Download Report

Volume 5, Issue 3, March 2015
ISSN: 2277 128X
International Journal of Advanced Research in
Computer Science and Software Engineering
Research Paper
Available online at: www.ijarcsse.com
Special Issue: E-Technologies in Anthropology
Conference Held at Bon Secours College for Women, India
Establishment of Power Optimistic Routing in Mobile Adhoc Networks
1
Pavithra.M, 2Uma Maheswari.B
M.E(II yr), Department of Computer Science, Vandayar Engineering College, Thanjavur, India
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science, Vandayar Engineering College, Thanjavur , India
1
Abstract: Mobile ad hoc networks (MANET) are networks in which routing is based on multi-hop routing from a
source to a destination node or nodes. These networks have quite a many constraints because of uncertainty of radio
interface and its limitations e.g. in available bandwidth. Also some terminals have limitations concerning battery
energy in use. Thus the great problem encountered, absence of power optimization. Power optimization can be done
by utilization of energy aware routing protocols. There are numerous applicable protocols for ad hoc networks, but
one confusing problem is the vast number of separate protocols. Each of these protocols is designed to perform its task
as well as it is possible according to its design criteria. The protocol to be chosen must cover all states of a specified
network and never is allowed to consume too much network resources by protocol overhead traffic. Such kind of
energy aware protocols discussed here for establishment of power optimistic routing are Fisheye State Routing (FSR),
Optimized Link State Routing(OLSR) and presenting these neighbor selection protocols as Energy Power Aware
Routing
Keywords: Power Optimization, EPAR, DSR, FSR, OLSR
I.
INTRODUCTION
Mobile ad hoc network is a multi-hop wireless network, which consists of number of mobile nodes. These nodes
generate traffic to be forwarded to some other nodes or a group of nodes. Due to a dynamic nature of ad hoc networks,
traditional fixed network routing protocols are not viable. Based on that reason several proposals for routing protocols
has been presented. Ad hoc radio networks have various implementation areas. Some areas to be mentioned are military,
emergency, conferencing and sensor applications. Each of these application areas has their specific requirements for
routing protocols. For example in military applications low probability of detection and interception is a key factor such
is routing efficiency during fading and disturbed radio channel conditions. At sensor applications low or minimum
energy consumption is a precondition for an autonomous operation. All application areas have some features and
requirements for protocols in common. The routing protocol overhead traffic is not allowed to drive the network to
congestion nor a local change in link is not allowed to cause a massive control traffic storm and more energy dissipation
throughout the network.
II. MANET
“A mobile ad-hoc network(MANET) is a self-configuring network of mobile routers (and associated hosts) connected by
wireless links.” Some of the main features of MANET are listed below:
i)
MANET can be formed without any preexisting infrastructure.
ii) It follows dynamic topology where nodes may join and leave the network at any time and the multi-hop routing
may keep changing as nodes join and depart from the network.
iii) It does have very limited physical security, and thus increasing security is a major concern.
iv) Every node in the MANET can assist in routing of packets in the network.
v) Limited Bandwidth & Limited Power.
“Routing is the process of information exchange from one host to the other host in a network”. Routing is the
mechanism of forwarding packet towards its destination using most efficient path. Efficiency of the path is measured in
various metrics like, Number of hops, traffic, security, residual battery power, etc. In Ad-hoc network each host node
acts as specialized router itself.
III. RELATED RESEARCH WORKS
The previous work on routing in wireless ad-hoc networks deals with the problem of finding and maintaining
correct routes to the destination during mobility and changing topology. Shortest path algorithm is used in this strongly
© 2015, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved
Page | 212
Pavithra et al., International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering 5 (3),
March- 2015, pp. 212-217
connected backbone network. However, the route may not be the minimum energy solution due to the possible omission
of the optimal links at the time of the backbone connection network calculation. Thus the selected route should be energy
aware by incorporating metrics like battery power of nodes, bandwidth of nodes, traffic intensity. A dynamic routing
algorithm for establishing and maintaining connection oriented sessions which uses the idea of proactive to cope with the
unpredictable topology changes.
3.1 Proactive Routing
In proactive routing scheme every node continuously maintains complete routing information of the network.
This is achieved by flooding network periodically with network status information to find out any possible change in
network topology. With table-driven routing protocols, each node attempts to maintain consistent up to date routing
information to every other node in the network. This is done in response to changes in the network by having each node
update its routing table and propagate the updates to its neighboring nodes. Thus, it is proactive in the sense that when a
packet needs to be forwarded the route is already known and can be immediately used. As is the case for wired networks,
the routing table is constructed using either link-state or distance vector algorithms containing a list of all the
destinations, the next hop, and the number of hops to each destination. Current routing protocol like Link State Routing
(LSR) protocol (open shortest path first) and the Distance Vector Routing Protocol (Bellman-Ford algorithm) are not
suitable to be used in mobile environment. Destination Sequenced Distance Vector Routing protocol (DSDV) and
Wireless routing protocols were proposed to eliminate counting to infinity and looping problems of the distributed
Bellman-Ford Algorithm.
3.2 Reactive Routing
Every node in this routing protocol maintains information of only active paths to the destination nodes. A route
search is needed for every new destination therefore the communication overhead is reduced at the expense of delay to
search the route. Rapidly changing wireless network topology may break active route and cause subsequent route search
[2].
Examples of reactive protocols are:
a) Ad hoc On-demand Distance Vector Routing (AODV).
b) Dynamic Source Routing (DSR).
3.2.1 AODV
AODV stands for Ad-hoc On demand Distance Vector. AODV is distance vector type routing where it does not
involve nodes to maintain routes to destination that are not on active path. As long as end points are valid AODV does
not play its part. Different route messages like Route Request, Route Replies and Route Errors are used to discover and
maintain links. UDP/IP is used to receive and get messages. AODV uses a destination sequence number for each route
created by destination node for any request to the nodes. A route with maximum sequence number is selected. To find a
new route the source node sends Route Request message to the network till destination is reached or a node with fresh
route is found. Then Route Reply is sent back to the source node. The nodes on active route communicate with each
other by passing hello messages periodically to its immediate neighbor. If a node does not receive a reply then it deletes
the node from its list and sends Route Error to all the members in the active members in the route. AODV does not allow
unidirectional link[2].
3.2.2 DSR
This is an On-demand source routing protocol. In DSR the route paths are discovered after source sends a packet
to a destination node in the ad-hoc network. The source node initially does not have a path to the destination when the
first packet is sent. The DSR has two functions first is route discovery and the second is route maintenance.
This protocol is based on the link state algorithm in which source initiates route discovery on demand basis. The sender
determines the route from source to destination and it includes the address of intermediate nodes to the route record in the
packet. DSR was designed for multi hop networks for small Diameters.
Figure 1: DSR protocol path selection
© 2015, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved
Page | 213
Pavithra et al., International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering 5 (3),
March- 2015, pp. 212-217
Disadvantage: proactive Vs reactive
Proactive protocols: These maintain the complete network graph in current state, where it is not required to send packets
to ll those nodes. Consumes many network resources to maintain upto- date status of network graph. “A frequent systemwide roadcast limits the size of ad-hoc network that can effectively use DSDV because the control message overhead
grows as O (n 2 ).” [3].
Reactive protocols: These have very high response time as route is needed to be discovered on demand, when there is
some packet to be send to new destination which does not lie on active path.
IV. DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF PROPOSED SYSTEM
Energy efficient routing protocols, for MANET try to reduce energy consumption by means of an energy efficient
routing metric, used in routing table computation instead of the minimum-hop metric. In the proposed system, Energy
Power Aware Routing established by means of utilizing FSR and OLSR routing protocols. Efficient routes can be made
with help of utilizing FSR routing protocol. Thus FSR scans all possible routes to the destination by instructing certain
metrics. The metrics includes bandwidth, battery power, lifetime of all intermediate nodes. Based upon satisfied metrics,
route to destination selected and traverse request packets to the destination. In rare case, there may be chance of packet
dropping while in traversing to destination, at that time OLSR routing protocol will generates intermediate nodes i.e.,
MANET has a great property of self creating and adhering self administering capabilities. Those generated intermediate
nodes leads to destination.
Figure 2: FSR protocol-Scope
OLSR is well suited to large and dense mobile networks, as the optimization achieved using the MRPs works well in this
context. The larger and more dense the network, the more optimization can be achieved. OLSR is well suited for
networks, where traffic is random and sporadic between several nodes rather than being almost exclusively between a
small specified set of nodes. [4]
Figure 3: System Design
The setup implemented using NS-2.33. Thus the simulated network consists of 120 nodes randomly scattered over
2000m x 2000m area. The tool setdest was used to produce different mobility scenarios, where nodes were moving at
varying speeds. Those simulation parameters as follows.
© 2015, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved
Page | 214
Pavithra et al., International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering 5 (3),
March- 2015, pp. 212-217
Fig. 4 shows that the consumed power of networks using EPAR and AODV decreases significantly when the number of
nodes exceeds 60. On the contrary, the consumed power of a network using the DSR protocol increases rapidly whilst
that of EPAR based network shows stability with increasing number of nodes. Here EPAR constitutes of FSR and OLSR.
Figure 4:Power consumed Vs Number of nodes
Fig. 5 shows that the end to end delay with respect to pause time of network using AODV and DSR increases
significantly when the pause time exceeds 70secs. On the contrary, the end to end delay operating EPAR protocol
increases slowly compared with AODV based network shows a gentle increase with increasing number of pause time.
Observe that EPAR protocol maintenance the stable battery power while calculating the end to end delay.
Figure 5: End to End delay
Fig. 6 shows the throughput of DSR protocol becoming stable when the number of nodes exceeds 60 while the AODV
increases significantly. On the other hand the throughput of EPAR increases rapidly when the nodes exceeds 60 with
© 2015, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved
Page | 215
Pavithra et al., International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering 5 (3),
March- 2015, pp. 212-217
80% efficiency than AODV and DSR. Fig. 7 shows that the DSR protocol becomes inefficient when the network consists
of more than 700 traffic size for low density network while for high density network becomes inefficient when the
network consist more than 1000 sources.
The life-time decreases as the number of grow; however, for a number of nodes greater than 100, the life-time remains
almost constant as the number of nodes increases. Lifetime decreases because MANET has to cover more nodes as the
number of nodes in the network size increases. We observe that the improvement achieved through EPAR is equal to 85
%. Energy is uniformly drained from all the nodes and hence the network lifetime is significantly increased.
V. CONCLUSION
A mobile ad hoc network (MANET) consists of autonomous mobile nodes, each of which communicates directly with
the neighbor nodes within its radio range or indirectly with other nodes in a network. In order to facilitate reliable
communication within a MANET, an efficient routing protocol is required to discover routes between mobile nodes. The
field of MANETs is rapidly growing due to the many advantages and different application areas.
Energy efficiency is a challenge faced in MANETs, especially in designing a routing protocol. In this paper, we surveyed
a number of energy efficient routing protocols and in many cases; it is difficult to compare these protocols with each
other directly. Since each protocol has a different goal with different assumptions and employs mechanisms to achieve
the goal. According to the study, these protocols have different strengths and drawbacks. Using EPAR can hardly satisfy
our maximum requirements. In other words, one routing protocol cannot be a solution for all energy efficient protocol
that designed to provide the maximum possible requirements, according to certain required scenarios. In future we try to
design a new procedure that reduces the energy consumption and increases more energy utilization of nodes in network.
© 2015, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved
Page | 216
Pavithra et al., International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering 5 (3),
March- 2015, pp. 212-217
REFRENCES
[1]
Mario Joa-Ng, “A Peer-to-Peer Zone-Based Two-Level Link State Routing for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks”, IEEE
Journal on selected areas in communications, Vol. 17, No. 8, Aug-1999.
[2]
Eitan Altman and Tamia Jimenez, “NS for Beginners",http://www.sop.inria.fr/maestro/personnel/Eitan.Altman/
COURS-NS/n3.pdf, Jan-2002.
[3]
Charles E.Perkins and Elizabeth M. Royer, “Ad hoc on demand distance vector (AODV) routing (InternetDraft)”, Aug-1998.
[4]
Philippe Jaquet, Paul Muhlethaler, Amir Qayyum, “Optimized Link State Routing Protocol”, IETF Draft,
2001.http://www.ietf.org/internetdrafts/draft-ietf-manet-olsr-06.txt
© 2015, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved
Page | 217