THE PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT OF ZONES ROUTING PROTOCOL IN

TERMS OF ZONES OF RADIUS AND NUMBER OF NODES

MUHAMMAD AZRULL HAZIQ BIN AZMAN SHAH

BACHELOR OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

(COMPUTER NETWORK SECURITY) WITH HONORS

FACULTY OF INFORMATICS AND COMPUTING

UNIVERSITI SULTAN ZAINAL ABIDIN

2019

I

DECLARATION

This dissertation is submitted as a partial fulfillment for the award of a Bachelor of Computer

Science (Computer Security Network) with Honors at Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin (UniSZA).

The results of this work are on my own investigations. All sections of text and results which have

been obtained from other sources are full referenced. I understand that cheating and plagiarism

constitute a breach of university regulations and will be dealt with accordingly.

Signature: …………………………………………...................

Name: MUHAMMAD AZRULL HAZIQ BIN AZMAN SHAH

Date: …………………………………………………………...

II

CONFIRMATION

I certify that the project and the writing of this report were conducted by the student under my

supervisison.

Signature: …………………………………………

Name: NOR AIDA BINTI MAHIDDIN

Date: ………………………………………………

III

DEDICATION

First of all, praise to Allah, the Most Gracious and the Most Merciful for blessings and giving me

the opportunity to undergo and complete my proposal for final year project, An Enhancement of

Routing Selection Scheme for Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET).

I would like to take this opportunity to express my heartest gratitude to my supervisor which is Dr.

Aida Binti Mahiddin for her motivation, guidance and help throughout my project. Without her

time, her support and guidance, it is impossible for me to finish my project successfully. Thank

you for the kindness. May Allah bless her.

Besides, I would like to extend my appreciation to my parent (Azman Shah Bin Abdullah and

Radziah Binti Che Hassan), my family members that always been there for me. May Allah protects

and bless all of them.

Lastly, thank you to all my lectures who taught me the throughout my education from semester 1

till now at Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin. May Allah bless them all.

IV

ABSTRACT

Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of computational devices that can be a

topology or a network for communication without any central device or base. MANET is the only

network that each device can be a host that worked like a router. There are three category of routing

protocol that can be broadly classified which is proactive, reactive and hybrid routing protocol.

The main goal for an ad hoc network routing protocol is to establish the best and efficient path

between a pair of devices. Besides, it also a challenge on how the routing protocol providing

consistent quality of service in wireless node. Therefore, providing the consistent quality of service

in network routing protocol is one of the crucial problem due to dynamic network topology because

of the nodes in the network are non-static and move randomly. This paper investigate the

performance of Zones Routing Protocol (ZRP) in terms of zones routing protocol and number of

nodes. The performance metrics which is use to measured is throughput, packet delivery ratio and

end-to-end delay. To ensure that this project can be done, Objective Modular Network Testbed in

C++ (OMNet++) are used to be a simulator to stimulate the performance of ZRP.

V

ABSTRAK

Rangkaian Ad-Hoc Mudah Alih (MANET) adalah koleksi peranti pengiraan yang boleh menjadi

topologi atau rangkaian untuk komunikasi tanpa sebarang peranti atau pangkalan pusat. MANET

adalah satu-satunya rangkaian yang setiap peranti boleh menjadi tuan rumah yang bekerja seperti

penghala. Terdapat tiga kategori protokol penghalaan yang boleh diklasifikasikan secara meluas

iaitu protokol penghalaan yang proaktif, reaktif dan hibrid. Matlamat utama untuk protokol routing

rangkaian ad hoc adalah untuk mewujudkan jalan terbaik dan berkesan antara sepasang peranti.

Selain itu, ia juga merupakan satu cabaran bagaimana protokol routing menyediakan kualiti

perkhidmatan yang konsisten dalam nod tanpa wayar. Oleh itu, menyediakan kualiti perkhidmatan

yang konsisten dalam protokol routing rangkaian adalah salah satu masalah penting kerana

topologi rangkaian dinamik kerana nod dalam rangkaian tidak statik dan bergerak secara rawak.

Makalah ini menyiasat prestasi Protokol Penghalaan Zon (ZRP) dari segi protokol penghalaan zon

dan bilangan nod. Metrik prestasi yang digunakan untuk diukur adalah penghantaran, nisbah

penghantaran paket dan kelewatan akhir-ke-akhir. Untuk memastikan projek ini dapat dilakukan,

OMNet++ digunakan untuk menjadi simulator untuk merangsang prestasi ZRP.

VI

LIST OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION I

CONFIRMATION II

DEDICATION III

ABSTRACT IV

ABSTRAK V

LIST OF CONTENTS VI – VIII

LIST OF FIGURES VIII

LIST OF TABLES IX

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS X

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1.1.1 Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) 1 – 2

1.1.2 Classfication of Ad-Hoc Routing Protocols 3 – 4

1.1.3 Zones Routing Protocol (ZRP) 5 – 6

1.2 Problem Statement 7

1.3 Objectives 7

1.4 Scopes 7

1.5 Limitation of Works 8

1.6 Summary 8

2.1 Literature Review 9

2.2 Related Works 10 – 13

2.3 Summary 13

3.1 Methodology 14

3.2 Research of Methodology 14 - 15

3.3 Simulation 15 – 17

3.4 Project Framework 18 – 19

VII

3.5 Project Flowchart 20 – 21

VIII

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

1.1 Classification of Routing Protocols 3

1.2 ZRP Components 6

1.3 A ZRP Zone Scheme 6

3.1 Research Methodology 15

3.3 OMNet++ Simulation Tools 17

3.4 Inetmanet Framework 17

3.5 Framework of ZRP Routing Protocol 18

3.6 Flowchart of Route Discovery Process 20

IX

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

2.1 Comparison of Metrics Parameter 10

3.2 Comparison of Network Simulator 16

X

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

MANET Mobile Ad-Hoc Network

ZRP Zone Routing Protocol

IARP Intra Zone Routing Protocol

IERP Inter Zone Routing Protocol

NDP Neighbor Discovery Protocol

BRP Border-cast Resolution Protocol

AODV Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector

DSDV Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector Routing

FSR Fisheye State Routing

AZRP Advanced Zone Routing Protocol

DSR Dynamic Source Routing

OMNET Objective Modular Network Testbed in C++

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1.1.1 Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET)

Mobile Ad-hoc Network (MANET) is a type of wireless network that has many free or

autonomous nodes such as mobile devices and other mobile pieces. Each mobile node is an

independent node, which could function either as a host or as a router. MANET can be defining

with three main criteria. Firstly, MANETs are infrastructure less. All nodes in MANET

environment connect wirelessly which is mean the nodes/mobile nodes will be operate themselves.

It does not require any specialized hardware to make connection between nodes. Secondly,

MANET environment is distributed network or the best word we can define as a decentralized

network. Nodes in MANET distributed and change their position continuously without any central

source. MANET is dynamic network topology which all nodes may traverse multiple links to reach

their destination. In MANET environment itself, “destination” refers to external network which is

Internet.

2

There are many advantages of MANET like router free and fault tolerance. Router free is

describing when MANET can make connection to the internet without any wireless router.

Because of this, running a MANET can be easier than tradisional network. Regarding to fault

tolerance, MANET supports connection failures due to designing of routing and transmission

protocols to manage this situation. MANET has been used in its own applications. The several

applications including tactical network, sensor network, emergency network (war-zone and natural

disaster), educational applications and etc. Military communication Automated Battle Fields is an

example of Tactical network. Meanwhile remote weathers for sensor and earth activities is

example of sensor network.

In MANET, routing protocols are used to find the correct route, the best route, and the most

optimal route between node in network. There are many routing protocols that can be used to send

information across the network from the source to destination. In general, MANET is free to move

independently in any direction, and will change its links to other devices frequently when there is

a need arise for information. At that time, the routing protocols works to give the node a route to

send the information in network. The performance of MANET also depends upon the efficiency

of the protocol which is being used for packet transmission. Efficiency of protocol depends upon

several factor like throughput, end to end delay, bandwidth utilized, communication overhead for

routing [1].

3

1.1.2 Classification of Ad-hoc Routing Protocols

Figure 1.1: Classification of the Routing Protocols

There are generally three types of routing protocol in MANET which is Proactive, Reactive and

Hybrid.

I. Proactive Routing Protocol (ProRout)

Proactive routing is also known as table driven routing, in which every node

maintains network topology information in the form of routing tables. Whenever a node

requires a path to destination it runs path finding algorithm on the topology information it

maintains [2].

4

II. Reactive Routing Protocol (ReRout)

Reactive Protocol or On Demand Routing Protocol are based on some sort of query-

reply dialog. Reactive protocols proceed for establishing route(s) to the destination only

when the need arises. They do not need periodic transmission of topological information

of the network [3].

III. Hybrid Routing Protocol (HyRout)

Hybrid protocols combine the features of reactive and proactive protocols. These

protocols have the advantage of both proactive and reactive routing protocols to balance

the delay which was the disadvantage of table driven protocols and control overhead (in

terms of control packages). Main feature of Hybrid Routing protocol is that the routing is

proactive for short distances and reactive for long distances [4].

5

1.1.3 Zones Routing Protocol (ZRP)

ZRP is a type of hybrid routing protocol in which the routing is based on the technique of

zones [5]. In this technique whole network area is divided into number of zones. In network, each

node has a single zone. Zone of any node is nothing but a circle whose radios is defined as a

number of hopes. Because ZRP is a hybrid routing protocol it used the both proactive and reactive

approach for routing of packets in the network. It uses proactive routing technique for intra-zone

communication and reactive for inter zone communications. ZRP is designed to take advantages

of both proactive and reactive protocol [6][7]. The advantage of ZRP is that it has significantly

reduced the communication as compared to proactive routing protocol. Size of the zone plays an

important role in the performance of ZRP. The disadvantage of this hybrid routing protocol is that,

it work as a pure proactive or pure reactive protocol when the size of the zone of either very large

or very small respectively. It means that efficiency or effectiveness of ZRP is based on the how

efficiently selecting the size of the zone.

ZRP most suitable for large-scale networks. It divides the MANET into a number of

overlapping zones. Each node maintain a route table which radius is R. Generally speaking, ZRP

consists of three sub-protocols, namely Neighbor Discovery Protocol (NDP) [8][9], Intra Zone

Routing Protocol (IARP) [10], Inter Zone Routing Protocol (IERP) [11]. Figure 2 shows how these

three subprotocols interact to provide an efficient routing protocol that acts proactively in zone

and reactively out of zone. The Neighbor Discovery Protocol aims to know each node’s neighbors.

Every node periodically broadcasts a “hello” message to keep its map of neighbors up to date. The

Intra Zone Routing Protocol is responsible for proactively maintaining routes for nodes in the zone.

The Inter Zone Routing Protocol is responsible for reactively creating routes for nodes out of the

zone.

6

Figure 3 shows a graphical representation of the network, radius is 2. Node A to J are in

the node S’ zone, node K is out of the zone, and node G,H,I,J are the peripheral nodes. When node

S wants to send a data packet to one of the node among A to J, the packet can be sent immediately

because S maintain a route to the destination. When S tries to send a data packet to K, the packet

cannot be sent immediately for no route there. Then S immediately initiates a route request using

the IERP. In its turn, IERP now uses the Border-cast Resolution Protocol (BRP) [12] to optimize

the request: the route request packet is not flooded to all nodes in S’ zone, but only to the peripheral

nodes G,H,I and J. Hereafter, these nodes are searching their own routing tables for a route to the

destination. In figure 3, we can see I has a route to K, I sends a route reply to S to tell S there is a

route to K. When S receives the route reply, then it sends the data packet to the destination. In this

way, global flooding is avoided and distant resources are discovered in an efficient and scalable

manner.

Figure 1.2: ZRP Components

Figure 1.3: A ZRP Zone Scheme (Radius 2)

7

1.2 Problem Statement

Though ZRP performs well in large scenarios, it still has some problems. As each node in the

scenario maintains a route table, there are lots of overlapping areas in the whole scenario. Those

overlapping areas produce redundant or duplicate route requests. The large amounts of route

requests cause the overhead of the network increasing.

1.3 Objectives

The objective of this thesis is to solve the problem statement through the suggested

MANET ZRP. So, this project is mainly focuses the objectives below:

I. To study the Zones Routing Protocol in MANET.

II. To apply the Zones Routing Protocol in MANET.

III. To analyze and evaluate the performance of Zones Routing Protocol in MANET.

1.4 Scopes

The scope in this thesis is to evaluate the performance enhancement of Zones Routing

Protocol in MANET environment. In, addition, the other scope is to study the simulation tools

which is OMNet++ that I used for this project.

8

1.5 Limitation of Works

The MANET cannot be implemented in real-world because of certain cases:

I. Costly

Implementing MANET in real-world will need a high cost for example when there

is a disaster area that had a large span area. The nodes that need to be used to

implementing the MANET in that disaster area are highly needed plus the cost for

setting up MANET for each of the nodes.

II. Time

Implementing and configuration of each nodes can take a lot of time due to the

large span of area for example earth quake disaster that impact a large area of the city.

1.6 Summary

This chapter has been discussing about the introduction of MANET, the classification of

MANET, the ZRP protocols and its components, problem statement, objective, scope and

limitation of this project. The next chapter will be discuss about literature review which is

referring to the previous research paper and journal that are related about this project.

9

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter will discuss about the previous articles and research papers that are related

with this project. It is important to gathered the information or knowledge to get better

understanding of the used and idea on how this project works.

As describe in chapter 1, it is clearly stated about the concept in MANET. The nodes in the

network is free to move independently in any direction, and will change its links to other devices

frequently when there is a need arise for information. The routing protocol help to find the most

suitable path to deliver the information in MANET.

10

2.2 Related Works

Figure 2.1: The comparison of metrics parameter.

MANETs are ad hoc networks comprised of mobile wireless nodes. Given the mobile

nature of the nodes, the network topology can change over time. The nodes create their own

network infrastructure: each node also acts as a router, forwarding traffic in the network. MANET

routing protocols need to adapt to changes in the network topology and maintain routing

information, so that packets can be forwarded to their destinations.

11

In a research paper “Performance Comparison of AODV, ZRP and AODVDR Routing

Protocols in MANET” [13] from Anupam Kumar Sharma and Munesh Chandra Trivedi, this

research work compare the performance of AODV, AODVDR and ZRP routing protocol in term

of pause time versus average end to end delay and pause time versus packet delivery ratio in the

presence of different number of network connections. Simulation results shows that ZRP is

perform better than AODV, AODVDR and AODV gives better performance AODVDR when

possible number of network connections from each node is less than 25% of total nodes in the

network. But when network connections is greater than 40 % of total nodes in the network,

AODVDR gives better performance than other two routing protocol. When network connections

are between 25% to 40% it is very difficult to say that which one is best performing protocol. The

conclusion of this research work is that AODV worked as to different protocol in different

scenarios. So, when we established MANET in our organization we have to use these routing

protocols according to present network scenarios to utilize higher benefit of presence network

resources.

In a research paper “Impact of Scalability with respect to Mobility and Zone Size on Zone

Routing Protocol over MANET” [14] from Rajneesh Kumar Gujral, Jyoti Kalra, and Manpreet

Singh says that simulation based analysis of ZRP has concluded that, when zone size is very small

it act as reactive routing protocol because the probability of destination node with in routing zone

is less, so average delay is more. ZRP uses proactive routing within the zone as zone size gets

increased then delay keeps on reducing destination nodes can come under the routing zone. We

also concluded that when nodes mobility rate is less then throughput, packet delivery ratio is

maximum as packets drop is less and as mobility rate and zone size is increased the control

12

overhead also increased. In future work, simulations can be performed by increasing number of

mobile nodes and varying transmission range is also great concern.

Extensive literature survey has been done on ZRP. Ashish K Maurya et al. [15] showed the

evaluation of ZRP in variable pause time and variable number of nodes. The performance of

AODV, ZRP and FSR has been compared with QUALNET simulator. From the simulation, it has

analyzed with respect to pause time that FSR in scenario 1 and ZRP in scenario 2 show lowest end

to end delay. In both scenarios, ZRP has less average jittering than AODV and FSR. T Ravi Nayak

et al.

In [16] an extension for ZRP protocol (AZRP) has been proposed that can adapt well to the

complicated network with nodes moving non-uniformly. AZRP utilizes the excellent performance

of the hybrid-driven manner of ZRP. The simulation comparison between DSDV, DSR, ZRP and

AZRP are done for 5, 10, 20 and 30 nodes on packet delivery ratio, the overhead of routing and

latency. Their results show the better performance for AZRP with these parameters.

In [17] proposed an analytical model that allows us to determine the routing overhead

incurred by the scalable routing framework on ZRP. In order to make ZRP adaptive, the

mechanisms must be devised for detecting the non-optimality of zone radius setting. In addition to

that, the cost-benefit analysis must be done to understand the tradeoff involved between the

optimality detection cost and additional overhead cost incurred due to non-optimality. Sree Ranga

Raju, et al.

13

Lastly, [18] considered protocols of AODV and DSR as a reference for analyzing ZRP

with QUALNET simulator. They observed ZRP uses additional time as it uses IARP, IERP by

studying ZRP operation of route discovery. They took different parameters for performance

analysis like end to end delay, packets received etc. From the above analyzed survey, their result

have concluded that lot of work has been done on ZRP, but no research work suggested us how

well ZRP will adapt in MANET with respect to nodes mobility, zone size and scalability. So in

this paper, we have analyzed impact of scalability with respect to mobility and zone size on ZRP

over MANETs.

2.3 Summary

This chapter is conclude all the simulation, methods and parameters using ZRP to evaluate

the performance of the ZRP. This study is essential in order to get an idea and as a guide to the

efficient project.

14

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter are discuss about the methods that will be used from the initial to the end of

the project. The simulation tool of the project also will be discussed. The simulation tools that is

used in this project is OMNet++ simulator. Moreover, this chapter will also review the framework

and flowchart of the project for better understanding of visualization in the implementation phase.

3.2 Research of Methodology

In research methodology, the preparation of the project is relevant to develop the project.

A few phase of methodology are usable for this project. Figure 5 shows the phases for this project

development. The first phase is problem identification which is identified based on related research

paper for a better understanding about MANET and the problems that occurred in MANET.

Second phase is designing and developing. The second phase is mainly focus to find, analyze and

implemented to the project. For this project, the radius of zones and number of nodes are being

analyze in ZRP. The third phase is project simulation. The simulation tool used for this project is

OMNet++ simulator. The last phase is performance evaluation. The performance metrics which is

15

throughput, end-to-end delay and also packet delivery ratio will be evaluate and analyze in this

project.

Figure 3.1: Research Methodology

3.3 Simulation

The simulation of this project is done using OMNet++ because implementing MANET in

real world required a lot of time and high cost. OMNet++ is a modular, component-based C++

simulation library and framework, primarily for building network simulators. OMNet++ can be

used for free for non-commercial simulations like at academic institutions and for teaching.

Network is meant in a broader sense that includes wired and wireless communication networks,

on-chip networks, queueing networks, and so on. Domain-specific functionality such as support

Research Methodology

1. Problem Identification

3.Project Simulation

2. Design and Development

4. Performance

Evaluation

16

for sensor networks, wireless ad-hoc networks, Internet protocols, performance modeling,

photonic networks is provided by model frameworks, developed as independent projects.

OMNeT++ offers an Eclipse-based IDE, a graphical runtime environment, and a host of other

tools. There are extensions for real-time simulation, network emulation, database integration,

SystemC integration, and several other functions. OMNeT++ is distributed under the Academic

Public License. OMNeT++ provides a component architecture for models. Components (modules)

are programmed in C++, then assembled into larger components and models using a high-level

language (NED). Reusability of models comes for free. OMNeT++ has extensive GUI support,

and due to its modular architecture, the simulation kernel (and models) can be embedded easily

into the applications.

After the installation of OMNet++, inetmanet framework will be imported to the OMNet++

simulator that is used as a framework. The inetmanet makes the implementation and configuration

in OMNet++ more easier because it is an extension of the OMNet++ environment itself.

Figure 3.2: Comparison of Network Simulator

17

Fi

Figure 3.3: OMNet++ Simulation Tool Figure 3.4: Inetmanet Framework

18

3.4 Project Framework

Figure 3.5: Framework of ZRP Routing Protocol

Zone routing protocol is a hybrid routing protocol which effectively combines the best

features of both proactive and reactive routing protocols. The key concept employed in this

protocol is to use a proactive routing scheme within a limited zone in the ρ-hop neighborhood of

every node, and use a reactive routing scheme for nodes beyond this zone [19]. ZRP consists of

the Intra Zone Routing Protocol (IARP), which is proactive in nature and the Inter Zone Routing

Protocol (IERP), which is reactive in nature. The nodes of a zone are divided into peripheral nodes

and interior nodes. Peripheral nodes are nodes whose minimum distance to the central node is

MANETZones Routing

ProtocolNeighbor Discovery

Route Request & Route Reply

Performance Metrics

Throughput

End-To-End Delay

Packet Delivery

Ratio

19

exactly equal to the zone radius ρ. The nodes whose minimum distance is less than ρ are interior

nodes. The fact that the topology of the local zone of each node is known can be used to reduce

traffic when global route discovery is needed. Instead of broadcasting packets, ZRP uses a concept

called bordercasting. Bordercasting utilizes the topology information provided by IARP to direct

query request to the border of the zone. The bordercast packet delivery service is provided by the

Bordercast Resolution Protocol (BRP). BRP uses a map of an extended routing zone to construct

bordercast trees for the query packets. Alternatively, it uses source routing based on the normal

routing zone. By employing query control mechanisms, route requests can be directed away from

areas of the network that already have been covered [20]. In order to detect new neighbor nodes

and link failures, the ZRP relies on a Neighbor Discovery Protocol (NDP) provided by the Media

Access Control (MAC) layer. NDP transmits “HELLO” beacons at regular intervals. Upon

receiving a beacon, the neighbor table is updated. Neighbors, for which no beacon has been

received within a specified time, are removed from the table. If the MAC layer does not include a

NDP, the functionality must be provided by IARP [21].

20

3.5 Project Flowchart

Figure 3.6: Flowchart of route discovery process

The route discovery process of ZRP operates as follows:

I. The source node first checks whether the destination is within its zone. If so, the path

to the destination node is known and no further route discovery is required.

II. If the destination node is not within the source routing zone, the source node bordercast

a ‘route request’ to its peripheral nodes.

21

III. The peripheral nodes perform the step as indicated in (i) to check whether the

destination node is within their zone or not. If so, a ‘route reply’ is sent back to the

source indicating the route to the destination.

IV. If the destination node is not available in the zones of the peripheral nodes, route

requests are forwarded to their peripheral nodes.

3.6 Summary

This chapter shows the concept of the research methodology, framework, and flowchart of

the project. It provides a better understanding for the implementation of the simulator that we used

in this project.

22

References

1. G. Lakshmikant, A Gaiwak, P.D. Vyavahare, “Simulation Based Comparative

Performance Analysis of Adhoc Routing Protocols”, in proceedings of TENCON 2008

2. C Siva Ram Murthy and BS Manoj “Ad Hoc Wireless Networks architectures and

protocols”,Pearson education, 2005.

3. G.Vijaya Kumar (2010). Current Research Work on Routing Protocols for MANET: A

Literature Survey.

4. Keshav Nayak (2015). Energy Efficient Consumption based Performance of AODV, DSR

and ZRP Routing Protocol in MANET.

5. A. Khatkar and Y. Singh, “Performance Evaluation of Hybrid Routing Protocols in Mobile

Adhoc Networks,” in Proc. of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Advanced

Computing & Communication Technologies, pp. 542-545, 2012.

6. S. Kalwar, “Introduction to reactive protocol,” IEEE Potentials, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 34-35,

2010.

7. J. -H. Song, V. W. Wong, and V. C. Leung, “Efficient on-demand routing for mobile ad

hoc wireless access networks,” IEEE Transactions on Selected Areas in Communications,

vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 1374-1383, 2004.

8. Joo-Chul Lee,Youn-Hee Han, Myung-Ki Shin, Hee-Jin Jang, Hyoung- Jun Kim

Considerations of Neighbor Discovery Protocol (NDP) over IEEE 802.16 Networks The

8th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT)

Volume: 2, 2006, Page(s): 951 - 955

9. Donggeon Noh and Heonshik Shin SPIZ: An Effective Service Discovery Protocol for

Mobile Ad Hoc Networks EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and

23

Networking Volume 2007, Article ID 25167, 13 pages doi:10.1155/2007/25167 Seoul

National University, Seoul 151742, Korea

10. Z. J. Haas, M. R. Pearlman, and P. Samar, “The intrazone routing protocol (iarp) for ad

hoc networks.” draft-ietfmanet- zone-iarp02.txt,Internet-Draft, IETF, July 2002.

11. Z. J. Haas, M. R. Pearlman, and P. Samar, “The interzone routing protocol (ierp) for ad

hoc networks.” draft-ietfmanet- zone-ierp02.txt,Internet-Draft, IETF, July 2002.

12. Z. J. Haas, M. R. Pearlman, and P. Samar, “The Bordercast Resolution Protocol (BRP) for

AdHoc Networks.” raft-ietfmanet- zone-ierp-02.txt,Internet-Draft, IETF, July 2002.

13. Anupam Kumar Sharma, Munesh Chandra Trivedi (2016). Performance Comparison of

AODV, ZRP and AODVDR Routing Protocols in MANET.

14. Rajneesh Kumar Gujral, Jyoti Kalra, and Manpreet Singh (2012). Impact of Scalability

with respect to Mobility and Zone Size on Zone Routing Protocol over MANETs.

15. Ashish K Maurya and Dinesh Singla “Simulation based performance comparison of

AODV, FSR, ZRP routing protocols in MANET”, International Journal of computer

applications. Foundation of computer science vol.12(2), December 2010, pp 23-18.

16. T Ravi Nayak et al. “Implementation of Adaptive Zonal Routing protocol for wireless

network”, International Journal of engineering Science and Technology vol.2 (12), 2010,

pp 72737288.

17. Brijesh Patel and Sanjay Srivastava, “Performance Analysis of Zone Routing Protocols in

Mobile Ad Hoc Networks”, Dhirubhai Ambani Institute of Information and

Communication Technology Gandhinagar 382 007, India, 2006.

24

18. Sree Ranga Raju and Jitendranath Mungara “Performance Evaluation of ZRP over AODV

and DSR in MANETs using Qualnet”, European Journal of Scientific Research,vol. 45(4),

(2010), pp 651-667.

19. C. Siva Ram Murthy and B.S. Manoj, Ad Hoc Wireless Networks, Architecture and

Protocols, Pearson Education, 2004.

20. Haas, Zygmunt J., Pearlman, Marc R., Samar, P.: The Bordercast Resolution Protocol

(BRP) for Ad Hoc Networks, June 2001, IETF Internet Draft, draft-ietf-manet-brp-01.txt.

21. Haas, Zygmunt J., Pearlman, Marc R.: Providing Ad-hoc Connectivity With

Reconfigurable Wireless Networks, Ihaca, New York,

http://www.ee.cornell.edu/~haas/wnl.html.

22. C. Siva Ram Murthy and B.S. Manoj, Ad Hoc Wireless Networks, Architecture and

Protocols, Pearson Education, 2004.