13 April 2015
ON DEMAND MULTICAST
ROUTING PROTOCOL
(ODMRP )
CSE 6590
TYPES OF MULTICAST ROUTING IN
MANETS

Tree-based
One path between a source-receiver pair
 AMRoute, AMRIS, MAODV


Mesh-based
Multiple paths between a source-receiver pair
 ODMRP, CAMP


Hybrid

Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP)
2
TYPICAL MULTICAST ROUTING
PROTOCOLS

AMRIS: Ad Hoc Multicast Routing Protocol
Utilizing Increasing ID Numbers
National University of Singapore
 Georgia Institute of Technology
 November 1998 [draft]


ODMRP: On-demand Multicasting Routing
Protocol
University of California at Los Angeles
 January 2000 [draft]

3
WHY COMPARE THEM?
AMRIS
ODMRP
Shared (Core-based) Tree
Mesh of Nodes
Big difference
Topology
Main Similarity
Mobility support
Driven mode
Advantages
Disadvantages
Yes, based on MANET
On-demand, do not store whole network topology
simple topology
low overheads
mobility
robustness
sensitive to mobility (low
delivery ratio)
complex topology
high overheads
4
ODMRP

Multicast Messages:
JOIN-QUERY (J-Q);
 JOIN-REPLY (J-R);


Similar to Route Request and Route Reply in
AODV and DSR
5
Basic Operation of ODMRP
On Demand Route and Mesh Creation
R
Join Query
Join Reply
S
R
R
R
R






S floods a Join Query to entire network to refresh membership.
Receiving node stores the backward learning into routing table and rebroadcasts the packet.
Finally when query reaches a receiver creates a Join Reply and broadcasts its to its
neighbors.
Node receiving the Join Reply checks whether the next node id in Join Reply matches it own.
If yes , it is a part of the forwarding group, sets its
FG_FLAG and broadcasts its join reply built upon matched entries.
Join Reply is propagated by each forwarding group member until it reaches source via a
shortest path.
Routes from sources to receivers builds a mesh of nodes called “forwarding group”.
ODMRP: JOIN REPLY
 JOIN-REPLY
message
S1
I1
R1
S2
I2
R1
J-R of R1
J-R of I1
Sender Next Node
Sender Next Node
S1
I1
S1
S2
I2
S1
7
Concept of Forwarding Group
FG
FG
FG
FG
FG
FG
R1
S1
A
Why a mesh?
Links
S2
Multicast Routes
Initial Route from S1 to R2 is < S1 -A- B- R2> R2
Redundant Route < S1- A- C- B- R2>
B
C
S3
R3
ODMRP: SENDER ACTIONS
Sender actions:
 Downstream
Generate J-Q message;
 Broadcast J-Q ;


Upstream

Receive J-R (include the
path info);
9
ODMRP: INTERMEDIATE NODES
(DOWNSTREAM)
Intermediate node
actions: (downstream)
–
–
–
Receive J-Q, omit duplicated
ones (use cached sequence
numbers);
Store upstream node info;
Re-broadcast J-Q;
10
ODMRP: INTERMEDIATE NODES (UPSTREAM)
Intermediate node
actions: (upstream)
 Received J-R;
 If node is on the path

Generate new J-R with
node info and broadcast,
route established!
11
ODMRP: RECEIVER ACTIONS
Receiver actions:
 Downstream
Received J-Q;
 Generate J-R with path
info;


Upstream

Broadcast J-R;
12
ODMRP: MAINTENANCE PHASE
Soft state approach
 Sender repeat J-R periodically to maintain mesh.
 Node joins


Sending J-R as discusses before.
Node leaves
Sender: stops sending J-Q;
 Receiver: stops sending J-R;


Links break

Receiver: receives new J-Q and replies with J-R;
13
ALGORITHM COMPARISON (1)
AMRIS
ODMRP
More differences
Multicast topology
Shared Delivery Tree
Mesh of Nodes
Initialization
Generating msm-id;
Store upstream info;
Maintenance
All nodes periodically send
beacon message
Sender periodically send
J-Q msg
Node joins
Detect beacon msg and
Detect J-Q and response
perform branch reconstruction; J-R;
Node leaves
Stop beacon msg;
Stop J-R or J-Q;
Link-break
No more beacon msg and
perform BR;
Receive new J-Q and
reply with J-R;
More and more differences (message types, routing table info…)
14
ALGORITHM COMPARISON (2)
AMRIS and ODMRP
More Similarities
Mobility support
Driven mode
Yes, based on MANET
On-demand, does not store whole network topology
Broadcast message
Yes
Unicast capabilities
Yes
Periodic message
Yes
Loop free
Yes
More similarities …
15
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON (1)
Packet Delivery Ratio as a
function of mobile speed
–
–
# of data packets actually
delivered to the destinations
versus # of data packets
supposed to be received
PDR of ARMIS is speed
sensitive
16
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON (2)
Packet Delivery Ratio as a
function of # of senders
–
–
PDR of AMRIS is not
sensitive to # of senders
ODRMP’s performance
improves as number of
senders increases
17
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON (3)
Packet Delivery Ratio as a
function of multicast
group size
–
–
PDR of ODMRP is not
sensitive to group size
AMRIS’s performance
improves as group size
grows
18
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON (4)
Packet Delivery Ratio as a
function of network
traffic load


AMRIS has severe packet
loss rates
ODMRP suffers less
19
OVERHEAD COMPARISON (1)
Number of Control Bytes
Transmitted Per Data
Bytes Delivered as a
function of mobility
speed
–
–
–
Control bytes are control
packets and data packet
headers
Not speed sensitive
AMRIS has lower ratio
20
OVERHEAD COMPARISON (2)
Number of Control Bytes
Transmitted Per Data
Bytes Delivered as a
Function of # of Senders
–
–
AMRIS is not affected by
number of senders
ODMRP may not be efficient
in large networks
21
QUALITATIVE COMPARISON
•
Bandwidth Consumption
ODMRP tends transmit more control bytes than
AMRIS
– However, ODMRP has higher packet delivery ratio
–
•
Power Consumption
Depends on mobility speed, number of senders,
network traffic load, etc.
– Not a problem for vehicle-based mobile nodes
–
22
REFERENCES






“A Performance Comparison Study of Ad Hoc Wireless
Multicast Protocols”, Sung-Ju Lee, William Su, Julian Hsu,
Mario Gerla, and Rajive Bagrodia, Proceedings of IEEE
INFOCOM 2000
“Multicast over wireless mobile ad hoc networks: Present
and future directions”, Carlos de Morais Cordeiro,
Hrishikesh Gossain and Dharma P. Agrawal, IEEE
Network, January 2003
“Exploring Mesh- and Tree Based Multicast Routing
Protocols for MANETs”, Kumar Viswanath, Katia
Obraczka and Gene Tsudik
“Capacity of Wireless Mesh Networks Understanding
Single Radio, Dual Radio and Multi-Radio Wireless Mesh
Networks”
“On the 802.11 Turbulence of Nintendo DS and Sony PSP
Handheld Network Games”, Mark Claypool
www.wikipedia.org
23