program code which was developed and tested on

COOJA at the beginning of its formation at the operating

system level can run without any modifications directly on

Contiki OS. Layer two which is the machine code

instruction layer uses MSPSim so that the emulation at a bit

level is possible, therefore the platform is able to emulate

ESB nodes with TI MSP430 microcontrollers [21]. After

simulation, nodes can be parted in different types, both in

the software as well as hardware aspects. One more great

feature of COOJA that it also adds those sensors which do

not use Contiki. The only drawback of this tool is that one

single node is simulated entirely as one of the layers. It is

seen as a disadvantage, but the other way around, a single

network of sensors simulated at particular levels of detail

can give a broader look at the structure with an acceptable

amount of time. But there are some limitations. COOJA has

a lot of calculations and not very much efficient.

3.6. J-SIM

Java Sim or so we called J-SIM [22] is a network

simulator and built in accordance to component based

software epitome. In J-SIM culture, this is called

autonomous component architecture (ACA). J-SIM is

actually component based, and yet the compositional

simulation environment which had been developed by a

Koushik Banerjee et al, Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 5 (4),1375-1379

IJCTA | July-August 2014 Available online@www.ijcta.com

1376

ISSN:2229-6093

team at the Distributed Real Time Computing Laboratory

of the Ohio State University and Illinois University. J-SIM

is a network simulator written in Java [22]. Every dot in J-

SIM is a component. It is either a node, a link or protocol.

Work of each component is depicted using ports. Adversely

speaking, there are three possible ways to connect ports

which are one to one, one to many, and last but many to

many is more frequently used. On a more intend level, J-

SIM can be represented in two layers, The Lower layer

Core Service Layer (CSL) holds every aspect OSI layer

from network to physical where the higher layer represents

the rest of the OSI layers [23]. J-SIM is relatively complex

(not more than NS-2), inefficient and it has some overheads

in intercommunication model.

3.7. SENSE

Sensor Network Simulator and Emulator [24] or SENSE

a simulator primarily designed for sensor network

simulation. SENSE possesses a template class support

which allows the use of different components with different

types of data [25]. It can be concluded that SENSE can be

classified under component-based simulator for wireless

network simulation. SENSE is still under development

stage. When trying to use the simulator, we found some

issues that were gladly solved by the developers. This

simulator provides three user type high level, network

designers and component designers. Every component in

SENSE communicates via ports this concept free the

simulator from dependency and also enables extensibility,

reusability and scalability. Extension of components in

functionality is possible only if the interface is compatible

and no inheritance between components is used. SENSE

only supports C++ language with an interface using text,

and the results are stored in a text file. This contributes to

the efficient use of computational power, but greatly

promote adversity in the interface. SENSE is less

customizable.

4. Comparison In this comparative study the focus is given to select a

wireless network simulator as per the need so a comparison

of simulators on different criteria such as scalability, types

of network support, platform, ease of use, etc. Some

simulators are general purpose, whereas some are specific

to a particular area. Sensor researchers mainly prefer

simulators which are designed for WSN areas such as

SENSE, COOJA, J-SIM etc. However general purpose

simulators are also extending such as Mannasim patch for

NS-2 to support sensor network but scholars find learning

NS-2 too difficult. The scalability is important if one goes

for sensor network as thousands of nodes are deployed in

the network, but working on NS-2 do not provide you

scalability even GloMoSim does not support GUI for large

number of nodes but it is available free. To modify or to

test a technology simulators support particular or more than

one language so a researcher can go for a simulator for

which they have sound knowledge of languages. Table-II

provides profound analysis of simulator on a large number

of criteria. Abbreviations used in this table are listed

below:-

GUI: Graphical User Interface.

T/W: Time warp.

Ad: Ad-Hoc

5. Conclusion In this paper a comprehensive survey on different

network simulators with all background details have been

provided the study is done by keeping different parameters

in mind and their merits and demerits in particular

conditions are also discussed. Those simulators are

different, but we can say none are superior or inferior to the other. In order to select a particular simulator for a specific

research a sound knowledge of simulators is needed,

therefore the authors have given more focus on the

selection of specific simulators for particular testing to

provide clearer vision regarding Simulators in addition to a

short description, a comparative presentation is provided in

tabular form which increases more understanding. No

particular simulator is universally accepted for all

situations, therefore appropriate guidelines are mandatory

to choose simulator for a specific research.

Koushik Banerjee et al, Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 5 (4),1375-1379

IJCTA | July-August 2014 Available online@www.ijcta.com

1377

ISSN:2229-6093

Table 2. Result and Comparison among Simulators

6. References [1] S. R. Das, C.E. Perkins, E.M. Royer, “Perfor-mance

comparison of two on-demand routing protocols for ad hoc

networks,” INFOCOM, Tel-Aviv, Israel, Aug. 2000.

[2] A. R. Khan, S. A. Madani, K. Hayat, S. U. Khan,

“Clustering‐based power‐controlled routing for mobile

wireless sensor networks,” International Journal of Communication Systems, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 529-542, 2012.

[3] L. Begg,W. Liu, K. Pawlikowski, S. Perera, and H. Sirisena.

Survey of simulators of next generation networks for

studying service availability and resilience. Technical Report

TRCOSC 05/06, Department of Computer Science & Software Engineering, University of Canterbury,

Christchurch, New Zealand, February 2006.

[4] D. Curren. A survey of simulation in sensor networks.

Student project, www.cs.binghamton.edu/˜kang/ teaching/cs580s/david.pdf, 2007.

[5] V. Efthimia. Free tools for network simulation. Master’s

thesis, University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, 2006.

[6] E. Egea-Lopez, J. Vales-Alonso, A. Martinez-Sala, P. Pavon-

Mari, and J. Garcia-Haro. Simulation scalability issues in

wireless sensor networks. IEEE Communications Magazine,

44(7):64–73, July 2006.

[7] L. Hogie, P. Bouvry, and F. Guinand. An overview of

manets simulation. In Electronic Notes in Theoretical

Computer Science, Proc. of 1st International Workshop on

Methods and Tools for Coordinating Concurrent, Distributed and Mobile Systems (MTCoord 2005), LNCS, pages 81–

101, Namur, Belgium, April 2005. Elsevier.

[8] M. Karl. A comparison of the architecture of network

simulators ns-2 and tossim. In Proceedings of Performance

Simulation of Algorithms and Protocols Seminar. Institut fr Parallele And Verteilte Systeme, Abteilung Verteilte

Systeme, Universit Stuttgart, 2005.

[9] A. Lemke and A. Sarkohi. Werkzeuge zur network

simulation. In G. Wittenburg, editor, Proceedings of Seminar Technische Informatik. Freie Universit Berlin, June 2006.

[10] P. Nov. Simulation of network structures. Master’s thesis,

Department of Software Engineering, Charles University in

Prague, August 2006.

[11] B. Schilling. Qualitative comparison of network simulation tools. Technical report, Institute of Parallel and Distributed

Systems (IPVS), University of Stuttgart, January 2005.

[12] The network simulator - ns-2. http:// www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/

[13] S. Duflos, G.L. Grand, A. A. Diallo, C. Chaudet, A. Hecker,,

C. Balducelli, F. Flentge, C. Schwaegerl, and O. Seifert. “List of Available and Suitable Simulation Components”

Sl.

No

Tool Developed By License GUI Scalability Language Networ

k

Suppor

ted

Learning

curve

Emulation

Capacity

1 NS-2 University of

California,

Berkley

Open source limited

visual aid

Small C+, OTCL T/W/A

d/

WSNA

Steep No

2 NS-3 University of

Washington,

Georgia

Institute of

Technology

Open source Better Large C++ (core)

Python(bi

ndings)

T/W/A

d/WSN

A

Steep No

3 GloMoSiM Parallel

Computing

Lab, UCLA

Open source limited

visual aid

Large Parsec T/W/A

d

Moderate No

4 Avrora

UCLA

Compilers

Group

Open source Originally

command-

line

framework

Very large Java Mainly

for

WSN

Moderate Yes

5 COOJA

Adam Dunkels

Open source Good Very large Java (Simulatio

ns in C)

Mainly for

WSN

Moderate No

6 J-SIM

Ohio State

University and

Illinois

University.

Open source Good

visualizati

on

Small Java/Jacl T/W/A

d

/WSN

A

Moderate No

7 SENSE

Dept. of

Computer Science,

Rensselaer

Polytechnic

Institute

Open source Good(Usin

g G-Sense)

Large C++ Mainly

for WSN

Moderate Yes

Koushik Banerjee et al, Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 5 (4),1375-1379

IJCTA | July-August 2014 Available online@www.ijcta.com

1378

ISSN:2229-6093

Technical report, Ecole Nationale Supieure des

Tommunications (ENST), September 2006..

[14] T. R. Henderson, S. Roy, S. Floyd, and G. F. Riley, “ns-3

project goals,” workshop on ns-2: the IP network simulator,

ACM, New York, USA 2006.

[15] G. Carneiro, P. Fortuna, M. Ricardo, “FlowMonitor - a

network monitoring framework for the Network Simulator 3 (NS-3),” Fourth In-ternational ICST Conference on

Performance Evaluation Methodologies and Tools, 2009.

[16] GloMoSiM, http://pcl.cs.ucla.edu/projects/glomosim/, ac-cessed Sept 20th 2011.

[17] R. Bagrodia, R. Meyerr, “PARSEC: A Parallel Simulation

Environment for Complex System” UCLA technical report,

1997.

[18] Ben L. Titzer, Daniel K. Lee, Jens Palsberg, “Avrora: Scalable sensor network simulation with precise timing,” 4th

Int. Conf. on Information Processing in Sensor Networks,

2005.

[19] F. Osterlind, A. Dunkels, J. Eriksson, N. Finne, and T. Voigt, “Cross-level sensor network simulation with COOJA,” 1st

IEEE International Workshop on Practical Issues in Building

Sensor Network Applications, pp. 8, Tampa, Florida, USA,

2006.

[20] “Instant Contiki.” http://www.contiki-os.org/p/instant-contiki.html accessed June 2012.

[21] T. Voigt, J. Eriksson, F. ¨ Osterlind, R. Sauter, N.

Aschenbruck, P. J. Marr´on, V. Reynolds, O. V. L. Shu, A.

Koubaa, and A. K¨opke, “Towards Comparable Simulations of Cooperating Objects and Wireless Sensor Networks,” in

Proceedings of WSNperf, 1st International Workshop on

Performance Methodologies and Tools for Wireless Sensor

Networks, (Pisa, Italy), 23 October 2009.

[22] J-Sim user, Google Groups. “http:// Groups. Google.com/group/J-Sim-users/browse_threds”

[23] M. M. Koksal “A survey of network simulator supporting

wireless networks.” Middle East technical university Ankara,

Turkey, pp.1-11, 2008.

[24] Chen, G., J. Branch, M. J. Pflug, L. Zhu and B. Szymanski

(2004). SENSE: A Sensor Network Simulator. Advances in

Pervasive Computing and Networking. B. Szymanski and B.

Yener, Springer: 249-267.

[25] B.K. Szymanski and G.G. Chen. Sensor Network Component

Based

Simulator. Handbook of Dynamic System

Authors Biography

Koushik Banerjee received his B.Tech degree from St. Thomas

College of Engineering & Technology,

Kolkata in 2011. He is currently pursuing M.Tech from ITM University, Gwalior. He is

very much attracted towards computer

programming. His research interest includes protocols and secure routing in

wireless sensor network as well as other Ad-Hoc networks. He is also interested in

different aspects of cloud computing.

Hemant Sharma received his B.E degree

from Maharana Pratap College of

Technology, Gwalior in 2011. He is

currently pursuing M.Tech from ITM University, Gwalior. He is interested in

security issues in sensor network, cloud

computing.

Koushik Banerjee et al, Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 5 (4),1375-1379

IJCTA | July-August 2014 Available online@www.ijcta.com

1379

ISSN:2229-6093