ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN MANET: A Review
Sarabjeet Kaur
PG Scholar
AIET,Faridkot
Sarb7316@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
A mobile ad-hoc network is a collection of wireless mobile
nodes frequently forming a network topology without the use
of any existing network infrastructure or centralized
administration. Data transmission between two nodes between
MANET’s, require multiple hops as nodes transmission range
is limited. The mobility of different nodes makes the situation
more complicated results in frequent changes of network
topology making routing in MANET a challenging task. To
overcome this difficulty various routing protocols in MANET
which helps nodes to send and receive packets in different
situations has been defined. This paper presents a
comprehensive study of various MANET protocols such as
AODV, OLSR, ZRP etc, their classification and selection
criteria and conclude the applications and future scope of
MANET.
Keywords
MANET, Routing Protocol, AODV, TBRPF ZRP, OLSR,
OSPF,TORA.
1. INTRODUCTION
Introduction A mobile ad-hoc network (MANET) is a network
of wireless mobile nodes (MNs) that communicate with each
other without centralized control or established infrastructure
such as access points. It is a self organized system of mobile
nodes these nodes like laptops, computers, PDA and wireless
phones have a limited transmission range for direct
transmission. If two such devices are located within
transmission range of each other they can communicate
directly otherwise they will use intermediate nodes thus a
multihop scenario will occur in which mobile nodes allow
communication among the nodes by hop to hop bases and
forward packets to each other. Each node performs the
function of a router. The success of communication depends
upon cooperation of other nodes. such a mobile adhoc
network have may mobile features:






Automatic self configuration and self maintenance
Quick and inexpensive deployment.
No need of centralized administration
Highly dynamic topology as nodes is continuously
into and out of the radio range so change in routing
information is required.
The wireless link between nodes is highly
vulnerable to security attacks.
Bandwidth is limited.
Vikas Gupta
A.P.,ECE Department
AIET,Faridkot
vikas_gupta81@yahoo.co.in

MANET needs energy efficient operation because
all nodes depend on battery power which is highly
limited.
The task of specifying a routing protocol for a mobile
wireless network is not a easy one. The main problem in
mobile networking is the limited bandwidth, high rate of
topology changes and link failure caused by node movement.
Therefore routing in MANET plays an important role for
data forwarding where each mobile node can act as relay in
addition to being a source or destination node.
2.CLASSIFICATION AND SELECTION
CRITERIA OF PROTOCOLS
Classification
Proactive v/s reactive routing: Proactive scheme determines
the routes to various nodes in the network in advance so that
route is always present when ever needed. Route discovery
overhead are large in such scheme as one has to discover all
the routes. Reactive scheme determines the route when
needed therefore they have smaller route discovery
overheads.
Single path v/s multipath: The overhead of route discovery
in multipath routing is much more than that of single path
routing. On the other hand frequency of route discovery is
much less in a network which use a multipath routing since
system can still operate even if one or a few of multiple
paths between a source and destination fail.Table driven V/s
source initiated: In table driven routing protocols up to date
routing information from each node to every other node in
the network is maintained on each node of the network. The
changes in the network topology are than propagated in the
entire network by means of updates. The routing protocols
classified under source initiated on demand routing, creates
routes only when desired by source node.
Periodic v/s event driven: Periodic update protocols
disseminate routing information periodically. It simplifies
the protocol and maintains network stability and also enables
new nodes to learn about the topology and state of the
network.
Flat v/s Hierarchical Structure: in Flat Structure all nodes in
the network are in the same level and have same routing
functionality. It is simple and efficient for small networks
but when network becomes large the volume of routing
information will be large and it will take a long time for
routing information to arrive at the remote nodes. So for
large networks hierarchical(cluster based ) routing may be
used to solve the problem In this nodes in the network are
dynamically organized into partitions called clusters, and
then the clusters are aggregated again into larger partition
called super clusters and so on.
Selection Criteria
The following points should keep in mind while selecting a
protocol (13(1)):
1) Multicasting: this is the ability to send packets to multiple
nodes at ones. This is important as it takes less time to
transfer data to multiple nodes.
2) Loop Free: a path taken by a packet never transits the same
intermediate node twice before it arrive the destination. So
routing protocol should guarantee that the routes supplied
are loop free. This also results in effective utilization of
bandwidth.
3) Multiple roots: if on route gets broken due to disaster, then
the data could be send through some other route. so
protocol should allow creating multiple routes.
4) Distributed operation: the protocol should of course be
distributed. It should not be dependent on a centralized
node.
5) Reactive: it should be reactive (on demand bases).
6) Power conservation: the nodes in an adhoc network can be
laptops or PDA that are very limited in battery power and
therefore use some sort of standby mode to save power. It is
therefore important that routing protocol has support for
these sleep modes.
2. VARIOUS TYPES OF MANET
PROTOCOLS
An adhoc routing protocol is a convention, or standard that
controls how nodes decide which way to route packets
between computing devices in mobile adhoc network.
Performance of routing protocol varies with network and
selection of accurate routing protocols according to the
network ultimately influences the efficiency of that network in
magnificent way.
Table 1.1: Twelve routing protocols divided into three classes
Pro-active
Re-active
Hybrid
protocol(s)
protocol(s)
protocol(s)
OLSR
AODV-BR
ZRP
OSPF
AOMDV
TBRPF
TORA
MP-DSR
ROAM
SMR
CHAMP
2.1 OLSR (Optimized link state routing
algorithm): It based on link state algorithm and it is
proactive in nature OLSR is an optimization over a pure link
state protocol as it squeezes the size of information send in the
message and reduces the no. of retransmissions. Unlike
DSDV and AODV OLSR reduces the size of control packet
by declaring only a subset of links with its neighbors who are
its multipoint relay selectors and only the multipoint relays of
a node retransmit its broadcast messages. Hence the protocol
does not generate extra control traffic in response to link
failure and mode join/leave events OLSR a particularly
suitable for large and dense networks. In OLSR each node
uses the most recent information to route a packet. Each node
in the network selects a set of modes in its neighbors which
retransmits its packets. This set of selected neighbors is called
the multipoint relay (MPR) of that node. The neighbors that
do not belong to MPR set read and process the packet but do
not retransmit the broadcast packet received from the node.
For this purpose each node maintain .a set of its neighbors
which are called the MPR selectors of that node this set can
change over time which is indicated by the selectors in their
HELLO . the path to the destination consists of sequence of
hopes through the multipoint relay from source to destination.
In OLSR a HELLO message is broadcasted to all its
neighbors containing information about its neighbor and their
link status and received by nodes which are one hope away
but they are not relayed to further nodes.. on reception of
HELLO messages each node would construct its MPR
selected table multipoint delays of a given mode are declared
in substituent HELLO messages transmitted by this node.
2.2 OSPF(Open Shortest Path First):It is a
link-state routing protocol for internet Protocol (IP) networks.
It uses a link state routing algorithm and falls into the group of
interior routing protocols, operating within a single
autonomous system (AS). OSPF is perhaps the most widely
used interior gateway protocol (IGP) in large enterprise
networks. The most widely used exterior gateway protocol is
the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), the principal routing
protocol between autonomous systems on the Internet. OSPF
is an interior gateway protocol that routes Internet Protocol
(IP) packets solely within a single routing domain
(autonomous system). It gathers link state information from
available routers and constructs a topology map of the
network. OSPF detects changes in the topology, such as link
failures, and converges on a new loop-free routing structure
within secondsThe OSPF routing policies to construct a route
table are governed by link cost factors (external metrics)
associated with each routing interface. Cost factors may be the
distance of a router (round-trip time), network throughput of a
link, or link availability and reliability, expressed as simple
unitless numbers. This provides a dynamic process of traffic
load balancing between routes of equal cost.
OSPF defines the following router types:
 Area border router (ABR)
 Autonomous system boundary router (ASBR)
 Internal router (IR)
 Backbone router (BR)
2.3 Topology broadcast based on reversepath forwarding (TBRPF): It is a link-state routing
protocol for wireless mesh networks.The obvious design for a
wireless link-state protocol (such as the optimized link-state
routing protocol) transmits large amounts of routing data, and
this limits the utility of a link-state protocol when the network
is made of moving nodes. The number and size of the routing
transmissions make the network unusable for any but the
smallest networks.Consists of two modules: the neighbor
discovery module (TND) and the routing moduleTND send
differential HELLO messages that reports onlythe changes of
neighbors.The routing module operates based on partial
topology informationTBRPF only propagates LS updates in
the reverse directionon the spanning treeformed by the
inimum-hop paths.Only the links that will result in changes to
the source tree are included in the updates
2.4TORA(Temporally-OrderedRouting
Algorithm):
It is an algorithm for routing data across Wireless Mesh
Networks or Mobile ad hoc networks. The TORA attempts to
achieve a high degree of scalability using a "flat", nonhierarchical routing algorithm. In its operation the algorithm
attempts to suppress, to the greatest extent possible, the
generation of far-reaching control message propagation. o
accomplish this, nodes need to maintain the routing
information about adjacent (one hop) nodes. The protocol
performs three basic functions:
 Route creation
 Route maintenance
 Route erasure
During the route creation and maintenance phases, nodes use
a height metric to establish a directed acyclic graph (DAG)
rooted at destination. Thereafter links are assigned based on
the relative height metric of neighboring nodes. During the
times of mobility the DAG is broken and the route
maintenance unit comes into picture to reestablish a DAG
routed at the destination.
2.5 AODV (Ad hoc on Demand distance
Vector): It is another routing algorithm which is based on
DSDV and DSR .it shares DSR’s on demand characteristics
hence discovers routes whenever it is needed by a similar
route discovery process and sequencing of DSDV. It is a
reactive routing protocol in which the network generate routes
at the start of communication. AODV arrange a route to a
destination only when a node wants to send a packet to that
destination routes are maintain as long as they are needed by
the source. Sequence numbers shows the freshness of route
and guarantee the loop free routing. AODV also provides
topology for the nodes. AODV builds routes using a route
request/route reply query cycle. When a source node desires a
route to a destination for which it doesnot already have a route
it broadcasts a route request(RREQ) packet across the
network. Nodes receiving this packet update their information
for the source node and setup backward pointers to the source
node in route tables. In addition to the source nodes ip
address, current sequence no., broadcast id the RREQ also
contains the most recent sequence no. for the destination of
which the source node is aware. A node receiving the RREQ
may send a route reply (RREP) if it is either the destination or
if it has a route to the destination with corresponding
sequence no. greater than or equal to that contain in the
RREQ. If this is the case is unicast a RREP back to the source
otherwise it rebroadcasts the RREQ. If they receive a RREQ
which they have already process they discard the RREQ and
donot forward it. As the RREP spreads back to the source
nodes setup forward pointers to the destination. Once the
source node receives the RREP it may begin to forward data
packets to destination. If the source later receives a RREP
containing a greater sequence number or contains the same
sequence number with a smaller hop count it may update its
routing information for that destination and begin using the
better route.as long as the routes reamin active it will continue
to be maintained if link break occurs while the route Is active
the node upstream of the break spreads a route the now
unreachable destination after receiving the RERR if the source
node still desires the route it can reinitiate the route discovery.
2.6 ZRP (zone routing protocol)- it is a hybrid
protocol which combines the advantage of both proactive and
reactive schemes. Proactive routing protocol uses excess
bandwidth to maintain a routing information while reactive
protocols suffers from long route request delays and
inefficient flooding the entire network for route determination.
ZRP addresses these problems by combining the best
properties of both approaches. each node in ZRP proactively
maintains routes to the destinations within a local
neighborhood which is referred as routing zone. However
size of a routing zone depends on a parameter non as zone
radius. In ZRP each node maintains the routing information of
all nodes within its routing zone. Node learn the topology of
its routing zone through a localized proactive scheme referred
as a intra zone routing protocol (IARP). The inter zone
routing protocol (IERP) is responsible for reactively
discovering routes to the destination beyond a nodes routing
zone. This is used if the destination is not found within the
routing zone. The route request packet are transmitted to all
border nodes. Which in turn forward the request if the
destination node is not found within their routing zone. IERP
distinguish itself from standard flood search by implementing
the concept called border casting provided by border cast
resolution protocol (BRP). For detecting link failure and new
neighbor nodes ZRP relies on protocol provided by MAC
layer known as neighbor discovery node (NDP). NDP
transmits hello beacons at regular intervals to advertise their
presence after receiving a beacon neighbor table is updated if
no beacon is receive from a neighbor within a specified time
the neighbor is considered as lost .
1)
2)
Performance analysis: after the simulation is
finished and data is available as a time-stamped
event trace. This data can then be statistically
analysed with tools like R to draw conclusions.
Graphical Visualization: raw or processed data
collected in a simulation can be graphed using tools
like Gnuplot, matplotlib or XGRAPH.
3.RELATED WORK
Benjie Chen et.al. (2002) described An Energy-Efficient
Coordination Algorithm for Topology Maintenance in Ad
Hoc Wireless Networks provides a span technique. It is a
distributed coordination technique for multi-hop ad hoc
wireless networks that reduces energy consumption without
significantly diminishing the capacity or connectivity of the
network. There results shows that Span not only save network
connectivity. It also preserves capacity and provides energy
savings. For a practical range of node densities and a practical
energy model, system lifetime with Span is more than a factor
of two better than without Span. The amount of energy that
Span saves increases only and density increases.
Xiaonan Luo et.al. (2006) presented a study Energy-Efficient
Routing in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks: Mobility-Assisted Case
provides information regarding energy-efficient packet
routing in a multi-hop wireless network, where mobility is
taken into account by adopting a deterministic model. They
considered the objective of minimizing the energy
consumption or packet delivery and subject to the packet
delay constraint and SINR requirement among concurrent
transmissions. This can be formulated and solved by a
dynamic programming algorithm. They also presented a
heuristic approaches. In this approached packets in a greedy
manner. There simulation results indicate that, with mobility
globally taken into account, the performance can be greatly
improved over a wide range of network settings. The multiple
hops relay may be involved and a sender might better hold the
packet first and transmit when the relay link is in a sound
channel condition. Where interference among concurrent
transmissions can be ignored, to take advantage of node
mobility and multiple packets might use nearby concurrent
transmissions or even share exactly the same transmission link
at the same instant for packet relay. They specifically to
ensure high throughput and low energy usage, preferably we
should choose transmission links with relatively low energy
requirement. The system’s performance would be greatly
improved if the packets of delivery can be arranged in few
relays with relatively low energy consumption and small
impact to the system.
Zeng (2008) described Opportunistic Routing in Multi-hop
Wireless Networks: Capacity, Energy Efficiency, and Security
studied geographic opportunistic routing (GOR), a variant of
OR which makes use of nodes’ location information. They
identify and prove three important properties of GOR. The
first one is on prioritizing the forwarding candidates according
to their geographic advancements to the destination. The
second one is on choosing the forwarding candidates based on
their advancements and link qualities in order to maximize the
expected packet advancement (EPA) with different number of
forwarding candidates. The third one is on the concavity of
the maximum EPA in respect to the number of forwarding
candidates. They further propose a local metric, EPA per unit
energy consumption, to trade-off the routing performance and
energy efficiency for GOR. Leveraging the proved properties
of GOR, we propose two efficient algorithms to select and
prioritize forwarding candidates to maximize the local metric.
Kang (2009) presented On Lifetime Extension and Route
Stabilization of Energy- Efficient Broadcast Routing over
MANET address the problem of energy efficient multicast
routing in wireless Mobile Adhoc NETwork (MANET). It is a
challenging environment because every node operates on
limited battery resource and multi-hop routing paths are used
over constantly changing network environments due to node
mobility. We define the network lifetime as duration of time
until first node failure due to battery energy exhaustion and
show that network lifetime for a multicast session can be
significantly extended by additionally considering the residual
battery energy as a parameter in cost metric functions for
constructing a power efficient routing tree. Using simulation
results, we show that the lifetime extension can lead to
oscillatory behavior of routing path select ion. We propose a
solution to stabilize the oscillations by considering a statistical
measure in our cost metric and present simulations that show
the oscillation can be reduced greatly at a small cost of
network lifetime.
Ghosh (2011) described Energy Efficient Zone Division
Multihop Hierarchical Clustering Algorithm for Load
Balancing in Wireless Sensor Network present a cluster based
routing algorithm. One of our main goals is to design the
energy efficient routing protocol. Here they try to solve the
usual problems of WSNs. They know the efficiency of WSNs
depend upon the distance between node to base station and the
amount of data to be transferred and the performance of
clustering is greatly influenced by the selection of clusterheads, which are in charge of creating clusters and controlling
member nodes. This algorithm makes the best use of node
with low number of cluster head know as super node. Here
they divided the full region in four equal zones and the center
area of the region is used to select for super node. Each zone
is considered separately and the zone may be or not divided
further that’s depending upon the density of nodes in that zone
and capability of the super node. This algorithm forms
multilayer communication. The no of layer depends on the
network current load and statistics. Our algorithm is easily
extended to generate a hierarchy of cluster heads to obtain
better network management and energy efficiency.
4. PROPOSED WORK
The proposed workl focuses on the following objectives
which are helpful to increase the efficiency on the mobile ad
hoc network and has been implemented using MATLAB
7.11.0 environment.
To develop a multi-hop system that uses energy sharing.
To increase the efficiency of the system.
To increase the lifetime of the system.
In recent years, the research focused on the shortest path
method to minimize energy, which could cause network
failure because some nodes might exhaust fast as they are
used repetitively, while some other nodes might not be used at
all. This can lead to energy imbalance and to network life
reduction. In this work research has been under taken to not
only improve the Energy storage but also to lengthen the
networks Lifetime. Battery power of the nodes is primarily
consumed while transmitting packets leading to an increase in
the performance of the participating nodes. In this work, uses
the concept of energy sharing to achieve better efficiency &
lifetime. Peer to-peer (P2P) overlay networks for the Internet
and mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) connecting mobile
nodes communicating with each other via multi-hop wireless
links share the key characteristics of self organization and
decentralization, and both need to solve the same fundamental
problem, that is, how to provide connectivity in a
decentralized, dynamic environment.A Dynamic P2P Source
Routing (DPSR), a new routing protocol for MANETs has
been proposed in this research work that exploits the synergy
between P2P and MANETs for increased scalability. By
integrating Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) and a proximityaware structured P2P overlay routing protocol, DPSR limits
the number of the source routes that each node has to discover
and rediscover, while retaining all the attributes of DSR for
dealing with the specifics of ad hoc networks. This is in
contrast to the maximum of N source routes each node has to
maintain in DSR.
5.APPLICATIONS AND FUTURE SCOPE
With the increase of portable devices as well as progress in
wireless communication, ad hoc networking is gaining
importance with the increasing number of widespread
applications. Ad hoc networking can be applied anywhere
where there is little or no communication infrastructure or the
existing infrastructure is expensive or inconvenient to use. Ad
hoc networking allows the devices to maintain connections to
the network as well as easily adding and removing devices to
and from the network. The set of applications for MANET is
diverse,ranging from large scale , mobile, highly dynamic
networks, to small, static networks that are constrained by
power sources. Besides the legacy applications that move
from traditional infra structured environment into the ad hoc
context, a great deal of new services can and will be
generated for the new environment. Typical applications
include .
REFERENCES
[1]V. Rodoplu and T. H. Meng, “Minimum Energy Mobile
Wireless Networks,” IEEE JSAC, Vol. 17, No. 8, pp. 1333–
1344, Aug. 1999.
[2]C. E. Jones, K. M. Sivalingam, P. Agrawal, and J. C. Chen,
“A Survey of Energy Efficient Network Protocols for
Wireless Networks,” Wireless Networks, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp.
343–358, July 2001.
[3]Chen, B. Jamieson, K., Balkrishnan, Morris, R.(2002)
“Span: An Energy-Efficient Coordination Algorithm for
Topology Maintenance in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks”Kluwer
Academic Publishers,Vol. 8, pp. 481-494
[4]G. Zussman and A. Segall, “Energy Efficient Routing in
Ad Hoc Disaster Recovery Networks,” IEEE INFOCOM, San
Francisco, CA, Apr. 2003.
[5]C. Bettstetter, G. Resta, and P. Santi, “The Node
Distribution of the RandomWaypoint Mobility Model for
Wireless Ad Hoc Networks,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile
Computing, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 257–269, July-Sept. 2003.
[6]Zhang,j.,Zhang,Q.,Li,B.,Luo,X.,Zhu,W. (2006),“EnergyEfficient Routing in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks: MobilityAssisted
Case”IEEE
Transaction
On
Vehicular
Technology,Vol. 55 Issue 1, pp. 369-379. ] A. K. Yupta, H.
[7]Sadawarti, and A. K. Verma, “Performance analysis of
AODV, DSR & TORA routing protocols,” IACSIT
International Journal of Engineering and Technology, vol.2,
no.2, pp.226-231, 2010.
[8]Mrs. Shilpi Jain and Mr. Sourabh Jain, “Energy Efficient
Maximum Lifetime Ad-Hoc Routing” IRACST –
International Journal of Computer Networks and Wireless
Communications (IJCNWC), ISSN: 2250-3501. Vol.2, No4,
August 2012.
[9]Shruti Sharma and Manisha Sharma, “Comparative
Analysis of Multicasting Routing Protocols With Security
Model In MANETs” International Journal of Engineering
Research & Technology (IJERT) Vol. 2 Issue 5, May – 2013
ISSN: 2278-0181]
[10]Zhu, Z. Chen, X., ji. F.,Zhang, L., Farahmand, F., Jue,
P.,Jason.(2012),“Energy-Efficient
Translucent
Optical
Transport Networks With Mixed Regenerator Placement”
Journal of light wave technology,Vol. 30 Issue 19, pp. 31473156.
[11] S. Priyadsrini, T. M. Navamani, and Venkatesh
Mahadevan, “An Efficient Route Discovery in Manets with
Improved Route Lifetime” International Journal of
Information and Electronics Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 4, July
2012.
[12] Suvarna P. Bhatsangave and V. R. Chirchi, “OAODV
Routing Algorithm for Improving Energy Efficiency in
MANET” International Journal of Computer Applications
(0975 – 8887) Volume 51– No.21, August 2012.
[13] Mrs. Shilpi Jain and Mr. Sourabh Jain, “Energy Efficient
Maximum Lifetime Ad-Hoc Routing” IRACST –
International Journal of Computer Networks and Wireless
Communications (IJCNWC), ISSN: 2250-3501. Vol.2, No4,
August 2012.
[14] Huang, Y., Hue, Y. (2011)“On Energy for Progressive
and Consensus Estimation in Multihop Sensor Networks”
IEEE Transaction on signal processing,Vol. 59 Issue 8, pp.
3863-3875.