Performance Analysis of Wireless Mesh Network for AODV, DSDV, DSR …€¦ · Performance Analysis of Wireless Mesh Network for AODV, DSDV, DSR and AOMDV 1Anagha P. Mahajan, M.Tech

Anagha P Mahajan* et al. ISSN: 2250-3676

[IJESAT] [International Journal of Engineering Science & Advanced Technology] Volume-5, Issue-4, 393-403

IJESAT | Jul-Aug 2015 393 Available online @ http://www.ijesat.org

Performance Analysis of Wireless Mesh Network for AODV, DSDV, DSR

and AOMDV

1Anagha P. Mahajan, M.Tech ,Electronics Engg(communication), Vidarbha Institute of Technology, Nagpur University,

India,

Email id- [email protected]. 2Nilesh Bodne, Assistant Professor (M. Tech ECE), Vidarbha Institute of Technology, Nagpur University, India,

Email id- [email protected]

ABSTRACT Wireless mesh networks (WMNs) have emerged

as a key technology for next-generation wireless

networking. Wireless mesh network is a self-organizing,

self-managing and self-healing and thus it is easy and

speedy in deployment. Apart from these characteristics,

it is low cost and easy maintenance. In recent years,

Wireless Mesh Networks have already become very

popular and been receiving an increasing amount of

attention by the research community. Due to the

limited transmission range of the radio, many pairs of

nodes in WMN may not be able to communicate

directly, hence they need other intermediate nodes to

forward packets for them. Routing in such networks is

an important issue and it possesses great challenges. In

their current form, however, these networks suffer

from both limited throughput and low reliability.

Routing is the main task to satisfy various parameters

like packet delivery ratio, packet loss ratio, throughput,

overhead, energy and delay. We generally use virtual

clustering concept in the protocol. In this paper routing

protocols used are AODV (Ad-Hoc On Demand

Distance Vector Routing), DSDV (Destination Sequence

Distance Vector Routing), DSR (Dynamic Source

Routing) and AOMDV (Ad-Hoc On Demand Multipath

Distance Vector Routing) and NS-2 simulator is used

for simulation and results will be calculated. But in

wireless networks packet loss ratio is a problem. It is

caused by various reasons. To minimize the packet loss

ratio and delay, compression and aggregation

techniques are used.

Key words: Wireless Mesh Network, Routing Protocol,

AODV, DSDV, DSR, AOMDV, compression.

1. INTRODUCTION:

Wireless Mesh Network (WMN) is formed by a set

of gateways, mesh routers, and mesh clients. Gateways and

mesh routers form the backbone of the network, where

mobility is reduced. Mesh clients can be cell phones,

laptops or other wireless devices. Routers communicate

with the external network (e.g. the Internet) by forwarding

each other's traffic (including clients traffic) towards the

gateway nodes, which are directly connected to the wired

infrastructure. In a WMN, each router forwards packets on

behalf of other nodes (that may not be within direct

wireless transmission range of their destinations).

Moreover, the gateway functionalities enable the

integration of WMNs with various existing wireless networks such as Wi-Fi, Wi-max cellular networks.

Compared to wired networks, routing in WMN is

specially challenging because of two fundamental

differences. The first one is the heterogeneous

characteristics of the wireless links: due to the strong

dependency of radio transmission impediments between

the nodes with their distance and the environmental

elements influencing the radio waves propagation. As a

consequence, packet delivery probabilities may be

significantly different for every link of a WMN. The

second one is the broadcast nature of wire-less transmissions: unlike wired networks, where links are

typically point to point, when a node transmits a packet in

a wireless network, the packet can be received by several

neighbouring nodes simultaneously.

Mesh networks extend the coverage area without

expensive wiring, offering cheap and moderately fast connectivity, sufficient for accessing the Internet assuming normal browsing habits. Next generation applications,

however, are highly demanding. Consumers expect to be

able to access video over the Internet, share large files, ship

high definition multimedia to entertainment devices in

their homes, among other things.




Fig. 1. Wireless Mesh Network

Wireless Mesh Network is a network in which there is

collection of nodes which are interconnected by wireless

links. Wireless mesh network nodes are differentiated as

stationary nodes and mobile nodes. It is the subclass of

ad-hoc networking. Wireless mesh network are developed

for military applications. There exist a family of ad-hoc

routing protocol.

Routing Protocols :

Wireless mesh networks are multi-hop networks.

Therefore a mechanism for finding a path between source

and destination is needed. Static routing means that the

path is set up manually, while dynamic routing requires a routing protocol which sets up routing tables. A router

forwards packets to a next hop neighbour, which is chosen

upon a routing metric. This process is called routing. Routing protocols are used to find and maintain

routes between source and destination nodes, in order to

forward traffic. These protocols find the route and deliver

the packet to the correct destination. Routing is used to

select the best suitable path for the transmission of packets

from one place to another.

Routing Protocols are divided into:

1. Proactive protocol

2. Reactive protocol 3. Hybrid Protocol

Proactive protocol:

These are also known as table driven protocol in

which route to all nodes is predefined in routing table.

These protocols require each and every node to maintain

one or more tables to store routing information. These

protocols give response to change in network topology by

providing route update throughout the network. Packet

forwarding is done fast because routes are defined before

transferring packets. Proactive routing protocols have the significance of providing lower latency in packet delivery

and possibility of supporting applications which have

quality-of-service constraints. Example- DSDV (Destination Sequence Distance vector

Routing)

Reactive protocol:

Generally, reactive protocols perform route

discovery mechanism between the source and the

destination, so that these protocols could find the route only

when it is necessary. Routes are not predefined for routing.

It is created when required. A source node finds a new route whenever transmission is needed. It invokes the route

discovery mechanism to determine the path to the

destination. It depends on flooding algorithm. A node send

packets to all its neighbours and intermediate nodes

forward that packet to all their neighbours. This is repeated

until it reaches the correct destination.

Example- AODV, DSR, AOMDV

2. LITERATURE REVIEW:

In this paper, the characteristics of wireless mesh

networks have been discussed and compared with the

properties of other wireless networks. Existing routing

protocols have been categorized according to these properties.[1]

In this paper, a routing protocol is proposed for

wireless mesh network. The proposed scheme, improves

performance compared to other protocols are AODV and

DSDV. It uses both proactive and reactive routing

mechanism. Proactive concept we use to collect the

topology information and reactive concept uses to route the

packets. Proactive scenario improves the end-to-end delay

and provides efficient routing in the network. Reactive

scenario improves packet delivery ratio and packet loss

ratio in the network.[2] This paper aims to study the performance of routing

protocols in a wireless mesh network, where static mesh

routers and mobile clients participate together to

implement networks functionality such as routing and

packet forwarding in different mobility scenarios.[3]

This paper presented a novel encoding scheme to

efficiently represent a n-bit bitmask using n-1 bits, thus

reducing the compressed data size. Experimental results

demonstrated an improvement of 3 to 10% in compression

efficiency without introducing any area or performance

penalty. [4] In this paper, an effort is made to have the

comparison of reactive and proactive protocols (AODV,




AOMDV, DSDV and DSR) by transmitting the

H.264/SVC format video over 3 mobile nodes and the QoS metrics like average end to end delay and packet loss rate

is measured at varying fragment sizes.[5]

3. PROBLEM STATEMENT:

In designing wireless mesh network using

different routing protocols various parameters are to be calculated such as throughput, packet delivery ratio, delay,

energy and jitter and the performance of protocols are

analyzed.

As the packet loss is caused due to various

reasons. One cause of packet loss is loss due to bit errors in

the transmitted frame. Bit errors occur when the received

signal cannot be decoded properly. If the network load and

the number of contending nodes rises, the probability of

collisions on the MAC layer rises. Larger packets have a

better payload/overhead ratio. Therefore they reduce the

channel utilization and consequently the probability of collisions. If a node tries to send more data than the MAC

layer and channel speed can handle, the packets will queue

up in the internal packet queue. If the packet rate is greater

than the maximum possible MAC service rate this will

eventually lead to a queue overflow. New packets cannot

be stored in the queue anymore and are dropped. So the

compression technique with aggregation algorithm is used

to minimize the packet loss and delay shown the

improvement in the results.

4. IMPLEMENTED WORK:

The NS-2 software is used for the project. Ns-2 is especially useful for the comparison of protocols. It is

quite challenging to model a real-life setting in ns-2. The

focus of NS-2 is on packet handling, which means that a

simulation is the exchange of packets between objects and

the processing of the packets by the objects. The routing

protocols used are AODV, AOMDV, DSDV and DSR.

The packet size is of 1000 bytes and the MAC layer is

802.11. The wireless mesh network is designed using all

the above protocols and calculated the result that are

throughput, jitter, energy and delay. But as the problem is

of packet loss ratio, so the compression of data is

implemented using aggregation algorithm.

Fig.2. Wireless Mesh Network with mesh router, clients

and gateway

Data compression minimizes the number of bits

required to encode information. Data compression often reduces the bandwidth needed to transmit information or

increases storage capacity. Removal of redundancy from

encoded data is essential to successful data compression.

Many algorithms are designed for special purposes. For

instance, in a broadcast environment, one may have huge

resources with which to compress information that is to be

transmitted from a single point to many destinations. The

equipment at the destination may be limited because

duplication of expensive equipment at each remote site is

not economical.

Data compression methods are designed to reduce

the number of bits required to store or transmit information in the original data and to allow information in the

decompressed copy of the data to be re-created. By

reducing the size of a message, the effective bandwidth of

the communications channel can be increased.

Packet Aggregation :

Packet aggregation means to assemble one large

aggregation packet from multiple small packets. It is called

packet aggregation.

The concept of packet aggregation is:

1) Collect packets which pass a common hop (aggregation

target) 2) Aggregate packets together in an aggregation packet.

Send this packet to the aggregation target.




5. SIMULATION PARAMETERS:

Channel Channel/wireless channel

Propagation Propagation/ two ray

ground

Network Interface Phy/Wireless phy

MAC MAC/802.11

Packet Size 1000 bytes

Interface Queue

Length

50

No. of Nodes 30

Area Size 300x300

Routing Protocols AODV, DSDV,DSR,

AOMDV

Performance Metrics Throughput, delay,

energy, jitter

6. SIMULATED RESULT:

• Throughput: The throughput is defined as the total

amount of data a receiver R receives from the sender

divided by the times it takes for R to get the last packet

• Average Jitter: Jitter is the variation in the time

between packets arriving, caused by network congestion,

timing drift or route changes.

• Average End-to-end delay: End-to-end delay indicates

how long it took for a packet to travel from the source to

the application layer of the destination. • Energy : Energy indicates how much the energy is

consumed or left.

In this section the simulation results of wireless

mesh are shown.

Fig 3. Network Simulation

Simulation results for AODV protocol with

and without compression:

Fig 4. Delay graph

Simulation

Time (sec)

Delay Without

compression(msec)

Delay With

compression(msec)

0.96 0.93 0.08

1 0.8 0.3

2.243 1.18 0.43




Fig 5. Throughput graph

Simulation

Time (sec)

Throughput

Without

compression

(pkt/sec)

Throughput

With

compression

(pkt/sec)

1.12 210 230

9.86 210 230

12.68 210 230

Fig 6. Energy graph

Simulation

Time (sec)

Energy Without

compression(mJ)

Energy With

compression(mJ)

5.6 6.143 6.135

7.02 9.072 9.056

9.4 15.303 15.265

Fig 7. Jitter graph

Simulation

Time (sec)

Jitter Without

compression(msec)

Jitter With

compression(msec)

0.54 0.8 0.4

4.85 0.5 0.2

8.3 0.4 0.1

Simulation results for DSDV protocol with





Fig 8. Delay graph

Simulation

Time (sec)

Delay

Without

compression

(msec)

Delay With

compression

(msec)

0.51 0.3 0.13

11.11 1.2 0.8

14.64 1.1 0.9


Simulation

Time (sec)

Throughput

Without

compression

(pkt/sec)

Throughput

With

compression

(pkt/sec)

0.51 48 210

9.7 210 230

11.75 48 210

Fig 10. Energy graph




Simulation

Time (sec)

Energy Without

compression

(mJ)

Energy With

compression (m

J)

1.48 0.588 0.424

6.20 7.322 5.070

8.06 11.571 10.353

Fig 11. Jitter graph

Simulation

Time (sec)

Jitter Without

compression

(msec)

Jitter With

compression

(msec)

0.57 0.4 0.2

4.03 0.6 0.1

12.13 0.7 0.4

Simulation results for DSR protocol with and

without compression:

Fig 12. Delay graph

Simulation

Time (sec)

Delay Without

compression

(msec)

Delay With

compression

(msec)

0.55 1.5 0.9

5.5 0.7 0.3

10.44 0.6 0.1





Simulation

Time (sec)

Throughput

Without

compression

(pkt/sec)

Throughput

With

compression

(pkt/sec)

0.93 210 230

13 48 210

15 210 230


Simulation

Time (sec)

Energy Without

compression

(mJ)

Energy With

compression

(mJ)

4.86 4.788 3.423

7.88 11.135 11.116

14.25 32.479 31.485


Simulation

Time (sec)

Jitter Without

compression

(msec)

Jitter With

compression

(msec)

0.64 1.48 0.5

15.84 0.47 0.1

17.24 1.1 0.7

Simulation results for AOMDV protocol with





Fig 16. Delay graph

Simulation

Time (sec)

Delay Without

compression(msec)

Delay With

compression(msec)

7.78 0.7 0.5

10.92 0.4 0.1

14.75 0.5 0.2


Simulation

Time (sec)

Throughput

Without

compression

(pkt/sec)

Throughput

With

compression

(pkt/sec)

0.53 210 230

19.54 210 230

9.11 230 230


Simulation

Time (sec)

Energy Without

compression

(mJ)

Energy With

compression

(mJ)

4.08 3.536 3.530

12.51 25.597 25.577

16.74 43.759 43.754





Simulation

Time (sec)

Jitter Without

compression

(msec)

Jitter With

compression

(msec)

0.58 1.2 0.3

12.04 0.47 0.2

23.93 1.09 0.3

CONCLUSION:

In this paper we have concluded that none of the

protocol have 100% efficiency. The network is designed

for 30 nodes and as the number of nodes are more

congestion in the network increases so delay and packet

loss increases. The network is designed using AODV,

DSDV, DSR and AOMDV protocol and the performance

of all the above protocols is analyzed with NS2 simulator

and calculated the result that are throughput, jitter, energy

and delay.Then with the help of aggregation based compression the improvement in the results are shown.

And it is observed that packet delivery ratio is good, delay

is minimized as compared to the delay which is without

compression. Jitter should be close to zero for consistency

and thus it is achieved.

REFERENCES:

[1] Sonia Waharte, Raouf Boutaba, Youssef Iraqi, Brent

Ishibashi, “Routing Protocol in Wireless Mesh Networks: Challenges and Design Considerations”,IEEE, July 2006.

[2] K. Sri Devi, K. Rama Krishnaiah, B. Ramesh Babu, “

A Comparative Study on Performance of AODV, DSDV

and Hybrid Routing Protocol for Wireless Mesh

Networks”, IJCST Vol. 4, Jan- Mar 2013.

[3] Shashi Bhushan1, Anil Saroliya2 , Vijander Singh,

“Implementation and Evaluation of Wireless Mesh

Networks on MANET Routing Protocols”, International

Journal of Advanced Research in Computer and Communication Engineering Vol. 2, Issue 6, June 2013.

[4] Chetan Murthy and Prabhat Mishra, “Lossless

Compression using Efficient Encoding of Bitmasks”, 2009

IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on VLSI.

[5] Dr. Swati Sharma, Nandita Negi, Nipun Sharma,

“Packet End To End Delay Evaluation of AODV,

AOMDV, DSR and DSDV in H.264 Streaming Video

Transmission over MANETs”, International Journal of

Innovative Research in Computer Science, Engineering

and Technology August 2014.

[6] Hashem Kalbkhani, Behrouz Zali*, “Video Streaming

over Wireless Mesh Networks”,

[7] Saleh Yousefi, Morteza Maleki, “Multicast Scheduling

Algorithm Supporting Spatial Mini-slot Reuse for IEEE

802.16 Mesh Networks”, IEEE, January 2013

[8] Meenakshi, Vinod Kumar Mishra, Kuber Singh,

“Simulation & Performance Analysis of Proactive, Reactive & Hybrid Routing Protocols in MANET”,

International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer

science and Software Engineering, July2012.

[9] B.Soujanya, T.Sitamahalakshmi, “Study Of Routing

Protocols In Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks”, International

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST),

Vol. 3 No. 4,pp 2622-2631, April 2011.

[10] Esmailpour A, Nasser N, “Packet Scheduling Scheme

with quality of Service support for Mobile WiMax

Networks”, Proceedings of 9th International Workshop on Wireless Local Network: October 20-23, 2009, Zurich

Switzerland: IEEE, 2009:1040-1045.




[11] Ali N, Taha M, Hassanein H, “ IEEE 802.16 Mesh

Schedulers: Issues and Design Challenges”, IEEE Network , 2008.

[12] Chai Keong Toh, Anh-Ngoc Le and You-Ze Cho

„‟Load Balanced Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Mobile

Wireless Networks‟‟ in IEEE Communications Magazine,

pp 2-9, August 2009.

[13] R. Bruno, M. Conti, and E. Gregori, “Mesh networks:

Commodity multihop ad hoc networks,” IEEE

Communications Magazine,

vol. 43, pp. 123–131, Mar. 2005.

[14] Chiang C-C, Gerla M (1997, October) IEEE 6th

international conference on universal personal

communications record. In: Routing and Multicast in

Multihop, Mobile Wireless Networks, vol 2, pp 546–551

[15] De Couto DSJ, Aguayo D, Bicket J, Morris R (2003)

A high-throughput path metric for multihop wireless

routing. In: Proceedings of the 9th Annual International

Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, pp

134–146

[16] Vijay Kumar, Bharat Bhushan, “Analytical Evaluation

of Protocols AODV and DSR”, JM Academy of IT &

Management, Vol.1, No.1, pp. 2229-6115, 2011.

[17] Priti Garg, Asma Tuteja, “Comparative Performance

Analysis of Two Ad-Hoc Routing Protocols”,

International Conference on Network And Electronics

Engineering, IPCSIT, Vol. 11, 2011.

Documents

Performance Analysis of Wireless Mesh Network for AODV, DSDV, DSR …€¦ · Performance Analysis of Wireless Mesh Network for AODV, DSDV, DSR and AOMDV 1Anagha P. Mahajan, M.Tech