A Seminar On MANET

(Mobile Ad-hoc Network)

By: ANKUR KAUSHIK

(MNW-883-2K11)
RAHUL KUMAR

(MNW-893-2K11)

Types of Wireless Networks

Infrastructure based(Cellular Network).
Infrastructure less Network(Mobile Ad hoc

Network) (MANET)
(Ad hoc networks are defined as the category of wireless networks that utilize multi hop radio relaying and are capable of operating without the support of ant fix Infrastructure)

Why Ad Hoc Networks ?

Ease of deployment
Speed of deployment Decreased dependence on infrastructure

Characteristics of an Ad-hoc network

Collection of mobile nodes forming a temporary

network Network topology changes frequently and unpredictably No centralized administration or standard support services Host functions as router also.

Applications
Personal area networking cell phone, laptop, ear phone, wrist watch Military environments soldiers, tanks, planes Civilian environments taxi cab network meeting rooms sports stadiums boats, small aircraft Emergency operations search-and-rescue policing and fire fighting

Many Variations
Fully Symmetric Environment all nodes have identical capabilities and responsibilities Asymmetric Capabilities transmission ranges and radios may differ battery life at different nodes may differ

processing capacity may be different at different nodes

speed of movement Asymmetric Responsibilities only some nodes may route packets some nodes may act as leaders of nearby nodes (e.g., cluster
7

head)

Issues In Ad Hoc Network

Medium access scheme Routing

Transport Layer protocol

Pricing Scheme Self Organization

Security
Energy Management Addressing and service discovery Scalability

Medium access scheme

Hidden Terminal

Exposed Terminal
Throughput Access delay Fairness Adaptive data rate control

Routing
Mobility

Bandwidth
Error prone and shared channel Location dependent contention Quick route reconfiguration Loop free routing Minimum control overhead

Multicasting
Efficiency
Efficient group management Security

Transport Layer protocols Pricing Scheme Self Organization

Security
Denial Service
Resource Consumption
Energy Depletion Buffer Flow

Host Impersonation Information Disclosure Interference

Why is Routing Different in Ad Hoc ???

Host mobility

Dynamic topology link failure/repair due to mobility Distributed Environment Bandwidth constrained Energy constrained

Categorization of Ad-Hoc Routing Protocols

Source Initiated On demand routing protocol

Reactive.

on-demand style: create routes only when it is desired

by the source node When a node requires a route to a destination, it initiates a route discovery process Route is maintained until destination becomes unreachable, or source no longer is interested in destination.

Table Driven Routing Protocol

Proactive.
Each node maintains one or more tables containing

routing information to every other node in the network. Tables need to be consistent and up-to-date view of the network. Updates propagate through the network

Table Driven Routing Protocol

Destination-Sequenced Distance Vector Protocol (DSDV)

Basic Routing Protocol Based on Bellman ford routing algorithm with some

improvement

Each node maintains a list of all destinations and

number of

hops to each destination.

Each entry is marked with a sequence number. Periodically send table to all neighbors to maintain topology

Two ways to update neighbors: Full dump

Incremental update

Example of DSDV
As Routing Table Before Change
Destination A B C D E F Next Hop A B C D D D Distance 0 1 1 1 2 2 Sequence Number S205_A S334_B S198_C S567_D S767_E S45_F

As Routing Table After Change

Destination A Next Hop A Distance 0 Sequence Number S304_A

B
C D E F

D
C D D D

3
1 1 2 2

S424_B
S297_C S687_D S868_E S164_F

Advantages & Disadvantages of DSDV

Advantages: Less Delay to find route Existing wired network protocol adaptable Maintain up-to-date view of network Disadvantages: Excessive control overhead. Waiting time is Higher.

Cluster-Head Gateway Switch Routing (CGSR)

Uses DSDV as an underlying protocol and Least Cluster Change (LCC) clustering algorithm A clusterhead is able to control a group of ad-hoc hosts Each node maintains 2 tables: -A cluster member table, containing the cluster head for each
destination node -A DV-routing table, containing the next hop to the destination

The routing principle:

Lookup of the clusterhead of the destination node Lookup of next hop Packet send to destination Destination cluster-head delivers packet

Cluster-head Gateway Switch Routing (CGSR)

Advantages & Disadvantages of (CGSR)

Advantages:
Hierarchical scheme enables partial coordination
Better bandwidth utilization

Disadvantages:
Too frequent cluster head selection can be an overhead and

cluster nodes and Gateway can be a bottleneck Increase the path length Gateway conflicts

Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP)

Predecessor to destination (next to last hop) in the

shortest path used Eliminates the Count-to-infinity problem and converges faster Neighbor connectivity via periodic Hello messages Update messages sent upon detecting a change in neighbor link

Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP)

Each node i maintains a Distance table (iDjk), Routing table

(Destination Identifier, Distance iDj , Predecessor Pj ,the successor Sj), link cost table (Cost, Update Period) Processing Updates and creating Route Table

Update from k causes i to re-compute the distances of all paths with

k as the predecessor For a destination j, a neighbor p is selected as the successor if p->j does not include i, and is the shortest path to j

Comparisons of the Characteristics of TableDriven Routing Protocols

Source Initiated On demand routing protocol

Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)

When node S wants to send a packet to node D, but does not

know a route to D, node S initiates a route discovery

Source node S floods Route Request (RREQ)
Each node appends own identifier when forwarding RREQ

29

Route Discovery in DSR

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E [S,E] F M L

J
[S,C] G D

Node H receives packet RREQ from two neighbors: potential for collision
30

Route Discovery in DSR

Y

Z
S B A H I [S,C,G] K N C E F [S,E,F] M L

J
G D

Node C receives RREQ from G and H, but does not forward it again, because node C has already forwarded RREQ once
31

Route Discovery in DSR

Y

Z
S B A H K I [S,C,G,K] N C E F [S,E,F,J] M L

J
G D

32

Nodes J and K both broadcast RREQ to node D Since nodes J and K are hidden from each other, their transmissions may collide

Route Discovery in DSR

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E F [S,E,F,J,M] M L

J
G D

Node D does not forward RREQ, because node D is the intended target of the route discovery
33

Route Discovery in DSR

Destination D on receiving the first RREQ, sends a

Route Reply (RREP)

RREP is sent on a route obtained by reversing the

route appended to received RREQ

RREP includes the route from S to D on which RREQ

was received by node D

34

Route Reply in DSR

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E RREP [S,E,F,J,D] F M L

J
G D

Represents RREP control message

35

Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)

Node S on receiving RREP, caches the route included

in the RREP
When node S sends a data packet to D, the entire route

is included in the packet header

hence the name source routing

Intermediate nodes use the source route included in a

packet to determine to whom a packet should be forwarded

36

Data Delivery in DSR

Y

DATA [S,E,F,J,D]
S B A H K I C E F M

J
G D N

Packet header size grows with route length

37

Use of Route Caching

When node S learns that a route to node D is broken, it uses

another route from its local cache, if such a route to D exists in its cache. Otherwise, node S initiates route discovery by sending a route request
Node X on receiving a Route Request for some node D can

send a Route Reply if node X knows a route to node D

Use of route cache
can speed up route discovery can reduce propagation of route requests
38

Use of Route Caching

[S,E,F,J,D] S B A H I Z [P,Q,R] Represents cached route at a node (DSR maintains the cached routes in a tree format)
39

[E,F,J,D] E C [C,S] G [G,C,S] D K N [F,J,D],[F,E,S] F [J,F,E,S] M L

Use of Route Caching: Can Speed up Route Discovery

[S,E,F,J,D] S B A H I [K,G,C,S] K RREQ Z When node Z sends a route request for node C, node K sends back a route reply [Z,K,G,C] to node Z using a locally cached route 40 RREP C [C,S] [E,F,J,D] E [F,J,D],[F,E,S] F [G,C,S] G D N [J,F,E,S] M L

Use of Route Caching: Can Reduce Propagation of Route Requests

[S,E,F,J,D] S B A H I [K,G,C,S] K RREP RREQ Z Assume that there is no link between D and Z. Route Reply (RREP) from node K limits flooding of RREQ. In general, the reduction may be less dramatic. 41 C [C,S] Y [E,F,J,D] E [F,J,D],[F,E,S] F [G,C,S] G D N [J,F,E,S] M L

Route Error (RERR)

Y

RERR [J-D]
S B A H K I C E F M

J
G D N

J sends a route error to S along route J-F-E-S when its attempt to forward the data packet S (with route SEFJD) on J-D fails

Nodes hearing RERR update their route cache to remove link J-D 42

Route Caching: Beware!

Stale caches can adversely affect performance With passage of time and host mobility, cached routes

may become invalid

A sender host may try several stale routes (obtained

from local cache, or replied from cache by other nodes), before finding a good route
An illustration of the adverse impact on TCP will be

discussed later in the tutorial [Holland99]

43

Ad Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing (AODV)

DSR includes source routes in packet headers Resulting large headers can sometimes degrade performance
particularly when data contents of a packet are small

AODV attempts to improve on DSR by maintaining routing

tables at the nodes, so that data packets do not have to contain routes
AODV retains the desirable feature of DSR that routes are

maintained only between nodes which need to communicate

44

AODV
Route Requests (RREQ) are forwarded in a manner similar

to DSR
When a node re-broadcasts a Route Request, it sets up a

reverse path pointing towards the source

AODV assumes symmetric (bi-directional) links

When the intended destination receives a Route Request, it

replies by sending a Route Reply

Route Reply travels along the reverse path set-up when

Route Request is forwarded

45

Route Requests in AODV

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E F M L

J
G D

Represents a node that has received RREQ for D from S

46

Route Requests in AODV

Broadcast transmission Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E F M L

J
G D

Represents transmission of RREQ

47

Route Requests in AODV

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E F M L

J
G D

Represents links on Reverse Path

48

Reverse Path Setup in AODV

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E F M L

J
G D

Node C receives RREQ from G and H, but does not forward it again, because node C has already forwarded RREQ once
49

Reverse Path Setup in AODV

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E F M L

J
G D

50

Reverse Path Setup in AODV

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E F M L

J
G D

Node D does not forward RREQ, because node D is the intended target of the RREQ
51

Route Reply in AODV

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E F M L

J
G D

Represents links on path taken by RREP

52

Route Reply in AODV

An intermediate node (not the destination) may also send a

Route Reply (RREP) provided that it knows a more recent path than the one previously known to sender S
To determine whether the path known to an intermediate node is

more recent, destination sequence numbers are used

The likelihood that an intermediate node will send a Route Reply

when using AODV not as high as DSR A new Route Request by node S for a destination is assigned a higher destination sequence number. An intermediate node which knows a route, but with a smaller sequence number, 53 cannot send Route Reply

Forward Path Setup in AODV

Y

Z
S B A H K I N C E F M L

J
G D

Forward links are setup when RREP travels along the reverse path
54

Represents a link on the forward path

Data Delivery in AODV

Y DATA

Z
S B A H K I N C E F M L

J
G D

Routing table entries used to forward data packet.

55

Route is not included in packet header.

Timeouts
A routing table entry maintaining a reverse path is

purged after a timeout interval

timeout should be long enough to allow RREP to come

back
A routing table entry maintaining a forward path is

purged if not used for a active_route_timeout interval

if no is data being sent using a particular routing table

entry, that entry will be deleted from the routing table (even if the route may actually still be valid)

56

Route Error
When node X is unable to forward packet P (from node S

to node D) on link (X,Y), it generates a RERR message

Node X increments the destination sequence number for D

cached at node X
The incremented sequence number N is included in the

RERR
When node S receives the RERR, it initiates a new route

discovery for D using destination sequence number at least as large as N

57

Destination Sequence Number

Continuing from the previous slide
When node D receives the route request with

destination sequence number N, node D will set its sequence number to N, unless it is already larger than N

58

Link Failure Detection

Hello messages: Neighboring nodes periodically

exchange hello message

Absence of hello message is used as an indication of

link failure
Alternatively, failure to receive several MAC-level

acknowledgement may be used as an indication of link failure

59

Why Sequence Numbers in AODV

To avoid using old/broken routes
To determine which route is newer

To prevent formation of loops

B E

Assume that A does not know about failure of link C-D because

RERR sent by C is lost Now C performs a route discovery for D. Node A receives the RREQ (say, via path C-E-A) Node A will reply since A knows a route to D via node B Results in a loop (for instance, C-E-A-B-C )
60

Why Sequence Numbers in AODV

A B E C D

Loop C-E-A-B-C

61

Summary: AODV
Routes need not be included in packet headers Nodes maintain routing tables containing entries only for

routes that are in active use

At most one next-hop per destination maintained at each

node
DSR may maintain several routes for a single destination

Unused routes expire even if topology does not change

62

Temporally Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA)

Link reversal algorithm
Destination oriented Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) Full/Partial reversal of links

Assigns a reference level (height) to each node Adjust reference level to restore routes on link failure

Multiple routes to destination; route optimality not

important Query, Update, Clear packets used for creating, maintaining and erasing routes

Creating Routes
QRY UPD QRY UPD

A
QRY UPD C

B
UPD E

UPD QRY D

G (DEST)

F QRY UPD H UPD

Route Maintenance
UPD

A
UPD C

B
E

UPD
D

X
F H

G (DEST)

Performance Analysis
Simulation Environment
Network Simulator, 50 nodes in a 1500x300m rectangular flat

grid Random waypoint mobility (Average 10 m/sec) Constant bit rate traffic (UDP)
Address resolution : ARP implementation in BSD Unix Medium Access Control : IEEE 802.11 Physical Layer model : combines both free space and two

ray ground reflection model Protocols studied : DSDV(SQ), AODV-LL, DSR, TORA

Performance Analysis
Metrics
Packet Delivery Ratio : Ratio of number of packets

generated by CBR sources to that received by CBR sinks at destination Routing Overhead : number of routing packets sent; each transmission counts as one transmission Path Optimality : Difference between length of actual path took and the length of the shortest path

Packet Delivery Ratio

95-100% in most cases

for DSR, AODV Stale route entries in DSDV cause drops Short lived loops in TORA as part of link reversal All protocols perform well when there is low node mobility +

Routing Overhead (packets)

Route caching and non-

propagating RREQs in DSR TORA Sum of mobility dependant, independent overhead for TORA Congestive collapse Nearly constant for DSDV due to periodic updates

Routing Overhead (Bytes)

DSR more expensive

than AODV except at high mobility Smaller packets in AODV, may be more expensive in terms of media access, power and network utilization

Path Optimality
DSDV, DSR use routes

close to optimal TORA not designed to find shortest path TORA, AODV use paths close to optimum when node mobility is low

Comparisons of the Characteristics of Source Initiated On-Demand Ad-Hoc Routing Protocols

Comparisons of On-Demand versus Table-Driven Based Routing Protocols

References
D. Baker, M. S. Corson, P. Sass, and S. Ramanatham, \Flat vs. Hierarchical Network

Control Architecture," ARO/DARPA Workshop on Mobile Ad-Hoc Networking, http://www.isr.umd.edu/Courses/Workshops/MANET/program.html, March 1997. J. Broch, D. B. Johnson, D. A. Maltz, \The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks," IETF Internet Draft draft-ietf-manet-dsr-01.txt, December 1998 (Work in Progress). C.-C. Chiang, M. Gerla, and L. Zhang, \Adaptive Shared Tree Multicast in Mobile Wireless Networks," Proceedings of GLOBECOM '98, pp. 1817{1822, November 1998. C.-C. Chiang, H.K.Wu, W. Liu, and M. Gerla, \Routing in Clustered Multihop, Mobile Wireless Networks with Fading Channel," Proceedings of IEEE SICON'97, pp. 197{211, April 1997. M. S. Corson and A. Ephremides, \A Distributed Routing Algorithm for Mobile Wireless Networks," ACM/Baltzer Wireless Networks Jouornal, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 61{81, February 1995. R. Dube, C. D. Rais, K.-Y. Wang, and S.K. Tripathi, \Signal Stability based Adaptive Routing

THANK YOU
ANY QUERY???