INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTING (IJTC)

ISSN-2455-099X,
Volume 1, Issue 3, DECEMBER 2015.

COMPARATIVE STUDY AND EVALUATION OF AODV, DSR

AND OLSR PROTOCOLS
,
b
Satinder Singh a , Jyoti Arora
a

M.Tech Student, CSE Department , DBU, Manigobindgarh

b

Assistant Professor, CSE, DBU, Manigobindgarh

ABSTRACT
MANET is a self-organized and self-configurable network, where the mobile nodes move arbitrarily. The

mobile nodes could receive and forward packets as a router or gateway. This paper is analysis the performance
of the protocols like AODV, DSR and OLSR protocols. We compared three routing protocols i.e. AODV, DSR
and OLSR. Our simulation tool will be OPNET modeler. The performance of these routing protocols is

analyzed by three metrics: delay, network load and throughput. All the three routing protocols are explained in a
deep way with metrics and OLSR protocol is among the best out of said protocols. The OLSR protocol is a
variation version of the traditional link state protocol. An important aspect of OLSR is the introduction of

.O

multipoint relays (MPRs) to reduce the flooding of messages carrying the complete link-state information of the
node and the size of link-state updates.

IJ
TC

Keywords: AODV, DSR, OLSR, Delay, Throughput.

I.

INTRODUCTION

MANETs are infrastructure less, and nodes in the networks are constantly moving. In
MANETs, nodes can directly communicate with each other if they enter each others
communication range. A node can terminate packets or forward packets (serve as a relay).
Thus, a message traverses an ad hoc network by being relayed from one node to another, until
it reaches its destination. There are two basic groups of routing protocols, Proactive MANET
protocol (PMP), Reactive MANET Protocol (RMP), and whereas the third one is derived
from both of these and called as Hybrid MANET Protocol. The Proactive MANET protocol
is generally called table driven protocol and it detects the network layout periodically. It tries
to maintain the routing table at every node which is used to detect a most feasible route to the
destination from the source with less delay. Proactive MANET protocols provide good
reliability and low latency for deciding a route but these protocols are not suitable for the
nodes moving with high speed as the routing information cannot be updated in the routing
table. If a node is not moving, then its routing table information is updated continuously. It
causes more traffic overhead wastage of network resources such as bandwidth [14].

100

IJ
TC

.O

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTING (IJTC)

ISSN-2455-099X,
Volume 1, Issue 3, DECEMBER 2015.

Fig. 1: Working of MANETs

In the figure 1, nodes far away from the base station rely on midway nodes for
communication. Thus provide a best communication network in such hostile situation. The
router is working like a boundary between the MANET and the Wi-Max network. The WiMax WLAN router is capable of translation between the MANET protocols and the Wi-Max
network protocols, and also the backbone protocols the Wi-Max is connected with.

II. ROUTING PROTOCOLS

There are several kinds of routing protocols for wireless ad hoc networks. These routing
protocols are categorized as reactive or proactive routing protocols [8]. The ad hoc routing
protocols which have both proactive and reactive merits, is called hybrid routing protocols.
The first kind of protocol is called reactive or on-demand routing protocol. The second kind

101

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTING (IJTC)

ISSN-2455-099X,
Volume 1, Issue 3, DECEMBER 2015.

of protocol is proactive or table driven routing protocol. The following protocols are listing in
the following sections.

A. AODV

The AODV protocol keeps a route table to store the next-hop routing information for
destination nodes. Each routing table can be used for a period of time. If a route is not
requested within that period, it expires and a new route needs to be found when needed. Each
time a route is used, its lifetime is updated. When a source node has a packet to be sent to a
given destination, it looks for a route in its route table. In case there is one, it uses it to
transmit the packet. Otherwise, it initiates a route discovery procedure to find a route by
broadcasting a route request (RREQ) message to its neighbors.
B. DSR

.O

C. OLSR

The source nodes starts a new route computation, thereby increasing the time to route packets
and, probably, leading TCP to experience timeouts during each route computation time,
especially if there is heavy traffic in the network.

IJ
TC

The OLSR optimizes a pure link state because it reduces the size of information sent in each
message and also reduces the total control overhead by minimizing the number of
retransmissions flooding an entire network. It uses a multipoint relaying technique to flood
the control messages in a network in an efficient manner.
III. RELATED WORK

These routing protocols DSDV, AODV, DSR and TORA were simulated using NS2 [3].
Analysis gives different results for every parameter differently. In finding shortest path
between the source and destination nodes, delay, DSDV performs well than AODV, DSR and
TORA. DSR perform well in network load balancing than DSDV, AODV and TORA. DSDV
has good jitter than AODV, TORA and DSR respectively.
The results given in [5] analyze DSR and DSDV in idealized and realistic simulation
environments on their performance. Another paper in reference [4] gives conclusion in
mobile ad hoc network that reactive protocols i.e. AODV and DSR perform well when the
network load is moderate. In reference [4] the reactive protocols are saving many resources
like energy and bandwidth. It analyze that the proactive protocols perform well in heavy
network traffic load.
In [6] the author give different kind of conclusions about the MANET routing protocols i.e.
DSDV, AODV and DSR were simulated in NS2. The reactive protocol AODV outperforms
than DSDV and DSR in maintaining connection by sequentially exchange of information for
102

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTING (IJTC)

ISSN-2455-099X,
Volume 1, Issue 3, DECEMBER 2015.

TCP based traffic. The packets were delivered when the node mobility is low and failed to
deliver at high mobility. DSR perform well than DSDV at all mobility. In [6] DSR performs
well than DSDV and AODV for packet dropping rate (PDR), delay and throughput. DSR
generates less network load than AODV.
In reference [7], the simulation was done in QUALNET simulator. The author wrote that
AODV shows best performance in low and medium node density but in high node density
both OLSR and DSR outperforms. The author wrote that DSR is selected for file transfers
where delivery and throughput are critical factors. OLSR performs well in both low and high
node density. It is stated in [7] that OLSR is best suited in application oriented traffic e.g.
streaming traffic, voice and video traffic. In application based traffic delay is a very critical
factor.

IV. PROPOSED SCENARIO

IJ
TC

.O

The simulation is carried out in the OPNET Modeler 14.5. Below in figure 2, it is showing
the simulation environment of one scenario having 20 mobile nodes for OLSR routing
protocol. The key parameters are provided here i.e. delay, network load and throughput. We
run three scenarios but we show the 80 nodes setup.

Fig. 2: Simulation Setup

The network size is of 1000 x 1000 meters. After that IPv4 addressing was assigned to all the
nodes. The application configuration and profile configuration was drag to workspace. All
the settings must be done according to the requirement. The FTP was selected as traffic High
Load. Now deploy the configured profile by clicking Protocol tab and select Deploy Defined
103

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTING (IJTC)

ISSN-2455-099X,
Volume 1, Issue 3, DECEMBER 2015.

application. Drag the Mobility Configuration to the workspace. Set all the attributes and in
last random mobility was set to MANET as a profile.
V. ANALYZING RESULTS
I. AODV Protocol

IJ
TC

.O

In the given figure 3, the first upper part of the graph shows the AODV delay when the
numbers of mobile nodes were 80. The middle graph shows the AODV network load and the
last part shows the AODV throughput. The AODV delay peak value when the numbers of
mobile nodes were 80 is 0.1137 sec. The AODV delay gradually decreases and reached to a
value of 0.0046 sec after 4 min. The reason of increasing the delay is that when the numbers
of mobile nodes are increased then the data which is needed to deliver to the specific
destination. So the data have to pass from many mobile nodes which cause more delay.

Fig. 3: AODV 80 Nodes

II. DSR Protocol

In the given figure 4, the DSR protocol will be checked against three parameters such as
delay, network load and throughput. The changes in the graph can be seen clearly from the
figure 4. The DSR shows its peak delay value at 0.0153 sec. The network load is 2779086
bit/sec. The DSR throughput can be seen from the given figure 4, which is 12888146 bit/sec.

104

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTING (IJTC)

ISSN-2455-099X,
Volume 1, Issue 3, DECEMBER 2015.

Fig. 4: DSR 80 Nodes

III. OLSR Protocol

IJ
TC

.O

The first part of the figure 5 shows the OLSR delay. The second middle part shows the OLSR
network load and the third and last part shows the OLSR throughput. The OLSR delay peak
value is 0.0153 sec. The graph gradually decreased to a value 0.0020 sec. The last OLSR
delay value is 0.0010 sec. The OLSR network load peak value is 2783173 bit/sec. The OLSR
throughput peak value is 11023736 bit/sec.

Fig. 5: OLSR 80 Nodes

IV. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

105

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTING (IJTC)

ISSN-2455-099X,
Volume 1, Issue 3, DECEMBER 2015.

Each protocol has its own advantages and disadvantages in terms of network efficiency and
resources required. Even though the network behavior may not be known, the performance of
these protocols developed under deterministic case may serve as bounds on the network
performance and as guidelines in designing protocols for stochastic case. Furthermore,
wireless networks may include unidirectional links; wired networks almost invariably entail
bidirectional point-to point communication between nodes. From a protocol designers
perspective, the bandwidth constraints limit the prospects of extensive control message
exchanges; that is, protocol overhead must be kept to a minimum to conserve bandwidth for
the actual messages the application processes need to exchange. The future work suggested is
the development of modified version of the selected routing protocols which should consider

different aspects of routing protocols such as rate of higher route establishment with lesser
route breakage and the weakness of the protocols mentioned should be improvised.

REFERENCES

[1] Rajiv Misra and C.R.Manda, Performance Comparison of AODV/DSR On-demand Routing Protocols for
Ad Hoc Networks in Constrained Situation, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur (India).

.O

[2] Opnet Technologies, Inc. Opnet Simulator, Internet: www.opnet.com, date last viewed: 2009-12-21
[3] Vahid Nazari Talooki & Koorush Ziarati, Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols For Mobile Ad
Hoc Networks, Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, School of Engineering, Shiraz University
[4] F. Bertocchi, P. Bergamo, G. Mazzini, M. Zorzi, Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols for Ad

IJ
TC

Hoc Networks, DI, University of Ferrara, Italy

[5] Amr M. Hassain, MohamedI. Youssef, Mohamed M. Zahra, Evaluation of Ad Hoc Routing Protocols in
Real Simulation Environments, Electronics and Electrical Communications Department, Faculty of
Engineering, AL-AZHAR University Cairo, Egypt.

[6] Nor Surayati Mohamad Usop, Azizol Abdullah, Ahmad Faisal Amri Abidin, Performance Evaluation of
AODV, DSDV & DSR Routing Protocol in Grid Environment, IJCSNS International Journal of Computer
Science and Network Security, VOL.9 No.7, July 2009

[7] Md. Anisur Rahman, Md. Shohidul Islam, Alex Talevski, Performance Measurement of Various Routing
Protocols in Ad-hoc Network.

[8] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2501.txt , date last viewed: 2009-12-21

[9] Ammar Zahary and Aladdin Ayesh, Analytical Study to Detect Threshold Number of Efficient Routes in
Multipath AODV Extensions, Faculty of Computing Sciences and Engineering De Montfort University
Leicester, LE1 9BH, UK
[10] Lijuan Cao Kashif Sharif Yu Wang Teresa Dahlberg, Adaptive Multiple Metrics Routing Protocols for
heterogeneous Multi-Hop Wireless Networks, Department of Computer Science, University of North Carolina
at Charlotte, Charlotte, USA.
[11] Uyen Trang Nguyen and Xing Xiong, Rate-adaptive Multicast in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks,
Department of Computer Science and Engineering York University Toronto, Canada M3J 1P3
[12] OPNET Modeler 14.5 Documentation.

106

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTING (IJTC)

ISSN-2455-099X,
Volume 1, Issue 3, DECEMBER 2015.

[13] Rainer Baumann, Simon Heimlicher, Martin May, Towards Realistic Mobility Models for Vehicular Adhoc Networks.
[14] Jing Xie, Luis Girons Quesada and Yuming Jiang, A Threshold-based Hybrid Routing Protocol for

IJ
TC

.O

MANET. Department of Telematics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

107