Analyzing the parameters of AODV, DSDV
And DSR in WSN Using NS-2
S. Parvathy
P. Pavithra
A. R. Priyanka
M. Sandhya
Dept. of ECE
Dept. of ECE
Dept. of ECE
Dept. of ECE
Panimalar Engineering
College, Poonamallee,
Chennai.
Panimalar Engineering
College, Poonamallee,
Chennai.
Panimalar Engineering
College, Poonamallee,
Chennai.
parvathy180@gmail.co
m
pavithra.ponnurangam
@gmail.com
Panimalar Engineering
College, Poonamalee,
Chennai.
sandhyamoorthy6594@
gmail.com
Abstract- Nowadays, Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs)
are widely exploited in many application. To design a
reliable and efficient network under fading channel is one
of the major challenges in WSNs. There are various
routings available to provide significant benefits to the
WSNs. Some of the most popular routing protocols are
AODV, DSDV and DSR. The main focus of this paper is to
evaluate the performance of these protocols and hence
compare the same using a network tool. The network tool
here used to simulate the performances of these protocols
is Network Simulator-2 (ns-2). The parameters analyzed
for comparison are Packet Drop, Throughput and Bit
Error Rate(BER).
Keywords- AODV, DSDV, DSR, BER, ns-2.
I. INTRODUCTION
Wireless Sensor networks are rapidly replacing the
traditional wired communication systems [1]. A WSN consists
of spatially distributed autonomous sensors to monitor
physical or environmental conditions, such as temperature,
sound, pressure, etc. using radio signals. Since the nodes are
autonomous, it becomes easy to deploy many numbers of
nodes and hence used in many applications such as military,
industrial process monitoring and control, machine health
monitoring, etc. Each sensor node has a radio transceiver, a
microcontroller and an energy source like battery [2]. Sensor
nodes can also derive energy by energy harvesting from
renewable resources.
In general the sensor networks are divided into two
categories [3]. In the first category, almost invariably mesh
based systems with multi-hop radio connectivity among or
between WNs, utilizing dynamic routing in both wireless and
wired portions of the network. Military-theater systems
typically belong to this category. It supports highly distributed
high node count applications (e.g., environmental monitoring,
national security systems). In the second category point-topoint or multipoint-to-point, (star based) systems generally
with single-hop radio connectivity to WNs, utilizing static
routing over the wireless network; typically, there will be only
one root from the WNs to the companion terrestrial or wired
priyankaraghupathy94@g
mail.com
forwarding node (WNs are pendant nodes). Residential control
systems belong to this category. It supports confined short
range spaces such as a home, a factory, a building or human
body.
In any WSN, the transmission failure can result in
missing or delaying of data packets which may require
unnecessary retransmissions, thus increasing the end-to-end
delay between source node and destination node and making
the network become sluggish. To improve the robustness of
the network many routing protocols such as AODV [4],
DSDV [6] and DSR [7] are implemented and their
performances for various parameters are compared and the
results are simulated using ns-2.
The rest of the work is organized as follows. Section
II elaborates the related work. Section III describes the
proposed method of the work. Section IV deals with the
characteristics of the mentioned routing protocols. Section V
provides the simulation details and results. Finally, Section VI
concludes the work.
II. RELATED WORK
Wireless Sensor Network is a collection of selforganizing mobile nodes that communicates with each other
through radio links. Such networks play a vital role in civilian
and military applications, process control and monitoring
applications, surveillance applications. To implement these
applications, various routing protocols such as Ad-hoc On
demand Distance Vector Routing (AODV) protocol,
Destination Sequenced Distance Vector Routing (DSDV)
protocol and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) were proposed.
In the previous works, researchers considered 300 m x 300 m,
300 m x 500 m, 500 m x 500 m terrain areas and illustrate the
average performance of the mentioned routing protocols. In our
work, we are trying to prove that DSR performs better than
DSDV and AODV.
III. PROPOSED METHOD
Wireless Sensor Networks are very much prone to
Interference and Delay due to its behavior of dynamic
topology. This has to be reduced by choosing efficient routing
protocol that provides better performance under cases that
interrupts the proper working of wireless sensor networks. The
best one is elected on comparing the respective protocols say
AODV, DSR, and DSDV.
IV. ROUTING PROTOCOLS
In general, there are two types of routing protocolsPROACTIVE (Table-driven) and REACTIVE (On-demand)
Protocols. In Proactive routing fresh lists of destinations and
their routes are maintained by periodically distributing routing
tables throughout the network [3]. Here routing information is
computed and shared and the path is set prior to the actual
transfer of data packets between the source and destination.
Example of Proactive routing is DSDV. In reactive routing
routes are found on demand by flooding the network with
route request packets (RREQ). Here the source initiates the
data transfer process by issuing a route request, the most
relevant immediate neighbor issues a route reply to this
request and takes forward the data transfer process. This
happens till the destination is reached and the data packet
received [3]. Examples of Reactive routing are AODV and
DSR [16].
1)AD HOC ON DEMAND DISTANCE VECTOR ROUTING
PROTOCOL (AODV):Being a reactive routing protocol
AODV uses traditional routing tables, one entry per
destination and sequence numbers are used to determine
whether routing information is up-to-date and to prevent
routing loops. It helps in both multicasting and unicasting. [4]
AODV makes use of (RREQ, RREP) pair to find the route.
The source node broadcast the RREQ i.e. Route Request
message to its neighbors to find the route to destination. The
RREQ message [5] contains the source and destination
address, lifespan of message, sequence numbers of source and
destination and request ID as unique identification.
Destination Sequence Number is the latest sequence number
received in the past by the source for any route towards the
destination and Source Sequence Number is the current
sequence number to be used in the route entry pointing
towards the source of the route request [14].
The DSDV routing algorithm is based on the classical
Bellman-Ford Routing Algorithm (BFRA) with certain
improvement [6]. Every mobile station maintains a routing
table with all available destinations along with information
like next hop, the number of hops to reach to the destination,
sequence number of the destination originated by the
destination node, etc. DSDV uses both periodic and triggered
routing updates to maintain table consistency. Triggered
routing updates are used when network topology changes are
detected, so that routing information is propagated as quickly
as possible. Routing table updates can be of two types – “full
dump” and “incremental”. “Full dump‟ packets carry all
available routing information and may require multiple
Network Protocol Data Units (NPDU); “incremental‟ packets
carry only information changed since the last full dump and
should fit in one NPDU in order to decrease the amount of
traffic generated. Mobile nodes cause broken links when they
move from place to place. When a link to the next hop is
broken, any route through that next hop is immediately
assigned infinity metric and sequence number is updated. This
is the only situation when any mobile node other than the
destination node assigns the sequence number. Sequence
numbers assigned by the destination nodes are even numbers,
and sequence numbers assigned to indicate infinity metrics are
odd numbers. When a node receives infinity metric, and it has
an equal or later sequence number with a finite metric, it
triggers a route update broadcast, and the route with infinity
metric will be quickly replaced by the new route [14]. When a
mobile node receives a new route update packet; it compares it
to the information already available in the table and the table
is updated based on the following criteria:
i) If the received sequence number is greater, then the
information in the table is replaced with the information in the
update packet.
ii) Otherwise, the table is updated if the sequence numbers are
the same and the metric in the update packet is better.
NODE 1
G
RREQ
RREQ
RREP
Dest.
RREP
RREQ
S
H
D
RREQ
2
3
.
.
.
NODE 4
Next hop
If any node from a list of neighbors is destination or knows the
route to destination, it can send RREP message to source.
2)DESTINATION-SEQUENCED
DISTANCE
VECTOR
ROUTING PROTOCOL (DSDV): DSDV is one of the most
well-known table-driven routing algorithms for MANETs.
3
……
1
5
.
.
.
H
S-source node, D-destination node
G-guide node, H-helper node
Fig.1 Illustration of AODV
5
NODE 5
Fig.2 Illustration of DSDV
3)DYNAMIC SOURCE ROUTING (DSR):In DSR, when a
mobile (source) needs a route to another mobile (destination),
it initiates a route discovery process which is based on
flooding. The source originates a RREQ packet that is flooded
over the network. The RREQ packet contains a list of hops
which is collected by the route request packet as it is
propagated through the network. Once the RREQ reaches
either the destination or a node that knows a route to the
destination, it responds with a RREP along the reverse of the
route collected by the RREQ [7]. This means that the source
may receive several RREP messages corresponding, in
general, to different routes to the destination. DSR selects one
of these routes (for example the shortest), and it maintains the
other routes in a cache. The routes in the cache can be used as
substitutes to speed up the route discovery if the selected route
gets disconnected. To avoid that RREQ packets travel forever
in the network, nodes, that have already processed a RREQ,
discard any further RREQ bearing the same identifier.
The main difference between DSR and AODV is in
the way they keep the information about the routes; DSR
stores information in the source node while AODV stores in
the intermediate nodes [16]. However, the route discovery
phase of both is based on flooding. This means that all nodes
in the network must participate in every discovery process,
regardless of their potential in actually contributing to set up
the route or not, thus increasing the network load.
The performances of three protocols are compared
and simulated using NS-2. We have considered the following
parameters for the analysis: Throughput, Bit Error Rate (BER)
and Packet Drop [10, 11, 12, and 13].
1) THROUGHPUT:It is defined as the number of packets
received for the number of packets transmitted. Here we have
considered the transmission time Vs throughput. The overall
throughput of DSR is better than AODV and DSDV in all
cases.
V. SIMULATION AND RESULTS
The simulation of these three protocols is obtained
using Network Simulator-2. In 1996-97, ns version 2 (ns-2)
was initiated based on a refactoring by Steve McCanne. Use
of Tcl was replaced by MIT's Object Tcl (OTcl), an objectoriented dialect Tcl. The core of ns-2 is also written in C++,
but the C++ simulation objects are linked to shadow objects in
OTcl and variables can be linked between both language
realms. Simulation scripts are written in the OTcl language, an
extension of the Tcl scripting language. Presently, ns-2
consists of over 300,000 lines of source code, and there is
probably a comparable amount of contributed code that is not
integrated directly into the main distribution (many forks of
ns-2 exist, both maintained and unmaintained). It runs
on GNU/Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, Mac OS X and Windows
versions that support Cygwin. It is licensed for use
under version 2 of the GNU General Public License.
Fig.2 Throughput comparison
2) BIT ERROR RATE (BER): The bit error rate (BER) is the
number of bit errors per unit time. The BER is the number of
bit errors divided by the total number of transferred bits during
a time interval.The BER of DSDV,DSR is very low when
compared to AODV,which indicates AODV performs lesser
than DSDV,DSR.
TABLE I: Specifications
Parameter type
Parameter value
Protocols
AODV, DSDV, DSR
Simulation time
200ms
Number of nodes
80
Packet type
TCP packet
Queue type
Environment size
Traffic type
Platform
Simulator
MAC protocol
Propagation model
Antenna type
Priority queue
1800m*840m
Constant Bit Rate
Windows
NS2
IEEE 802.11
Two ray
Omni antenna
The simulation is performed after a thorough study
of various papers and is implemented using the Network
Simulator-2. Simulation is followed by the working of all the
protocols in the Network Animator (NAM). NAM is a TCL
based animation tool used to view simulation and packet
traces [8, 9].
Fig.3 BER comparison
3) PACKET DROP: Packet drop is the discarding
of packets in a network when a router or other network device
is overloaded and cannot accept additional packets at a given
moment.Here we have considered transmission time Vs
number of packets dropped. Incase of packet drop,the
performance of DSR is best when compared to AODV,DSDV.
Fig.4 Packet Drop comparison
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the performances of various routing
protocols are performed. The three protocols AODV, DSDV
and DSR were compared on the basis of throughput, packet
drop and bit error rate using NS-2. From the overall
performance for various numbers of nodes, we conclude that
DSR performs better than DSDV and AODV in all the aspects.
But in the case of packet drop alone DSR performance tend to
decrease on increasing the transmission time,where packet
drop occurs. The results depend on the parameters and vary
accordingly. Here transmission time Vs throughput, packet
drop and BER are considered. Also parameters such as
network life-time, jitter, energy consumption, etc. can be
obtained. Thus from the above work, we can understand that
routing protocols are important for better performance of the
WSNs and its applications. We are trying to extend our work
on mobile nodes and by increasing the simulation environment.
REFERENCES
[1] S. john, “Wireless Sensor Networks,” Department Of
Computer Science, University Of Virginia, June 19, 2006.
[2] T. P.Lambrou and C. G. Pamayiotou, “Collaborative Area
Monitoring Using Wireless Sensor Networks with
Stationary and Mobile Nodes,” Department of Electrical
and Computer Engineering, University of Cyprus,
Cyprus, Vol. 2009, Mar. 2009
[3] Kazem Sohraby, Daniel Minoli, Taieb Znati, A book on
“Wireless Sensor Networks- Technology, Protocols and
Applications”, published by ‘A John Wiley & sons, Inc.,
Publication’, 2007.
[4] M. Marina and S. Das, “On-demand multipath distance
vector routing in ad hoc networks”, Mobile computing,
pp. 153-181, 1996.
[5] Mobile Ad Hoc Networking working group- AODV,
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3561.txt
[6] D. Loganathan, P. Ramamoorthy, “Performance Analysis
of Enhanced DSDV Protocol for Efficient Routing in
Wireless Ad Hoc Networks”, Research Inventy:
International Journal Of Engineering And Science Vol.2,
Issue 10 (April 2013), Pp01-08 Issn(e): 2278-4721,
Issn(p):2319-6483, www.researchinventy.Com.
[7] D. B. Johnson, D. A. Maltz, and Y-C. Hu, “The dynamic
source routing (DSR) protocol for mobile ad hoc
network”, IETF MANET Working Group, Internet Draft,
July 2004.
[8] Network simulator [online].
Available: http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/
[9] Sukumar Panda, Rahul Mohapatra, “Implementation and
comparison of Mobility models in NS-2”, National
Institute of Technology, Rourkela 2009.
[10] Anu Arya, Jagtar Singh, “Comparative Study of AODV,
DSDV and DSR Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor
Network Using NS-2 Simulator”, International Journal of
Computer Science and Information Technologies, Vol.
5(4), 2014, pp. 5053-5056.
[11] Kapang Lego et. al. . “Comparative study of Adhoc
Routing Protocol AODV, DSR and DSDV in Mobile
Adhoc NETwork”, Indian Journal of Computer Science
and Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 364-371.
[12] S. A. Ade, P.A. tijare, “Performance Comparison of
AODV, DSDV, OLSR, and DSR Routing Protocols in
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks”, International Journal of
Information Technology and Knowledge Management,
July-December 2010, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 545-548.
[13] Sultan Singh Saini, Vipin Jain, “Performance Evaluation
of AODV and DSDV Routing Protocols in Wireless
Sensor Network Using Different Network Parameters”,
International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer
Science and Software Engineering, Vol. 4, Issue 1,
January 2014, ISSN: 2277 128X, pp. 730-735.
[14] Sachin Kumar Gupta, R. K. Saket, “Performance metric
Comparison of AODV and DSDV Routing Protocols in
MANETs using NS-2”, IJRRAS 7(3), June 2011.
[15] Mina Vajed Khiavi, Shahram Jamali, Sajjad Jahanbakhsh
Gudakahriz, “Performance Comparison of AODV,
DSDV, DSR and TORA Routing Protocols in MANETs”,
International Research Journal of Applied and Basic
Sciences. Vol., 3 (7), 1429-1436, 2012. Available online
at http://www.irjabs.com ISSN 2251-838X ©2012.
[16] Akshai Aggarwal, Savita Gandhi, Nirbhay Chaubey,
“Performance Analysis of AODV, DSDV and DSR in
MANETS”, International Journal of Distributed and
Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.2, No.6, November 2011.