ijtc€¦ · international journal of technology and computing (ijtc) issn-2455-099x, volume 1,...

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTING (IJTC) ISSN-2455-099X, Volume 1, Issue 3, DECEMBER 2015.

100

COMPARATIVE STUDY AND EVALUATION OF AODV, DSR

AND OLSR PROTOCOLS

Satinder Singh a, ∗, Jyoti Arorab

aM.Tech Student, CSE Department , DBU, Manigobindgarh

bAssistant Professor, CSE, DBU, Manigobindgarh

ABSTRACT

MANET is a self-organized and self-configurable network, where the mobile nodes move arbitrarily. The

mobile nodes could receive and forward packets as a router or gateway. This paper is analysis the performance

of the protocols like AODV, DSR and OLSR protocols. We compared three routing protocols i.e. AODV, DSR

and OLSR. Our simulation tool will be OPNET modeler. The performance of these routing protocols is

analyzed by three metrics: delay, network load and throughput. All the three routing protocols are explained in a

deep way with metrics and OLSR protocol is among the best out of said protocols. The OLSR protocol is a

variation version of the traditional link state protocol. An important aspect of OLSR is the introduction of

multipoint relays (MPRs) to reduce the flooding of messages carrying the complete link-state information of the

node and the size of link-state updates.

Keywords: AODV, DSR, OLSR, Delay, Throughput.

I. INTRODUCTION

MANETs are infrastructure less, and nodes in the networks are constantly moving. In

MANETs, nodes can directly communicate with each other if they enter each other’s

communication range. A node can terminate packets or forward packets (serve as a relay).

Thus, a message traverses an ad hoc network by being relayed from one node to another, until

it reaches its destination. There are two basic groups of routing protocols, Proactive MANET

protocol (PMP), Reactive MANET Protocol (RMP), and whereas the third one is derived

from both of these and called as Hybrid MANET Protocol. The Proactive MANET protocol

is generally called table driven protocol and it detects the network layout periodically. It tries

to maintain the routing table at every node which is used to detect a most feasible route to the

destination from the source with less delay. Proactive MANET protocols provide good

reliability and low latency for deciding a route but these protocols are not suitable for the

nodes moving with high speed as the routing information cannot be updated in the routing

table. If a node is not moving, then its routing table information is updated continuously. It

causes more traffic overhead wastage of network resources such as bandwidth [14].

IJTC.O

RG


101

Fig. 1: Working of MANETs

In the figure 1, nodes far away from the base station rely on midway nodes for

communication. Thus provide a best communication network in such hostile situation. The

router is working like a boundary between the MANET and the Wi-Max network. The Wi-

Max WLAN router is capable of translation between the MANET protocols and the Wi-Max

network protocols, and also the backbone protocols the Wi-Max is connected with.

II. ROUTING PROTOCOLS

There are several kinds of routing protocols for wireless ad hoc networks. These routing

protocols are categorized as reactive or proactive routing protocols [8]. The ad hoc routing

protocols which have both proactive and reactive merits, is called hybrid routing protocols.

The first kind of protocol is called reactive or on-demand routing protocol. The second kind

IJTC.O

RG


102

of protocol is proactive or table driven routing protocol. The following protocols are listing in

the following sections.

A. AODV

The AODV protocol keeps a route table to store the next-hop routing information for

destination nodes. Each routing table can be used for a period of time. If a route is not

requested within that period, it expires and a new route needs to be found when needed. Each

time a route is used, its lifetime is updated. When a source node has a packet to be sent to a

given destination, it looks for a route in its route table. In case there is one, it uses it to

transmit the packet. Otherwise, it initiates a route discovery procedure to find a route by

broadcasting a route request (RREQ) message to its neighbors.

B. DSR

The source nodes starts a new route computation, thereby increasing the time to route packets

and, probably, leading TCP to experience timeouts during each route computation time,

especially if there is heavy traffic in the network.

C. OLSR

The OLSR optimizes a pure link state because it reduces the size of information sent in each

message and also reduces the total control overhead by minimizing the number of

retransmissions flooding an entire network. It uses a multipoint relaying technique to flood

the control messages in a network in an efficient manner.

III. RELATED WORK

These routing protocols DSDV, AODV, DSR and TORA were simulated using NS2 [3].

Analysis gives different results for every parameter differently. In finding shortest path

between the source and destination nodes, delay, DSDV performs well than AODV, DSR and

TORA. DSR perform well in network load balancing than DSDV, AODV and TORA. DSDV

has good jitter than AODV, TORA and DSR respectively.

The results given in [5] analyze DSR and DSDV in idealized and realistic simulation

environments on their performance. Another paper in reference [4] gives conclusion in

mobile ad hoc network that reactive protocols i.e. AODV and DSR perform well when the

network load is moderate. In reference [4] the reactive protocols are saving many resources

like energy and bandwidth. It analyze that the proactive protocols perform well in heavy

network traffic load.

In [6] the author give different kind of conclusions about the MANET routing protocols i.e.

DSDV, AODV and DSR were simulated in NS2. The reactive protocol AODV outperforms

than DSDV and DSR in maintaining connection by sequentially exchange of information for

IJTC.O

RG


103

TCP based traffic. The packets were delivered when the node mobility is low and failed to

deliver at high mobility. DSR perform well than DSDV at all mobility. In [6] DSR performs

well than DSDV and AODV for packet dropping rate (PDR), delay and throughput. DSR

generates less network load than AODV.

In reference [7], the simulation was done in QUALNET simulator. The author wrote that

AODV shows best performance in low and medium node density but in high node density

both OLSR and DSR outperforms. The author wrote that DSR is selected for file transfers

where delivery and throughput are critical factors. OLSR performs well in both low and high

node density. It is stated in [7] that OLSR is best suited in application oriented traffic e.g.

streaming traffic, voice and video traffic. In application based traffic delay is a very critical

factor.

IV. PROPOSED SCENARIO

The simulation is carried out in the OPNET Modeler 14.5. Below in figure 2, it is showing

the simulation environment of one scenario having 20 mobile nodes for OLSR routing

protocol. The key parameters are provided here i.e. delay, network load and throughput. We

run three scenarios but we show the 80 nodes setup.

Fig. 2: Simulation Setup

The network size is of 1000 x 1000 meters. After that IPv4 addressing was assigned to all the

nodes. The application configuration and profile configuration was drag to workspace. All

the settings must be done according to the requirement. The FTP was selected as traffic High

Load. Now deploy the configured profile by clicking Protocol tab and select Deploy Defined

IJTC.O

RG


104

application. Drag the Mobility Configuration to the workspace. Set all the attributes and in

last random mobility was set to MANET as a profile.

V. ANALYZING RESULTS

I. AODV Protocol

In the given figure 3, the first upper part of the graph shows the AODV delay when the

numbers of mobile nodes were 80. The middle graph shows the AODV network load and the

last part shows the AODV throughput. The AODV delay peak value when the numbers of

mobile nodes were 80 is 0.1137 sec. The AODV delay gradually decreases and reached to a

value of 0.0046 sec after 4 min. The reason of increasing the delay is that when the numbers

of mobile nodes are increased then the data which is needed to deliver to the specific

destination. So the data have to pass from many mobile nodes which cause more delay.

Fig. 3: AODV 80 Nodes

II. DSR Protocol

In the given figure 4, the DSR protocol will be checked against three parameters such as

delay, network load and throughput. The changes in the graph can be seen clearly from the

figure 4. The DSR shows its peak delay value at 0.0153 sec. The network load is 2779086

bit/sec. The DSR throughput can be seen from the given figure 4, which is 12888146 bit/sec.

IJTC.O

RG


105

Fig. 4: DSR 80 Nodes

III. OLSR Protocol

The first part of the figure 5 shows the OLSR delay. The second middle part shows the OLSR

network load and the third and last part shows the OLSR throughput. The OLSR delay peak

value is 0.0153 sec. The graph gradually decreased to a value 0.0020 sec. The last OLSR

delay value is 0.0010 sec. The OLSR network load peak value is 2783173 bit/sec. The OLSR

throughput peak value is 11023736 bit/sec.

Fig. 5: OLSR 80 Nodes

IV. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

IJTC.O

RG


106

Each protocol has its own advantages and disadvantages in terms of network efficiency and

resources required. Even though the network behavior may not be known, the performance of

these protocols developed under deterministic case may serve as bounds on the network

performance and as guidelines in designing protocols for stochastic case. Furthermore,

wireless networks may include unidirectional links; wired networks almost invariably entail

bidirectional point-to point communication between nodes. From a protocol designer’s

perspective, the bandwidth constraints limit the prospects of extensive control message

exchanges; that is, protocol overhead must be kept to a minimum to conserve bandwidth for

the actual messages the application processes need to exchange. The future work suggested is

the development of modified version of the selected routing protocols which should consider

different aspects of routing protocols such as rate of higher route establishment with lesser

route breakage and the weakness of the protocols mentioned should be improvised.

REFERENCES

[1] Rajiv Misra and C.R.Manda, ‘‘Performance Comparison of AODV/DSR On-demand Routing Protocols for

Ad Hoc Networks in Constrained Situation’’, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur (India).

[2] Opnet Technologies, Inc. “Opnet Simulator,” Internet: www.opnet.com, date last viewed: 2009-12-21

[3] Vahid Nazari Talooki & Koorush Ziarati, ‘‘Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols For Mobile Ad

Hoc Networks’’, Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, School of Engineering, Shiraz University

[4] F. Bertocchi, P. Bergamo, G. Mazzini, M. Zorzi, ‘‘Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols for Ad

Hoc Networks’’, DI, University of Ferrara, Italy

[5] Amr M. Hassain, MohamedI. Youssef, Mohamed M. Zahra, ‘‘Evaluation of Ad Hoc Routing Protocols in

Real Simulation Environments’’, Electronics and Electrical Communications Department, Faculty of

Engineering, AL-AZHAR University Cairo, Egypt.

[6] Nor Surayati Mohamad Usop, Azizol Abdullah, Ahmad Faisal Amri Abidin, ‘‘Performance Evaluation of

AODV, DSDV & DSR Routing Protocol in Grid Environment’’, IJCSNS International Journal of Computer

Science and Network Security, VOL.9 No.7, July 2009

[7] Md. Anisur Rahman, Md. Shohidul Islam, Alex Talevski, ‘‘Performance Measurement of Various Routing

Protocols in Ad-hoc Network’’.

[8] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2501.txt , date last viewed: 2009-12-21

[9] Ammar Zahary and Aladdin Ayesh, ‘‘Analytical Study to Detect Threshold Number of Efficient Routes in

Multipath AODV Extensions’’, Faculty of Computing Sciences and Engineering De Montfort University

Leicester, LE1 9BH, UK

[10] Lijuan Cao Kashif Sharif Yu Wang Teresa Dahlberg, ‘‘Adaptive Multiple Metrics Routing Protocols for

heterogeneous Multi-Hop Wireless Networks’’, Department of Computer Science, University of North Carolina

at Charlotte, Charlotte, USA.

[11] Uyen Trang Nguyen and Xing Xiong, ‘‘Rate-adaptive Multicast in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks’’,

Department of Computer Science and Engineering York University Toronto, Canada M3J 1P3

[12] OPNET Modeler 14.5 Documentation.

IJTC.O

RG


107

[13] Rainer Baumann, Simon Heimlicher, Martin May, ‘‘Towards Realistic Mobility Models for Vehicular Ad-

hoc Networks’’.

[14] Jing Xie, Luis Girons Quesada and Yuming Jiang, ‘‘A Threshold-based Hybrid Routing Protocol for

MANET’’. Department of Telematics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

IJTC.O

RG

ijtc€¦ · international journal of technology and computing (ijtc) issn-2455-099x, volume 1,...

Documents