PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET

A Mini-Project Report
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
In

COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

By Ch.Phanindra Ramesh D.Rambabu M.Chandra Giddaiah (08191A0522) (08191A0557) (08191A0558)

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING JNTUA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING PULIVENDULA 516390 ANDHRA PRADESH - INDIA (September, 2011)

STUDENT DECLARATION
We hereby declare that this submission is our own work and that to the best of our knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or material which has been accepted for the award of any degree or diploma of any University or institute of higher learning.

CH.PHANINDRA RAMESH (08191A0522)

D.RAMBABU (08191A0557)

M.CHANDRA GIDDAIAH (08191A0558)

JNTUA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING PULIVENDULA

Department of Computer Science and Engineering CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the Mini Project Report entitled Performance Analysis of AODV over MANETs that is being submitted By Ch. Phanindra Ramesh D. Rambabu M. Chandra Giddiah (08191A0522) (08191A0557) (08191A0558)

in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the, Degree of Bachelor of Technology in Computer Science and Engineering to the Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University-Anantapur, Anantapur is a record of bonafied work carried out by them under my guidance and supervision. The results embodied in this Mini Project Report have not been submitted to any other University or Institute for the award of any degree or diploma.

GUIDE & HEAD

DR.P.CHENNA REDDY ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, JNTUA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING PULIVENDULA

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Its our privilege to express our gratitude to all, who helped us directly or indirectly, in successfully completion of this Mini-Project. Prof. B.KRISHNA GANDHI Garu, Honourable Vice Chancellor, has been striving hard to make the college emerge as a premier institute of excellence in the field of science and technology. We express our sincere gratitude for his objective. The man who has helped us a lot in times of trouble, and who helped us in recovering from burnout problems is Dr.V.VENUGOPAL REDDY Garu, Principal, JNTUA College of Engineering Pulivendula. We are very thankful to him. Its our pleasure to say thanks to Dr.A.V.N.SWAMY Garu, Vice Principal, JNTUA College of Engineering, Pulivendula for motivating us to having vision and continue to work in spite of many obstacles .Our sincere thanks to him. The man who wished our success, who shared our joy, who was with us in times of trouble and helped us in finding solutions to many of our project related problems, and the man who has to be complemented for our success is our guide Dr.P.CHENNA REDDY Garu, Assoc-Professor and Head Of The Department Of Computer Science, JNTUA College of Engineering Pulivendula. We are thankful to him for insightful supervision and encouragement. We thank all the faculty of Department Of Computer Science and our friends for their valuable comments, advice and encouragement. Their constructive criticism helped us a lot in the course of work.

ABSTRACT
Wireless Adhoc Network is a collection of communication nodes that wish to communicate without any fixed infrastructure and predetermined organization of available networks. The Adhoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Algorithm enables dynamic, self-starting, multihop routing between participating mobile nodes wishing to establish and maintain an Adhoc network AODV allows mobile nodes to obtain routes quickly for new destinations, and does not require nodes to maintain routes to destinations that are not in active communication. The main objective of this project is to analyze the performance of CBR traffic in Mobile Adhoc network using AODV as routing protocol and NS-2 as bit rate, where there is an simulating tool. The CBR service inherent dependence on time category is used for connections that transport traffic at a consistent synchronization between the traffic source and destination. Various performance metrics of Adhoc networks namely Average End-to-End Delay, Packet Delivery Fraction, Normalizing routing overhead are calculated with respect to varying pause times.

vi

CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES ABBREVIATIONS x 1 1 1 2 4 8 9 9 10 10 11 viii ix

1.INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background 1.1.1 Characteristics of MANETs 1.1.2 MANET Routing Protocol Performance Issues 1.1.3 AODV 1.2 Motivation 1.3 Problem Statement 1.4 Organization of the report

2. LITERATURE SURVEY
2.1 Table driven protocols 2.2 Ondemand Routing Protocols 2.3 Observations 11 2.4 Limitations of AODV

12 13 16 16

3. SIMULATION
3.1 Network Simulating Tool 3.1.1 Network Representation 3.1.2 Experiments 17 3.1.2.1 CBR traffic 17 3.1.2.2 FTP Session 17 3.2.2 CMU Tools 18 3.2.2.1 setdest 18 vi

3.2.2.2 cbrgen 19 3.2 Performance Metrics 20 3.2.1 Packet Delivery Fraction 20 3.2.2 Average End to End Delay 20 3.2.3 Average Routing Overhead 20 3.2.4 Packet Loss 20 3.3 Environment 21 3.4 Results and Analysis 21 3.4.1 Packet Delivery Ratio 21 3.4.2 Average End to End Delay 23 3.4.3 Routing Overhead 25 3.4.4 Packet Drop 27 4. CONCLUSION 30 REFERENCES 31

vii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 18 Table 3.2: Average End To End Delay and Pause Time Readings 20 Table 22 Table 3.4: Packet Drop and Pause Time Readings 23 3.3: Routing Overhead and Pause Time Readings 3.1: Packet Delivery Ratio and Pause Time Readings

viii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: RREQ Message Format Figure 1.2: RREP Message Format Figure 1.3: RERR Message Format Figure 3.1: Packet Delivery Ratio Vs Pause Time Graph Figure 3.2: Average End To End Delay Vs Pause Time Graph Figure 3.3: Routing Overhead Vs Pause Time Graph Figure 3.4: Packet Drop Vs Pause Time Graph 5 6 7 19 21 22 24

ix

ABBREVIATIONS
AODV MANET RREQ RREP RERR NS-2 CBR TCP Adhoc Ondemand Distance Vector Routing Algorithm Mobile Adhoc NETwork Route REQuest Route REPly Route ERRor Network Simulator 2 Constant Bit Rate Transmission Control Protocol

1. INTRODUCTION

With the advancement in radio technologies like Bluetooth, IEEE 802.11 or Hiperlan, a new concept of networking has emerged. This is known as Adhoc networking where potential mobile users arrive within the common perimeter of radio link and participate in setting up the network topology for communication. Nodes within Adhoc are mobile and they communicate with each other within radio range through direct wireless links or multihop routing.

1.1 About MANET 1.1.1 Characteristics of MANET

A Mobile Adhoc Network or MANET is defined as a wireless network of mobile nodes communicating with each other in a multi-hop fashion without the support of any fixed infrastructure such as base stations, wireless gateways or access points .The vision of mobile Adhoc networking is to support robust and efficient operation in mobile wireless networks by incorporating routing functionality into mobile nodes, such networks are envisioned to have dynamic, sometimes rapidly changing, random, multihop topologies which are likely composed of relatively bandwidth constrained wireless links. A MANET consists of mobile platforms (e.g., a router with multiple hosts and wireless communication devices) referred to as "nodes" which are free to move about arbitrarily. The nodes may be located in or on airplanes, ships, trucks, cars, perhaps even on people and there may be multiple hosts per router. A MANET is an autonomous system of mobile nodes. PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 5

The following are the salient characteristics MANETs:

Dynamic topologies
Nodes are free to move arbitrarily, thus the network topology which is typically multihop may change randomly and rapidly at unpredictable times, and may consist of both bidirectional and unidirectional links.

Bandwidth
Bandwidth is constrained for variable capacity links. Wireless links will continue to have significantly lower capacity than their hardwired counterparts. In addition, the realized throughput of wireless communications after counting for the effects of multiple access, fading, noise, and interference conditions, etc. is often much less than a radios maximum transmission rate. One effect of the relatively low to moderate link capacities is that congestion is typically the norm rather than the exception, i.e. aggregate application demand will likely approach or exceed network capacity frequently. As the mobile network is often simply an extension of the fixed network infrastructure, mobile Adhoc users will demand similar services. These demands will continue to increase as multimedia computing and collaborative networking applications rise.

Energy-constrained operation
Some or all of the nodes in a MANET may rely on batteries or other exhaustible means for their energy. For these nodes, the most important system design criteria for optimization may be energy conservation.

Limited physical security

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 6

Mobile wireless networks are generally more prone to physical security threats than are fixed cable nets. The increased possibility of eavesdropping, spoofing, and denial of service attacks should be carefully considered. Existing link security techniques are often applied within wireless networks to reduce security threats. As a benefit, the decentralized nature of network control in MANETs provides additional robustness against the single points of failure of more centralized approaches.

1.1.2 MANET Routing Protocol Performance Issues

To judge the merit of a routing protocol, one needs metrics, both qualitative and quantitative with which to measure its suitability and performance. These metrics should be independent of any given routing protocol. The following is a list of desirable qualitative properties of MANET routing protocols.

Distributed operation
This is an essential property, but it should be stated nonetheless.

Loop-freedom
Loop freedom is not required in light of certain quantitative measures (i.e. performance criteria), but generally desirable to avoid problems such as worst case phenomena, e.g. a small fraction of packets spinning around in the network for arbitrary time periods. Adhoc solutions such as TTL values bounds the problem, but a more structured and well-formed approach is generally desirable as it usually leads to better overall performance.

Demand-based operation
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 7

Instead of assuming a uniform traffic distribution within the network (and maintaining routing between all nodes at all times), the routing algorithm adapts to the traffic pattern on a demand or need basis. If this is done intelligently, it can utilize network energy and bandwidth resources more efficiently, at the cost of increased route discovery delay.

Proactive operation
In certain contexts, the additional latency demand-based

operation incurs may be unacceptable. If bandwidth and energy resources permit, proactive operation is desirable in these contexts.

Security
Without some form of network level or link layer security, a MANET routing protocol is vulnerable to many forms of attack. It may be relatively simple to snoop the network traffic, replay transmissions, manipulate packet headers, and redirect routing messages, within a wireless network without appropriate security provisions. While these concerns exist within wired infrastructures and routing protocols as well, maintaining the "physical" security of the transmission media is harder in practice with MANETs. Sufficient security protection to prohibit disruption of modification of protocol operation is desired. This may be somewhat orthogonal to any particular routing protocol approach, e.g. through the application of IP Security techniques.

Sleep period operation

As a result of energy conservation, or some other need to be inactive, nodes of a MANET may stop transmitting and/or receiving for arbitrary time periods. such A routing protocol should be able to accommodate sleep periods without overly adverse

consequences. This property may require close coupling with the linkPERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 8

layer protocol through a standardized interface.

Unidirectional link support

Bidirectional links are typically assumed in the design of routing algorithms, and many algorithms are incapable of functioning properly over unidirectional links. Nevertheless, unidirectional links can and do occur in wireless networks. Oftentimes, a sufficient number of duplex links exist so that usage of unidirectional links is of limited added value. However, in situations where a pair of unidirectional links form the only bidirectional connection between two Adhoc regions, the ability to make use of them is valuable.

1.1.3 AODV
The Adhoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) algorithm enables dynamic, self-starting, multihop routing between participating mobile nodes wishing to establish and maintain an Adhoc network. AODV allows mobile nodes to obtain routes quickly for new destinations, and does not require nodes to maintain routes to destinations that are not in active communication. AODV allows mobile nodes to respond to link breakages and changes in network topology in a timely manner. One distinguishing feature of AODV is its use of a destination sequence number for each route entry. The destination sequence number is created by the destination to be included along with any route information it sends to requesting nodes. Using destination sequence numbers ensures loop freedom. Given the choice between two routes to a destination, a requesting node is required to select the one with the greatest sequence number.

RREQ message format

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET

Fig 1.1:RREQ Message Format The format of the Route Request message is illustrated above, and contains the following fields: Type J R G IP D : : : : 1 Join flag, reserved for multicast. Repair flag, reserved for multicast. Gratuitous RREP flag, indicates whether a gratuitous RREP should be unicast to the node specified in the Destination Address field. Destination only flag, indicates only the destination that

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 10

respond to this RREQ U : Unknown sequence number, indicates the destination sequence number is unknown Reserved: Set as 0, ignored on reception. node handling the request. RREQ ID: nodes A sequence number uniquely identifying the particular RREQ when taken in conjunction with the originating IP address. Hop Count: The number of hops from the Originator IP Address to the

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 11

Destination IP Address: The IP address of the destination for which a route is desired. Destination Sequence Number: The latest sequence number received in the past by the originator for any route towards the destination. Originator IP Address: The IP address of the node, originates the Route Request. Originator Sequence Number: The current sequence number to be used in the route entry points towards the originator of the route request.

RREP messages format

Fig 1.2: RREP Message Format

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 6

The format of the Route Reply message is illustrated above, and contains the following fields: Type R A : : 2 Repair flag, used for multicast. Acknowledgement required

Reserved: Sent as 0, ignored on reception. Prefix Size: If nonzero, the 5-bit Prefix Size specifies that the indicated next hop

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 7

may be used for any nodes with the same routing prefix (as defined Hop Count: by the Prefix Size) as the requested destination. The number of hops from the Originator IP Address to For multicast route requests this indicates the number of hops to the Destination IP Address: The IP address of the destination for which a route is supplied. Destination Sequence Number: The destination sequence number associated to the route. Originator IP Address: The IP address of the node which originates the RREQ, to which Lifetime: RREP the route is supplied. consider the route to be valid. The time in milliseconds for which nodes receiving the multicast tree member sending the RREP.

the Destination IP Address:

RERR messages format

Fig 1.3: RERR Message Format

The format of the Route Error message is illustrated above, and contains the following fields: Type N : 3 No delete flag, sets when a node has performed a local

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 7

repair of a route.

link, and upstream nodes should not delete the

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 8

Reserved: Sent as 0, ignored on reception. DestCount: the message, The number of unreachable destinations included in MUST be at least1.

Unreachable Destination IP Address: The IP address of the destination that has become unreachable due to a link break. Unreachable Destination Sequence Number: The sequence number in the route table entry for the destination Destination IP Address field. listed in the previous Unreachable

Hop counts
The number of hops from the Originator IP Address to the Destination IP Address.

1.2 Motivation
With the advancement in radio technologies like Bluetooth, IEEE 802.11 or Hiperlan, a new concept of networking has emerged. This is known as Adhoc networking where potential mobile users arrive within the common perimeter of radio link and participate in setting up the network topology for communication. Nodes within Adhoc are mobile and they communicate with each other within radio range through direct wireless links or multihop routing. A Mobile Adhoc Network or MANET is defined as a wireless network of mobile nodes communicating with each other in a multi-hop fashion without the support of any fixed infrastructure such as base stations, wireless gateways or access points. A MANET, due to its unique infrastructure, less characteristic feature, compared to other types of wireless networks can be very useful for many applications in which no infrastructure exists. Another area in which MANETs can be deployed is collaborative and distributed computing. The requirement for a temporary communication network among a group of people in a conference, meeting or classroom necessitates the formation of a PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 8

mobile Adhoc network. AODV is Adhoc On demand Distance Vector routing protocol. It is an On-Demand protocol, so it discovers the routes only when it has something to send. It is a hard state

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 9

protocol, so if a member node of a multicast group wants to terminate its group membership, it must ask for it. When a mobile node wants to join a multicast group or wants to send a message but does not have a route to the group, then a Route Request (RREQ) is originated. Thus analysing the performance of AODV over MANET will help in choosing the perfect network environment for obtaining the best results from MANETs.

1.3 Problem statement

Create a wireless Constant Bit Rate traffic and different scenarios with varying pause times, obtain the traces of those scenarios and traffic over AODV. Analyze the traces and calculate the various performance metrics namely Packet Delivery Ratio, Average end-to-end delay, Packet loss, Average routing over head.

1.4 Organization of the Report

In the report a brief description of Characteristics of background section of chapter1. The main motivation behind the project is written in motivation section, the objective and the problem statement are placed in the subsections of chapter1. In the literature survey chapter, various Adhoc protocol types are described and the limitations of AODV are given a glance. In the simulation chapter, information regarding the network simulating tool used[NS-2], CMU tools used(cbrgen, setdest), definitions of performance metrics that are calculated in the project, the simulation environment, various results obtained and analysis on the obtained results is written. Finally the Conclusion obtained from analyzing the results obtained and the References ends up this report. PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 9 MANET , AODV, AODV message formats, and their details are written in the

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 10

Literature Survey

2. LITERATURE SURVEY
A Mobile Adhoc Network (MANET) is a wireless network that uses multi-hop peer-to-peer routing instead of static network infrastructure to provide network connectivity. The network topology in a MANET usually changes with time. Therefore, there are new challenges for routing protocols in MANETs since traditional routing protocols may not be suitable for MANETs. Routing has been a primary focus of researchers in mobile Adhoc networks. Consequently, a large number of dynamic routing protocols applicable to mobile Adhoc networks have been developed by the MANET working group. Based on when routing activities are initiated, routing protocols for mobile Adhoc networks may be broadly classified into three basic categories 1) Proactive (table-driven) i) DSDV
ii) OLSR iii) FSR iv) FSLS

2) Reactive (on demand) i) DSR

ii)AODV

3) Hybrid Researchers are designing new MANET routing protocols and comparing and then improving existing MANET routing protocols and their performance metrics before any routing protocols are standardized using simulations. Furthermore, it is difficult for one to choose a proper routing protocol for a given MANET application [4].They have given the brief description of MANET routing protocols.

2.1 Table Driven Routing Protocols (Proactive)

In proactive or table-driven routing protocols, each node continuously maintains up-to-date routes to every other node in the PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 10

Literature Survey network. Routing information is periodically transmitted throughout the network in order to maintain routing table consistency. Thus, if a route has already existed before

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 11

Literature Survey traffic arrives, transmission occurs without delay. Otherwise, traffic packets should wait in queue until the node receives routing information corresponding to its destination. However, for highly dynamic network topology, the proactive schemes require a significant amount of resources to keep routing information up-to-date and reliable. Certain proactive routing protocols are Destination- Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV), Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP), Global State Routing (GSR) and Cluster head Gateway Switch Routing (CGSR).

2.2 On-Demand Routing Protocols (Reactive)

In contrast to proactive approach, in reactive or on demand protocols, a node initiates a route discovery throughout the network, only when it wants to send packets to its destination. For this purpose, a node initiates a route discovery process through the network. This process is completed once a route is determined or all possible permutations have been examined. Once a route has been established, it is maintained by a route maintenance process until either the destination becomes inaccessible along every path from the source or until the route is no longer desired. In reactive schemes, nodes maintain the routes to active destinations. A route search is needed for every unknown destination. Therefore, theoretically the communication overhead is reduced at expense of delay due to route research. Some reactive protocols are Cluster Based Routing Protocol (CBRP), Adhoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR).

2.3 Observations
One of the author describes as performance comparison of DSR, AODV, FSR and ZRP routing protocols for mobile Ad-hoc networks is presented as a function of pause time. Performance of these routing protocols is evaluated with respect to four performance metrics such as average end to end delay, packet delivery ratio, throughput and PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 11

Literature Survey average jitter. According to our simulation results, DSR shows best performance than AODV, FSR and ZRP in terms of packet delivery ratio and throughput as a function of pause time. FSR show lowest end-toend delay and ZRP has less average jittering than DSR, AODV and FSR [1].

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 12

Literature Survey

2.4 Limitations of AODV

The limitation of AODV protocol is that it expects/requires that the nodes in the broadcast medium can detect each others broadcasts. It is also possible that a valid route is expired and the determination of a reasonable expiry time is difficult. The reason behind this is that the nodes are mobile and their sending rates may differ widely and can change dynamically from node to node. In addition, as the size of network grows, various performance metrics begin decreasing. AODV is vulnerable to various kinds of attacks as it based on the assumption that all nodes must cooperate and without their cooperation no route can be established. Distance Vector routing protocols are based on the Bellman-Ford routing Algorithm .In Distance Vector routing, every router maintains a routing table (i.e. vector), in which it stores the distance information to all reachable destinations. A router exchanges distance information with its neighbours periodically to update its routing table. The distance can be calculated based on metrics such like hop number, queue length or delay. If multiple paths exist, the shortest one will be selected. The main drawback of Distance Vector routing algorithm is the slow convergence. Slow convergence leads to the "count-to-infinity" problem, i.e., some routers continuously increase the hop count to particular networks. The well-known Routing Information Protocol (RIP) is based on Distance Vector Routing [7].

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 12

Literature Survey

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 13

Simulation

3. SIMULATION
3.1 Network Simulating Tool (NS-2)
Network simulators have grown in maturity since they first appeared as performance, management and prediction tools. Simulators are normally used as network management tools, for which packet level analysis is not commonly employed. However, more studies are needed to establish guidelines for researchers so that they may select and customise a simulator to suite fine-grained packet level analysis. Ns-2 is developed by the Virtual Inter Network Test bed (VINT) project. It is an event-driven network simulator, which is popular with the networking research community. It includes numerous models of common Internet protocols including several newer protocols, such as reliable multicast and TCP selective acknowledgement. A network animator, Nam, provides packet-level animation and protocol specific graph for design and debugging of network protocols. Additionally, different levels of configurations are present in Ns-2 due to its open source nature, including the capability of creating custom applications and protocols as well as modifying several parameters at different layers

3.1.1 Network representation in the simulators

The Ns-2 architecture takes an object-oriented approach using C++ and otcl . Otcl is an object-oriented variant of the well-known scripting language tcl. C++ is utilized for per-packet processing and forms the core of the simulator. Otcl is used for simulation scenario generation, periodic or triggered action generation and for manipulating existing C++ objects.

3.1.2 The experiments

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 13

Simulation Two sets of experiments were conducted. The first one was to test the simulators accuracy with raw CBR data traffic and the second with an FTP session to simulate best-effort data traffic.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 14

Simulation

3.1.2.1 CBR traffic

CBR traffic is characterized by a fixed bandwidth across the network and is typically used by applications such as video and audio. Furthermore, these type of applications usually requires strict delay and jitter bounds on the CBR packets used for transport. A CBR traffic stream can be generated by fixing the packet size and using the same inter-arrival time between these packets. This type of traffic was produced by introducing trace files into the simulators tools. The traffic generators, stg and rtg, which, come with the NCTUns simulator tool were used in the network testbed. The stg program can read from a trace file and replicate the UDP (User Datagram Protocol) packets.

3.1.2.2 FTP session

FTP is intended to share, transfer and transmit information between two computers. Bhushan , in the MIT Project MAC, proposed the first file transfer mechanism in 1971. Nearly all of the FTP servers and clients follow the more recent RFC no. 959, in which is explained: the usage model for FTP, the set of commands employed, and how the protocol handles the control commands and the data connection. For the FTP experiments, two types of tests were performed: 1. -FTP sessions using the default settings of the simulators. 2. -Finely tuned FTP parameters at different levels for each simulator capability. The actual parameters changed are discussed next. Several tests were performed to evaluate the tuned parameters and the values that better mimic the characteristics of the networks test bed for each simulator. In Ns-2, the link latency was activated and this affects the Round Trip Time (RTT) of the packets. Max segment size was increase for bigger Ethernet packets, and Window size to have more range for sliding the window value. With Ns-2 there was no discernable change between Reno and New Reno. PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 14

Simulation

3.2.2 CMU Tools

The two CMU tools used in the simulation are: 1) setdest

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 15

Simulation 2) cbrgen. 3.2.2.1 setdest Setdest tool is used to generate the positions of nodes and their moving speedand moving directions. The syntax is: setdest -v 1 -n $numnodes -p $pt -M $maxspeed -t $simtime -x $maxx -y $maxy Here the various options and their meanings are: -n: n denotes number of nodes -p: p denotes pause time -M: M denotes maximum speed -t: t denotes simulation duration -x: x denotes maximum value x can have -y: y denotes maximum value y can have for example: setdest -v 1 -n 50 -p 0 -M 20 -t 900 -x 1500 -y 300 will generate a 1500*300 topology with 50 nodes random distributed labeled by a XY(Z) coordinates .After the initial position information, the nodes are specified with their movement destination and speed. After that, the initial distance (hop counts) information are counted by a GOD. Currently, the god object is used only to store an array of the shortest number of hops required to reach from one node to another. The god object does not calculate this on the fly during simulation runs, since it can be quite time consuming. The information is loaded into the god object from the movement pattern file. Then, the nodes are going to move during this 900-second simulation scenario. During this, the distance (hop-counts) information is going to change, thus, the following lines are going to show this recent change. Note that the distance is calculated based on a nominal radio change as "250" meters. The god information should not be available to any of the node. Thus, for a routing protocol, it has to discover the distance by itself with some mechanism. It's possible that a node reaches its destination before the simulation timer ends. Thus, it needs to rePERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 15

Simulation specify new direction and speed for it. Also, the average pause time is a parameter to allow a node stop to move in a destination before moving again.

3.2.2.2 cbrgen Random traffic connections of TCP and CBR can be setup between mobile nodes using a traffic-scenario generator script. This traffic generator script is available under ~ns/indep-utils/cmu-scen-gen and is called cbrgen.tcl. It can be used to create CBR and TCP traffics connections between wireless mobile nodes. In order to create a trafficconnection file, we need to define the type of traffic connection (CBR or TCP), the number of nodes and maximum number of connections to be setup between them, a random seed and incase of CBR connections, a rate whose inverse value is used to compute the interval time between the CBR packets. So the command line looks like the following: ns are: (tcp or cbr) -nn: -seed: -mc: nn denotes the number of nodes seed denotes a random seed mc denotes the maximum number of connections to be set up cbrgen.tcl [-type cbr|tcp][-nn -type: nodes][-seed seed][-mc connetions][-rate rate] Here the various options and their meanings type denotes the traffic type

among the nodes -rate: in case of CBR traffic rate denotes the value whose inverse is

used to compute the interval time between the CBR packets. The start times for the TCP/CBR connections are randomly generated with a maximum value set at 180.0s, thus the simulation time is at least 180 seconds. And the number of nodes has no relationship to the maximum number of connections (mc), we can have PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 16

Simulation 10 nodes, also 10 connections as one node could have multiple simultaneous connections to other nodes. The parameter "rate" means how many packets per second, thus, for CBR traffic, the packet intervel is the reversal of this parameter. And for TCP traffic, we don't have to specify rate, ftp connections are going to be used. the default packet size is 512B.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 17

Simulation

3.2 Performance Metrics 3.2.1 Packet Delivery Fraction

This is the ratio of total number of packets successfully received by the destination nodes to the number of packets sent by the source nodes throughout the simulation.

3.2.2 Average End-to-End Delay

This is defined as the average delay in transmission of a packet between two nodes.

3.2.3 Average Routing Overhead

Average routing overhead is the total number of routing packets divided by total number of delivered data packets .This metric provides an indication of the extra bandwidth consumed data traffic.

3.2.4 Packet Drop

Packet loss describes an error condition in which data packets appear to be transmitted correctly at one end of a connection, but never arrive at the other end. There might be different reasons like corrupted packets dropping the nodes, the link between nodes is not working, insufficient bandwidth, etc.

3.3 Environment
Area: Number of nodes: Simulation duration: Physical/Mac Layer: range Mobility model: sec,25sec. random waypoint model with maximum node movement speed 5 m/sec and pause time 0sec,5sec,10sec,15 sec,20 500 m X 500 m 25 90 Seconds IEEE 802.11 at 2Mbps, 250 meter transmission

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 17

Simulation

3.4 Results and Analysis

3.4.1 Packet Delivery Ratio
Packet delivery ratio is the fraction of packets sent by the application that

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 18

Simulation are received by the receivers and is calculated by dividing the number of packets received by the destination through the number of packets originated by the application layer of the source. The simulation readings are shown in the following table

Table 3.1: Packet Delivery Ratio and Pause Time Readings

PAUSE TIME 0 PACKET DELIVERY RATIO
4.14858645627876397107

5 10 15 20

3.61002785515320334262

3.71594005449591280654 3.40969782150386507379 0.00366300366300366300

25

4.51898734177215189873

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 18

Simulation The graph for the packet delivery ratio Vs pause time is shown in the following figure:

Fig 3.1: Packet Delivery Ratio Vs Pause Time Graph

The above figure shows that with the increase in the pause time the packet delivery ratio first decreases from 4.15 to 3.62 during the pause time interval 0 sec to 5 sec, then fluctuates from 3.71 to 3.28 during the pause time interval 5 sec to 20 sec, the has a gradual increase to 4.56 during the pause time interval 20sec to 25sec.

3.4.2 Average End-to-End Delay

End-to-end delay indicates how long a packet takes to travel from the CBR source to the application layer of the destination. This includes all possible delays caused by buffering during route discovery latency, queuing at the interface queue, retransmission delays at the MAC, propagation and transfer times .

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 19

Simulation The simulation readings are shown in the following table

Table 3.2: End To End Delay and Pause Time Readings

PAUSE TIME 0 END TO END DELAY
0.01194925858558558559

5 10 15 20

0.01926149904873646209

0.01100980617192982456 0.01030145639107142857 0.01030145639107142857

25

0.43328538355898366606

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 20

Simulation The average delay from the source to the destinations application layer is shown in the following fig

Fig 3.2: Average End To End Delay Vs Pause Time Graph

According to our simulation results the average end-to-end delay fluctuates between 0.0119 to 0.0156 during the pause time interval 0 sec to 20 sec and has a sudden increase from 0.156 to 0.4332 during the pause time interval 20 sec to 25 sec.

3.4.3 Routing over head

The number of routing packets transmitted per data packet delivered at the destination. Each hop-wise transmission of a routing packet is counted as one transmission. And calculated by dividing total transmitted messages with the number of total transmitted bytes.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 21

Simulation The simulation readings are shown in the following table

Table 3.3: Routing Overhead and Pause Time Readings

PAUSE TIME 0 ROUTING OVERHEAD
0.0211042311661506707 9

0.0210431190291763490 8

10

0.0210539912167398605 0

15

0.0211020751542344363 4

20

0.0210194025254080689 9

25

0.0210499341045541074 8

The routing overhead from the source to destination is shown in fig:

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 22

Simulation

Fig 3.3: Average Routing Overhead Vs Pause Time Graph

This simulation results shows that the routing over head fluctuates with very

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 23

Simulation narrow differences.

3.4.4 Packet drop

Packet loss describes an error condition in which data packets appear to be transmitted correctly never arrive at the other. There might be different reasons like corrupted packets will be dropped by nodes, the link/route between nodes is not working, insufficient bandwidth, etc. The packet drop is calculated by dividing the total number of dropped packets with the total number of transmitted packets. The simulation readings are shown in the following table at one end of a connection, but

Table 3.4: Drop/Loss and Pause Time Readings

PAUSE TIME 0 DROP/LOSS
0.00244498777506112469

5 10

0.00306748466257668712

0.00306748466257668712 2

15 20

0.00332225913621262458 0.00366300366300366300

25

0.00173913043478260870

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 23

Simulation

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 24

Simulation The packet drop variation with the pause time is shown in the fig:

Fig 3.4: Packet Drop Vs Pause Time Graph

This simulation results shows that the packet drop fluctuates with very narrow differences.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 24

Conclusion

4. CONCLUSION
In this project the AODV protocol is simulated over MANET using ns-2, and the following performance metrics are cal calculated. 1. Packet delivery ratio 2. Average end-to-end delay 3. Average routing overhead 4. Packet drop From the results obtained, it can be concluded that for smaller values of pause time the packet delivery ratio changes with small differences and for higher values of the pause time the packet delivery ratio increases at a higher rate. The average end-to-end delay is almost constant for small values of pause time and increases suddenly for higher values of pause time. The average routing overhead is almost constant for all the values of pause times examined in the simulation. The packet drop increases for smaller values of pause time and for higher values of pause time, the packet drop is observed to be decreasing. Thus, from all the performance metrics calculated, it can be calculated that maintaining high pause times between the movements will lead to improved performance of AODV.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 25

Conclusion

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 26

References

REFERENCES
[1] S. Sathish, K. Thangavel and S. Boopathi Performance Analysis of DSR, AODV, FSR and ZRP Routing Protocols in MANET Periyar University,Tamilnadu, India. [2] Raissa M. DSouza, Sharad Ramanathan, and Duncan Measuring performance of Adhoc networks using timescales for information flow Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies Murray Hill, NJ 07974. [3] Renato M. de Moraes, Hamid R. Sadjadpour Throughput-Delay Relaying Analysis of Mobile Ad-hoc Networks with a Multi-Copy USA. [4] T K Godder, M. M Hossain, M M Rahman, Md. Sipon Miah and S K Mondal Performance comparison and analysis of mobile Adhoc routing Protocols Islamic University, Kushtia 7003, Bangladesh April 2011. [5] Muhammad Hisyam Lee, Mazalan Sarahintu Performance Analysis of Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Adhoc Networks Based on Taguchis Method Faculty of Science, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia November 2nd,2008. [6] Deepti Verma, Deepika Chandrawanshi Comparative Performance Evaluation of AODV over CBR and TCP Traffic National Institute of Technology, Raourkela, Orisa, India, June 2011. [7] Dr. Aditya Goel, Ajaii Sharma Performance Analysis of Mobile Adhoc Network Using AODV Protocol Deemed University,Bhopal, India [8] Biao Zhou, Yeng-Zhong Lee, Mario Gerla Direction Assisted Geographic Routing for Mobile Adhoc networks University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. [9] Ahmed A. Radwan, Tarek M. Mahmoud and Essam H. Houssein Performance Measurement of Some Mobile Adhoc Network Routing Protocols Faculty of Science, Minia University El Minia, Egypt,January 2011.

Strategy University of California at Santa Cruz Santa Cruz, CA 95064,

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 26

References [10] C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer, Santa Barbara, S. Das, Request for Coments: 3561, Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing, July 2003. [11] S. Corson, J. Macker, Request for Comments: 2501 Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET),January 1999.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AODV PROTOCOL OVER MANET 27