Multipath Distance Vector Zone Routing Protocol for Asymmetric Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
seminar class
Active In SP

Posts: 5,361
Joined: Feb 2011
19-02-2011, 11:10 AM

Multipath Distance Vector Zone Routing Protocol for Asymmetric Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks
Most of the ad hoc routing protocols assume that all wireless networks aresymmetric (bidirectional links). In reality any practical network has some links may beunidirectional and hence the network is asymmetrical rather than symmetrical. The presenceof such links can reduce the performance of the existing protocol and could lead to networkclogging. In this paper we introduce a Multipath Distance Vector Zone Routing Protocol forAsymmetric mobile ad-hoc networks (MDVZRPA), which is a modification to MDVZRP. It isa hybrid routing protocol assumes that all routes in the routing table are active and usable,unless a broken link has been reported or discovered for reducing control traffic.In addition to adopting MDVZRP technique, MDVZRPA is designed to deal with bothbidirectional and unidirectional links by adding a new field called Symmetric-link in eachroute to distinguish between the two link types
recent years, mobile computing has enjoyed a tremendous rise in popularity. Thecontinued minimization of mobile computing devices and the extraordinary rise ofprocessing power available in mobile laptop computers combine to put more andbetter computer-based applications into the hands of a growing segment of the population.Mobile devices, such as laptop computers, Pocket PCs, cellular phones, etc., are noweasily affordable, and are becoming more popular in everyday life [14]. At the same time,network connectivity options for mobile hosts have grown tremendously. The markets forwireless telephones and communication devices are experiencing rapid growth.Projections have been made that, in nowadays there are more than billion wireless devicesin use. With the availability of mobile computing devices, users often have a naturaltendency to share information between them, even though it is not planned in advance andthere is no infra structure available for connection, for example, workers at rescue scenesand employees in a meeting room, or conference or business. Therefore, the wirelessmobile ad hoc networks become the practical and conventional solution in such likesituations, without requiring each user to connect to the internet or to a wide-area networkto communicate with each other because of cost and time. This type of network is easyand fast of deployment, where the nodes are communicate with each other throughwireless medium without any fixed infrastructure. Mobile ad-hoc network was also beingnamed as MANET [1] by IETF The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) is a largeopen international community of network designers, operators, vendors, and researchers.A wireless ad hoc network as a decentralizing network offers an easy and fast connectionbetween collection of autonomous nodes or terminals by forming a multi hop radionetwork. Since the nodes communicate over wireless links, they have to contend with theeffects of radio communication, such as noise, fading, and interference. In addition, thelinks typically have less bandwidth than in a wired network. Each node in a wireless adhoc network functions as both a host and a router, and the control of the network isdistributed among the nodes [11] [12].In general, MANET topology is dynamic, because of nodes departure and new nodesarrival during the connectivity time among the nodes, and asymmetrical, because thenodes communicate over wireless links which forms a different transmission range.Hence, there is a need for efficient routing protocols to offer optimum routes during thenetwork establishing time to allow the network nodes to communicate over multi hoppaths. Some of MNET features are characteristic of the type of packet radio networks thatwere studied extensively in the 1970s and 1980s. In general, a multi-hop routing protocolis needed in a mobile ad hoc network, because two hosts wishing to exchange packetsmay not be able to communicate directly with each other because they are out of radiorange [14]. Figure (1) shows a simple ad hoc network of four mobile nodes using differentwireless transmission range interfaces. Node A and D are not included within the wirelesstransmission range of node C. Only node A is included within the wireless transmissionrange of node D, and node D is not included within the transmission range of node B, asindicated by the circle around A, B and C. Nodes B, C and D are all included within thewireless transmission range of node A. If B and D want to communicate with each otherby exchanging packets, they may ask node A to forward packets for them because node Ais within the overlapped wireless transmission range between node B and node D. In any practical MANET, packets are travel over one or more hops from one node toanother node as demonstrated in Figure (1). In reality, the routing problem may be evenmore complex than this example, because of the nodes different wireless transmissionrange, and the network topology features which is dynamic because any or all of thenodes associated with the network may move at any time [14]. To provide routing theconventional way in MANET is to make each mobile node take the role as a router, andapply an existing routing protocol between them [16][17]. The fundamental differencebetween MANETs and the traditional wired networks that is the wired networks topologyis stationary and static. This made the traditional protocols such as TCP/IP are not suitablefor MANE and leads us for a specific requirement and constraints to provide routingprotocols in such dynamic environments.Over the few last years, many routing protocols have been proposed, where most of theseprotocols are based on distance vector or link state algorithms. In distance-vector routingprotocols (i.e. DSDV) [4], routing information are periodically advertised to all nodes toget an up-to-date view over the entire network. Each node during the network establishingtime sends to and receives from, all its neighbor nodes periodic messages and routinginformation to build and update its routing table, which contains the distance from itself toall possible destinations. Each node can decide whether to keep or update the next hop asthe best and shortest path from itself to the specified destination based on comparison ofthe distances obtained from its neighbors. When each node has a packet to send to somedestination, it simply forwards the packet to the decided next hop router. The advantage ofthis approach is that routes between arbitrary source - destination pairs are readilyavailable, all the time, while the disadvantages are that the routing tables will occupy alarge amount of space if the network is large, and that the updates may lead to inefficientusage of network resources if they occur too frequently.Since ad-hoc networks are bandwidth limited and their topology changes often, anOptimized Link-State Protocol (OLSR) [5] has been proposed. While being suitable forsmall networks, some scalability problems can be seen on larger networks. The need toimprove convergence and reduce control traffic has led to algorithms that combinefeatures of distance-vector and link-state schemes. Such a protocol is the wireless routingprotocol (WRP) [10], which eliminates the counting-to-infinity problem and avoidstemporary loop without increasing the amount of control traffic. [11, 12]In addition to the view point categorizing routing protocols in terms of either distancevector or link state routing, routing protocols for MANET also can be classified asuniform, non uniform or reactive routing protocols versus proactive routing protocols. Inthe reactive routing approach, a node initiates a route discovery (Rout requisite) onlywhen want to communicate with a destination which has no available rout to it in itsrouting table, in other words, a routing protocol does not initiate route request until it isneeded(Route On Demand). AODV [2], DSR [14], and TORA [13] are the most famousreactive routing protocols for MANET. The disadvantages of such algorithms are highlatency time in route finding and excessive flooding can lead to network clogging(Blocking). On the contrary, the proactive routing approach is based on the exchange ofknowledge of network topology periodically [9]. The proactive protocols provide a needed route instantly at the expense of bandwidth because of transmitting periodicupdates of topology frequently.Hybrid routing protocols also exist and they try to achieve an efficient balance betweenboth categories of protocols, where combining both the proactive and the reactiveapproach. ZRP is an example of hybrid routing protocols, was introduced in 1997 by Haasand Pearlman [6][7]. A more fine grained classification of ad-hoc routing protocols andtaxonomy for comparing them can be found in [15].
In a symmetric computer network, all nodes can transmit and receive data at equalrates. Asymmetric networks, on the other hand, support disproportionately morebandwidth in one direction than the other. This can be a problem in wireless networkswhich adopt a TCP technique where TCP relies on ACKs for reliable delivery and forcongestion control. If ACKs are not reliably returned the smooth of packets will bedisrupted by retransmissions. Most of ad hoc networks protocols have been designedassuming that the underlying technology was bidirectional (Symmetrical Network). As anexample, a set of nodes which are connected through a single physical network assumethey can exchange routing information with each other as shown in figure (2). Exchangingrouting information enables the discovery of the underlying network topology, and therouting traffic via discovered networks. However, if the link connecting these nodes is unidirectional (Asymmetrical Network), wecan say that all downstream nodes have received only capabilities and therefore cannotsend routing information to upstream nodes as shown in figure (3). As a result, upstreamnodes cannot discover downstream network topologies dynamically and will thereforenever forward information towards them.

download full report

Important Note..!

If you are not satisfied with above reply ,..Please


So that we will collect data for you and will made reply to the request....OR try below "QUICK REPLY" box to add a reply to this page

Quick Reply
Type your reply to this message here.

Image Verification
Please enter the text contained within the image into the text box below it. This process is used to prevent automated spam bots.
Image Verification
(case insensitive)

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  DETECTION OF LOST MOBILE USING SNIFFERS seminar class 64 34,004 12-04-2016, 03:24 PM
Last Post: mkaasees
  Report on Mobile TV study tips 1 477 11-04-2016, 10:14 AM
Last Post: mkaasees
  MOBILE TV PPT project girl 1 1,145 11-04-2016, 10:14 AM
Last Post: mkaasees
Last Post: mkaasees
  MOBILE TRAIN RADIO COMMUNICATION REPORT study tips 1 620 06-04-2016, 03:47 PM
Last Post: mkaasees
  6g mobile technology pdf jaseelati 0 355 22-01-2015, 02:00 PM
Last Post: jaseelati
  manufacturing automation protocol jaseelati 0 159 27-12-2014, 01:37 PM
Last Post: jaseelati
  the client/server network strategy can handle very large networks efficiently. jaseelati 0 285 11-12-2014, 02:17 PM
Last Post: jaseelati
Last Post: seminar project topic
  Report on mobile application study tips 0 507 07-09-2013, 04:18 PM
Last Post: study tips