SIMULATION STUDY FOR PERFORMANCE COMPARISON WITH MOBILITY MODELS OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE ADHOC NETWORK

NOOR MOHD¹*, QUAMAR DANISH²*
¹Graphic Era University, Dehradun, India
²Research Scholor Bhagwant University, Rajasthan India
* Corresponding Author : danishquamar@yahoo.com

Received : 12-12-2011     Accepted : 15-01-2012     Published : 28-02-2012
Volume : 3     Issue : 1       Pages : 261 - 264
J Inform Oper Manag 3.1 (2012):261-264

Mobile computing: is computing for fixed infrastructure based wireless Network. Due to insufficient frequency band and tremendous growth of the mobile users, complex computation is needed for the use of resources. Long distance communication began with the introduction of telegraphs and simple coded pulses, which were used to transmit short messages. Since then numerous advances have rendered reliable transfer of information both easier and quicker. Wireless network refers to any type of computer network that is wireless, and is commonly associated with a telecommunications network whose interconnections between nodes is implemented without the use of wires. Wireless network can be broadly categorized in infrastructure network and infrastructure less network. Infrastructure network is one in which we have a base station to serve the mobile users and in the infrastructure less network is one in which no infrastructure is available to serve the mobile users this kind of networks are also known as mobile Adhoc networks. In this paper we simulated the result for different mobility scenarios with protocols like AODV, DSR and OLSR

Adhoc Network, AODV, DSR, OLSR, Mobility Model, Power Aware Routing, Security, opnet.

Mobile Adhoc Network is a future technology; various challenges are superimposed by this technology. MANET inherited the challenges from fixed wireless cell architecture; in addition bandwidth and highly dynamic topology and battery back up problem. MANET is used where no infrastructure is available for communication; such like disastrous area, military tactical application, sensor network .One primary application of MANET is in military use including tactical operations. In these environments security is often the primary concern. Future information technology will be based on wireless technology. Infrastructure based cellular and mobile networks are still limited by the need of infrastructure such like base station, allocation of frequencies. to fulfill the demand of users various approaches are given such as frequency reuse concepts, clustering technique, sectoring technique, and assignment of conflict free channels. The Ad Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol enables multi-hop routing between participating mobile nodes wishing to establish and maintain an ad-hoc network. AODV is based upon the distance vector algorithm. The difference is that AODV is reactive, as opposed to proactive protocols like DV, Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) [4,5,6] also belongs to the class of reactive protocols and allows nodes to dynamically discover a route across multiple network hops to any destination. OLSR is based on Proactive Routing Protocol.
In this paper section 2 is describing the related work section 3 shows the Simulation Environment and section 4 shows the validation and section 5 holds the conclusion about the simulation.

Many routing protocols have been proposed [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,&16] , but few comparisons between the different protocols have been made of the work that has been done in this field, only the work done by the Monarch project at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) has compared some of the different [17] proposed routing protocols and evaluated them based on the same quantitative metrics. For Mobile Adhoc Network there are various model proposed for security because it is an important and crucial aspect, some very good references are given in [21,22,&23] .

Simulator used for simulation is the Opnet Modeler 14.

In this scenario we have taken the campus of “Graphic Era University” for our simulation.
In this scenario we have 10 mobile nodes enabled with AODV, DSR and OLSR routing protocols.

In Opnet we have to configure the profile for MANET, and there are three important configurations for standard application.
1. Mobility Configuration
2. Application Definition
3. Profile Definition.

Mobility configuration is related to description about the mobility of mobile nodes, and for this we have set the three important parameters. [Table-1] , [Fig-1] .

Application definition is related to the description about the application for which our setup will deal.
For this Scenario we have taken standard application type which is FTP. & inter request time is 360 Seconds. [Table-2] .

[Table-3] .

Routing parameters are set to default values. [Table-4] .

[Table-5] .

[Table-6] .

[Fig-2] , [Fig-3] , [Fig-4] , [Fig-5] , [Fig-6] .

[Fig-7] , [Fig-8] , [Fig-9] , [Fig-10] , [Fig-11] , [Fig-12] .

[Fig-13] , [Fig-14] , [Fig-15] , [Fig-16] , [Fig-17] .

From above table we can say that control messages are better in DSR but Data Traffic is better in AODV and OLSR is not standing for any condition. [Table-7] .

In this Paper we have simulated the performance result for Routing Protocols for Mobile Adhoc Networks with different mobility models for 10 nodes and routing protocols AODV, DSR and OLSR. For the above condition we can say that AODV is better than the DSR and OLSR. OLSR is not performing well because it is proactive routing protocol and for mobile adhoc network Reactive routing protocols are best suited.

[1] Bommaiah, McAuley and Talpade A.M. (1998) Internet draft.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[2] Josh Broch, David A. Maltz, David B. Johnson, Yih-Chun Hu and Jorjeta Jetcheva (1998) Mobicom'98, Dallas Texas,25–30.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[3] Josh Broch, David B. Johnsson, David A. Maltz (1998) Internet Draft.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[4] Scott Corson and Joseph Macker (1998) Internet-Draft.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[5] M.Scott Corson, Papademetriou S., Philip Papadopolous, Vincent D. Park and Amir Qayyum (1998) Internet draft.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[6] Kevin Fall and Kannan Varadhan (1998) The VINT project, UC Berkeley, LBL, USC/ISI, and Xerox PARC.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[7] Zygmunt J. Haas and Marc R. Pearlman (1998) Internet draft.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[8] IEEE Computer Society LAN MAN Standards Committee IEEE Std 802 (1997) The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[9] Philippe Jacquet, Paul Muhlethaler and Amir Qayyum (1998) Internet draft.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[10] Mingliang Jiang, Jinyang Li and Yong Chiang Tay (1998) Internet draft.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[11] David B. Johnson and David A. Maltz. In Mobile Computing, pp. 153-181.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[12] David B. Johnson and David A. Maltz (1996) In IEEE Personal Communications, 3(1).  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[13] Stephen Kent and Randall Atkinson (1998) Internet draft, draft-ietf-ipsec-arch-sec-07.txt.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[14] Mobile Ad -hoc Networks (MANET) (1998) www.ietf.org.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[15] Vincent D. Park and M. Scott Corson (1998) Internet draft.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[16] Vincent D. Park and M. Scott Corson (1998) EEE Symposium on Computers and Communication.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[17] Charles E. Perkins (1998) Internet draft.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[18] Charles E. Perkins and Pravin Bhagwat (1994) Conference on Communications Architecture, protocols and Applications, pages234-244.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[19] Shahnawaz Husain, Gupta S.C., Mukesh Chand (2011) Computer and Communication Technology pp.292-297.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[20] Husain Shahnawaz, Gupta S.C. (2011) International Journal of Computer Science & Information Technology, ISSN 0975-9646, Vol (2) Issue 4, pp 1569-1573.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[21] Husain S., Gupta S.C., Chand M., Mandoria H.L. (2010) Computer and Communication Technology, pp. 99-102.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

	Fig.1- Simulation Environment
	Fig. 2- Routing Traffic Received
	Fig. 3- Routing Traffic Sent
	Fig. 4- Routing Traffic Sent
	Fig. 5- FTP Traffic Received
	Fig. 6- FTP Traffic Sent
	Fig. 7- FTP Upload Time
	Fig. 8- Routing Traffic Received
	Fig. 9- FTP Traffic Received
	Fig. 10- FTP Traffic Received
	Fig. 11- FTP Traffic Sent
	Fig. 12- FTP Download Time
	Fig.13- FTP Upload Time
	Fig. 14- Routing Traffic Received
	Fig. 15- Routing Traffic Sent
	Fig. 16- FTP Traffic Received
	Fig. 17- FTP Traffic Sent
	Table 1- Mobility Configuration
	Table 2- Application Definition
	Table 3- Profile Definition
	Table 4- AODV
	Table 5- DSR
	Table 6- SIMULATION PARAMETERS
	Table 7- Performance Table