2009 International Conference of Soft Computing and Pattern Recognition

AODV Routing Protocol with Selective Flooding

Geetam S. Tomar, Manish Dixit & Shekhar Verma Dept of Electronics Engineering Malwa Institute of Technology & Management, Jhansi Road, Gwalior 475001 India
Dept of Information Technology Madhav Institute of Tech. & Science, Gola Ka Mandir, Gwalior 474005 India Dept of CSE and IT, Indian Institute of Information Technology, Jhalwa, Allahabad 211012 India e-mail: gstomar@ieee.org, dixitmits@gmail.com & sv.iiitm@ac.in Abstract Ad-hoc network is a self organizing and adaptive in nature. Since it is a dynamic multihop wireless network and established by a cluster of mobile nodes on a shared wireless channel. The transitive closure of the neighborhood of all the hosts or nodes in the set of mobiles under consideration forms network. Each node is potentially a router and it is possible to dynamically establish routes by changing together a sequence of neighboring hosts from a source to destination in the adhoc network. In this paper study compares the relative performance of existing protocols and evaluates them. It has been determined that under similar conditions AODV outperforms the other protocols. In this work we have proposed an algorithm to overcome flooding problem in the network. The proposed algorithm is selective flooding in place of broadcasting. It is proposed to lessen the number of packets within the network. This reduces the routing Packet overhead. The algorithm was incorporated in the AODV algorithm and simulated in the identical environment it has improved throughput in the network.
Keywords-Multihop, Routing, flooding, cluster

I.

INTRODUCTION

Wireless networks are classified as Infrastructure wireless network and Infrastructure less wireless network.. In infrastructure wireless network only end users are mobile while other parts of network are remaining static, while Infrastructure-less are fully dynamic i.e. every part of network are mobile in any direction without any predefined strategy. These networks are self organizing and adaptive to any change in topology and other parameters. The nodes are free to move in arbitrary direction with any arbitrary speed. With no fixed routers, nodes work as routers in the network. In such a dynamic network each node has to keep track of topological changes in network in order to choose the shortest path to any destination. The existing routing protocols cannot work in this situation proficiently. The main issues that surface due to the fluid nature of the topology due to unpredictable changes are: one; the route computation has to be distributed due to lack of fixed routers; second, loop freedom; third, conservation of power since the mobile nodes are routers; fourth, sleep

period operation is typical and unidirectional support; and finally, end to end data throughput and delay, apart from this route Acquisition time and percentage out of order delivery also plays its role in routing under topological changes. Other networking parameters that affect protocols performance, network connectivity, network size, topological rate of change, link capacity, traffic pattern, mobility and fraction of unidirectional link behavior. The existing protocols work on the basis of either table driven concept or on demand routing idea in the network. In table driven protocol each node maintains one or more tables which contain routing Information to every other node in network by control message. Any change in network topology is communicated to entire network through update message. A node sends update message when its state or position change in network even if it is clustered. Different variations of table driven routing protocols exist like DSDV, WRP, GSR [1,2], Fish eye state routing, Zone based hierarchical link state routing [3,5], cluster head gateway and Hierarchical state routing [6]. The details of these protocols are well established and proven according to various patterns and available results. In on-demand routing protocols all update routes are not maintained at every node, instead the routes are created as and when required [8,9]. When a source wants to send packets to destination, it invokes the route discovery mechanism to find the path to the destination [10]. The route remains valid till the destination is reachable or until the route is no longer needed. Some on demand routing protocols are Cluster based routing [7], Ad-hoc on demand distance vector routing, dynamic source routing, temporally ordered routing algorithm and Associative based routing is exercised [1113], the optimal routing with query and delivery is also existing for ad hoc networks but without control on the traffic and delivery system with emphasis on traffic delivery and control [14, 15]. The main emphasis is not only low latency and high throughput; but also on the efficiency to cope with the changes due to collisions in the network too. In this paper, some representative table driven and on demand routing protocols like DSDV, DSR and AODV have been for studied through simulation. The study
682 699

978-0-7695-3879-2/09 $26.00 2009 IEEE DOI 10.1109/SoCPaR.2009.136

compares the relative performance of these protocols and evaluates them. It has been determined that under similar conditions AODV outperforms the other protocols. The problem inherent to AODV has been identified and studied. Further, modification has been proposed and evaluated to rectify the problem in the protocol. The rest of the paper is divided as follows. Section II contains the problem statement. Section III discusses the DSDV, DSR and AODV in detail. Section IV identifies a major limitation associated with AODV and a solution is proposed for the same, section V contains the simulation framework and Section VI discusses the results and concludes the work. II. PROBLEM STATEMENT Routing protocols are efficient if they maintain some parameters like high throughput; low packet loss, low average delay and same time perform under constraints like bandwidth utilization, power usage by nodes, setup time, etc. All these parameters are related to one another and anyone parameter the one parameter affects the other parameter when it is taken into consideration of entire operations. Thus, the choice of a particular protocol is dependent on its performance in actual conditions. The second problem in the choice of a protocol is due to other several parameter change problems in these protocols. The primary goal of this paper is to study the different routing protocols and compare them through simulation to determine their relative performance and to identify the intrinsic problems in these techniques, which are mostly affecting the overall performance of the entire network of cluster in the present topological conditions. The main task is then to alleviate these problems to improve the performance of a protocol under conditions specified for the performance measurement. The network is considered to be of better quality if it is flexible to changes with scalability and design simplicity; it is thus considered to use the available algorithm with performance criteria and trusted utility for available data types and rates. III. ROUTING PROTOCOLS

routing though a large amount of memory is required for the storing the routing Information in update tables. 3.2 DSR Protocol In DSR (Dynamic Source Routing), a node maintains route caches containing the source routes that are aware of the node updates entries in the rout cache as and when it learns about new routes. Route is looked up in this cache, non-availability results in the broadcasting of a route request (RREQ) packet that contains the address of sources and destination. Each Intermediate node checks it. A route reply (RREP) is generated by destination or an Intermediate node with current information about the destination receives the RREQ packet. If the node generates the RREP, is an intermediate node, it appends its catch route to the destination to the route record of the RREQ packet and puts that into RREP packet. The main drawback is scalability. 3.3 AODV Routing Protocol AODV (Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector) is improved model of DSDV algorithm. AOVD minimizes the number of broadcast by creating routes on-demand. In path discovery mechanism source broadcast a rout request packet (RREQ) to its neighbors, who in turn broadcast it to their neighbors and so on to know the required packet by individual nodes. This process continues until the packet reaches on Intermediate node or destination node itself. The reverse path for the route reply (RREP) packet is constructed by node according to their table Information, the node from which the first copy of RREQ arrival. If source moves then it can reinitiate route discovery to the destination. If an Intermediate node moves, a link failure notification is issued upstream. AODV maintains routes for as long as the route is active. The protocol is scalable with loop free routing. The disadvantage is route packet overhead: IV.
SIMULATION FRAMEWORK

This section presents an overview of a few representative protocols that have been studied in detail in later sections. 3.1 DSDV Routing Protocol The DSDV (Destination- Sequenced Distance-Vector) routing algorithm is extension of Bellman- ford routing algorithm with some Improvements in its architecture. Each mobile host maintains a routing table, which contains information of all available destination nodes, number of hopes required to reach destination and sequence number. Routing tables are updated in full dump and incremental updates manner. Full dump carry all the available routing information and can span many packets, while Incremental carry only information changed since last dump of the table. The protocol ensures loop free

The protocols have been simulated using ns-2 as a simulator. The protocols, DSDV, DSR, and AOVD are simulated on ns-2 with a network with fifty mobile nodes which are moving and communicating with one another. In DSDV Implementation both full and incremental updates are required by protocol description. However published description of DSDV is ambiguous about specifying when triggered updates should be sent. One Interpretation is that the receipt of new sequence no. for a destination causes a triggered update. This approach is known as DSDV-QS (Sequence no.). The advantage of this approach is that broken links would be detected and routed around as a new sequence no. propagate around the broken link and create alternate routes. The parameters have been chosen to be the same as in existing studies. The desired goal of the experiment was to measure the ability of the routing protocols i.e. successfully deliver data packets to destinations .To measure the ability of routing protocol, multiple loads have been used; in effect testing with each

683 700

data packet originated by sender whether routing protocol can at that time route to destination . The protocol evaluation is based on the simulation of 50 wireless nodes which forming an ad-hoc network and moving over a rectangular (1500m by 300m) flat space for 900s simulation time. The comparisons between protocols are very critical in case of identical load. Each run of simulator accepts as input a scenario file that describes the exact motion of each node and exact sequence of packets, with 210 different pregenerated scenario files with varying moment pattern and traffic loads. This is done for all the three protocols. The movement scenario is characterized by a pause time in each simulation. Each node begins the simulation by running stationary for pause time in seconds .Then it select a random destination in the (1500 by 300) space and moves to the destination at a speed of distributed uniformly between 0 and max. Speed, .Reaching upon destination the node pauses again for pause time in seconds, select another destination and proceed like previous manner and repeat this process during simulation. Scenario files with seventy different movement patterns have been generated. For comparison of the protocols, the following metrics have been considered with a traffic load of 20 sources. Packet delivery ratio: The ratio between number of packets originated by the application layer CBR sources and no. of packets received by CBR sink at final destination that defines the throughput. Routing overhead: Total no. of packets transmitted during simulation .For packets sent over multi hops, each transmission of packet (each hop )counts as one transmission. Routing overhead measures the scalability of a protocol.

160,000 140,000
Data packets receiv ed/ data packet sent

120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000

DSDV-SQ DSR AODV-LL

100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Pause time (secs)

800

900

Fig. No. 2: Overhead DSR and AODV perform well and delivered ninety five percent of data packets regardless mobility rate, but DSDV fails to converge, when pause times less than 300 seconds. DSR and AODV both are on-demand protocol, their overhead drops as mobility rate drops. In DSDV overhead is almost constant with respect to mobility rate. It was found that DSDV performs very well at low mobility rate and low movement speed, but when mobility increases its performance degrade as shown in figure (1,2). DSR performance is very good at all mobility rate and movement speed, but it required high routing overhead bytes. AODV performs as well as DSR and with low source routing overhead but it still requires the transmission of many routing overhead packets and at high rate of node mobility is more expensive than DSR (see figure (3,4). V. ROUTING OVERHEAD IN AODV

1.0
D at a pac k ets rec e iv e d/ d at a pa c k et s e nt

0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7

DSDV-SQ DSR AODV-LL

100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Pause time (secs)

800

900

Flooding which is consequence of broadcasting is the root cause of the problem. Hence, reduction of indiscriminate flooding is imperative. It is evident that in a mobile adhoc network with every node being a potential router, multiple paths exist between any two nodes, moreover, particular path between a source and destination had a very short life and sub optimal paths may not really degrade the routing performance; moreover randomized algorithms have been observed to perform well in such networks. Based on these observations, selective flooding is proposed in place of broadcasting. It is assumed that randomly choosing a set of neighbors; the probability of finding to a route to destination will not decrease. The selective flooding is proposed to lessen the number of packets within the network. The request should be sent only to those neighbors from whom the probability of getting the response is highest. However, this the nodes move randomly, in the proposed technique, the neighbors are chosen randomly. The algorithm starts with an initial

Fig. No. 1: Throughput

684 701

selection of one-third neighbors randomly and sends the first Route Request message. If it gets reply before the request time out period it is done, otherwise, again route request message to another one-third of the neighbors and keep on doing the same operation until all the neighbors are selected or it gets a out reply. This reduces the routing Packet overhead. The algorithm was incorporated in the AODV algorithm and simulated in the identical environment. The simulation indicated that rate of packet loss decreased and the throughput increased proportionately. The average delay of network, however, increased.

VI.

CONCLUSION

SF_AOV AODV 450 400 350 300

This paper was basically divided in to two phases for executing the work. In first phase three protocols DSDV, DSR and AODV, and these protocols were compared on performance basis, which was based on various parameters concerned with network. In second phase, a correction in AODV was proposed and implemented. This correction may solve the low bandwidth problem in ad-hoc networks though with an increase in delay. The increase in delay in not to the extent, which can hamper its usual operation and delivery of the packets. The overall performance of the network is improved in terms of throughput and delivery rate, which was the objective of the proposed modification. The basic emphasis was given on bandwidth as scarcity of bandwidth is day to day phenomena and has to be taken care due to air interface constraints for the wireless networks. The implementation has given new hopes for ad hoc networks with low bandwidth and sudden changes in the topology. REFERENCES
[1] C.E. Perkins and P. Bhagwat, Highly Dynamic DestinationSequenced Distnace-Vector Routing (DSDV) for Mobile Computers, Comp. Comm. Rev., Oct. 1994, pp.234-244. S. Murthy and J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, An Efficient Routing Protocol for Wireless Networks, ACM Mobile Networks and App. J., Special Issue on Routing in Mobile Communication Networks, Oct. 1996, pp. 183-97. Tsu-Wei Chen and Mario Gerla, Global State Routing: a New Routing Scheme for Ad-hoc Wireless Networks Proc. IEEE ICC98, 5 pages. A. Iwata, C.-C. Chiang, G. Pei, M. Gerla, and T.-W.Chen, Scalable Routing Strategies for Ad Hoc Wireless Networks IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, Special Issue on Ad-Hoc Network, Aug.1999, p.p.1369-79. M Joa-Ng and I. T. Lu, A Peer-toPeer zone-based two-level link state routing for mobile Ad Hoc Networks, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, Special Issue on Ad-Hoc Network, Aug.1999, p.p.1415-25. C.-C. Chiang, Routing in Clustered Multihop, Mobile Wireless Networks with Fding Channel Proc. IEEE SICON97, Apr.1997, pp.197-211. Mingliang Jiang, jinyang Li, Y.C.Tay,Cluster Based Routing Protocol August 1999 IETF Draft, 27 pages. David B. Johnson, Davis A. MAltz, The ynamic Source Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks October 1999 IETF Draft, 9 pages. David B. Johnson, Davis A. Maltz, Dynamic Source Routing in Ad Hoc Networks, Mobile Computing, T. Imielinski and H. Korth, Eds., Kulwer, 1996, pp. 152-81. VD Park and MS Corson A highly adaptive distributed routing algorithm for mobile wireless networks, Proc. INFOCOM97, Apr. 1997, 9 pages. Chai-Keong Toh, A novel distributed routing protocol to support Ad hoc mobile computing Proc. 1996 IEEE 15th Annual Intl. Phoenix Conf. Comp. and Commun., Mar. 1996, pp. 480-86 C.-K.Toh, Long-lived Ad-Hoc Routing based on the concept of Associativity March 1999 IETF Draft, 8 pages. R. Dube et al., Signal Stability based adaptive routing for Ad Hoc Mobile Networks, IEEE Pers. Comm., Feb. 1997, pp. 36-45.

P ac ket Loss

250 200 150 100 50 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

[2]

[3]

Number of nodes

[4]

Fig. No. 3: Packet delay

[5]

[6]
AODV SF_AODV 0.014 0.012

[7] [8]

Average De la y

0.01 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.002 0 800 200 400 600 800

[9]

[10]

Pause Time

[11]

[12]

Fig. No. 4: Average Delay Variations

[13]

685 702

[14] Elizabeth M. Royer, Chai-Keong Toh, A Review of Current Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks, IEEE Personal Communications, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 46-55, April 1999. [15] Z.J. Haas and M.R. Pearlman, The Performance of Query Control Schemes for the Zone Routing Protocol, ACM SIGCOMM98.

Describes ZRP protocol, which leads to the development of ZoneBased Hierarchical Routing Protocol. Dec. 2007, pp. 57-64, doi:10.

686 703