Enhanced Quality of Service Based Routing Protocol Using Hybrid Ant Colony Optimization and Particle Swarm Optimization

International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research
Volume 4– Issue 8, 618 - 622, 2015, ISSN: 2319–8656
WWW.IJCATR.COM 618
Enhanced Quality of Service Based Routing Protocol Using Hybrid
Ant Colony Optimization and Particle Swarm Optimization
Neelam Kumari
Dept. Computer Science and Engineering
Beant College of Engineering & Technology
Arpinder Singh Sandhu
Dept. Computer Science and Engineering
Beant College of Engineering & Technology
Abstract
The main problem of QoS routing is to setup a multicast hierarchy that may meet particular QoS constraint. In order to reduce the constraints
of the earlier work a new improved technique is proposed in this work. In the proposed technique the issue of multi-cast tree is eliminated
using clustering based technique. First of all multi-radio and multichannel based clustering is deployed and these cluster head are responsible
for the multicasting. It will diminish the overall energy consumption of nodes and complexity of intelligent algorithms. The path will be
evaluated based upon the ant colony optimization. Thus it has produced better results than other techniques.
Keywords: QoS, Multicast, Ant colony optimisation, clustering.
1.Introduction
A Mobile Ad-hoc Network is an accumulation of independent
mobile nodes that can communicate together via Radio Lake.
Your mobile nodes which has been in radio selection of each
various other could right communicate, whereas others needs the
aid of intermediate nodes to route his or her packets. The entire
node carries a radio user interface to connect jointly. These
networks usually are fully distributed, and perform at any place
without the aid of any fixed infrastructure as gain access to points
or base areas. Figure 1 shows a simple ad-hoc network having 3
nodes. Node 1 in addition to node 3 isn’t within range of each and
every other, however the node 2 enables you to forward packets
between node 1and node a couple of. The node 2 will behave as a
router in addition to these three nodes in concert form an ad-hoc
system.
.
Fig. 1 Example of mobile ad-hoc network
1.1 MANETs characteristics
1) Dispersed operation: There isn't background network for
that central control in the network operations; the control in the
network is distributed one of the nodes. The nodes associated with
a MANET should cooperate with each other and communicate
among themselves and each and every node acts to be a relay as
essential, to implement specific functions for example routing and
security.
2) Multi get routing: When a node endeavours to send facts to
other nodes that is out of its communication range, the packet the
packet need to be forwarded via one or more intermediate node.
3) Autonomous fatal: In MANET, each mobile node is an
independent node, which will function as both a host and a router.
4) Vibrant topology: Nodes are unengaged to move
arbitrarily using different speeds; so, the network topology might
change randomly and also at unpredictable time. The nodes in the
MANET dynamically determine routing among themselves since
they travel around, establishing their unique network.
5) Light-weight terminals: Within maximum cases, the actual
nodes at MANET are generally mobile with much less CPU
capability, minimal power storage and also small memory
measurement.
6) Shared Physical Medium: The wireless communication
medium is obtainable to any entity with all the appropriate
equipment and also adequate resources. Keeping that in mind,
access to the channel is not restricted.
Advantages of MANET
Why people love an Ad-Hoc network add the following:
• They feature access to information and services no matter
geographic position.
• Liberty from central circle administration. Self-configuring
circle, nodes are also behave as routers. Less expensive compared
to wired network.
• Scalable—accommodates the particular addition of additional
nodes.

WWW.IJCATR.COM 619
• Much better Flexiblibility.
• Robust on account of decentralize administration.
• The network might be set up at any place and time.
1.1.1 MANETs Challenges
1)Limited bandwidth: Wireless link keep have significantly
reduced capacity than infrastructure networks. In addition, the
realized throughput involving wireless communication after
accounting for that effect of a number of accesses, fading, noise,
and interference problems, etc., is often a reduced amount of than
a radio’s highest transmission rate.
2) Energetic topology: Dynamic topology member's program
may disturb the particular trust relationship amongst nodes. The
trusts are often disturbed if a number of nodes are recognized as
compromised.
3) Course-plotting Overhead: In Wi-Fi ad-hoc networks, nodes
frequently change their area within network. And so, some stale
routes are generated from the routing table that leads to
unnecessary direction-finding overhead.
4) Undetectable terminal problem: The hidden terminal problem
describes the collision of packets with a receiving node a result of
the simultaneous transmission of the nodes that aren't within the
direct transmission selection of the sender, but are within the
transmission range on the receiver.
5) Bundle losses on account of transmission mistakes: Ad hoc
Wi-Fi networks experiences a far more achievable bundle loss
due to factors like while increased collisions a consequence of the
presence of cannot be seen terminals, presence involving
disturbance, unidirectional links, frequent way breaks due to
mobility associated with nodes.
6) Mobility-induced approach changes: The system topology
inside the ad hoc Wi-Fi network can be highly dynamic a
consequence of the activity of nodes; for that reasons an on-going
interval suffers typical path pauses. This situation often leads to
frequent way alterations.
7) Battery demands: Devices used throughout these networks
have restrictions for the power source so as to maintain
portability, size and weight on the device. 8) Security threats: The
wireless mobile random nature of MANETs provides new
security challenges for the network design. For the reason that
wireless medium is at risk of eavesdropping and random network
functionality is made through node assistance, mobile ad hoc
networks are intrinsically confronted with numerous security
attacks.
1.1.1.1 MANETs Applications
1) Military battlefield: Ad-Hoc networking will allow the military
to reap the benefits of commonplace network technology to help
keep an information network relating to the soldiers, vehicles, and
military information brain quarter.
Unknown terrain
Limit the Range of communication
Directional Antennas
Destroyed infrastructure
2) Collaborative perform: For some enterprise environments, the
need regarding collaborative computing may very well be more
important outside office environments when compared with inside
and in which people do must have outside meetings to help
cooperate and exchange information on a given challenge.
3) Local levels: Ad-Hoc networks can autonomously link
instantaneously and temporary media network using notebook
computers to spread and share information among participants for
a e. g. meeting or classroom. Another appropriate community
level application may very well be in home networks where
devices can communicate straight to exchange information.
4) Personalized area network and bluetooth: A personal area
network is a short range, localized network in which nodes are
usually associated with a given person. Short-range MANET like
Bluetooth can de-stress the inter verbal exchanges between
various mobile devices as being a laptop, and also a mobile
phone.
5) Commercial Market: Ad hoc may be used in emergency/rescue
procedures for disaster relief efforts, e. gary the gadget guy. in
fire, avalanche, or earthquake. Emergency rescue operations must
be held where non-existing or even damaged communications
national infrastructure and rapid deployment of any
communication network is necessary.
1.1.1.1.1 SAFETY GOALS in MANET
All networking functions for instance routing and bundle
forwarding, are performed by nodes themselves in a very self-
organizing manner. Therefore, securing a cell ad -hoc network is
quite challenging. The goals to evaluate if mobile ad-hoc circle is
secure or even not are as follows:
1)Availability: Availability suggests the assets are generally
accessible to sanctioned parties at suitable times. Availability
applies both to data in order to services. It makes sure the
survivability associated with network service despite denial of
services attack.
2) Privacy: Confidentiality ensures in which computer-related
assets are generally accessed only by authorized parties.
Protection of information which is exchanging through any
MANET. It ought to be protected against any disclosure attack
including eavesdropping- unauthorized examining of message.
3) Honesty: Integrity means that assets is usually modified only
by authorized parties or even only in sanctioned way.. Integrity
assures which a message being transported is never damaged.
4) Authentication: Authentication is defined as assurance men and
women in communication are authenticated in lieu of
impersonators. The recourses involving network needs to be
accessed because of the authenticated nodes.
5) Acceptance: This property assigns distinct access rights to
different types of users. For example any network management
can be carried out by network officer only.
6) Strength to attacks: It must sustain the network functionalities
whenever a portion of nodes is actually compromised or ruined.

WWW.IJCATR.COM 620
7) Freshness: It ensures that malicious node doesn't resend
previously seized packets.
1.1.1.1.1.1 ROUTING PROTOCOLS
Ad-Hoc circle routing protocols are commonly divided into about
three main classes; Proactive, reactive and cross protocols as
found in figure 2.
Fig. 2 Classification of MANET
routing protocol
Proactive Protocols: Proactive, or table-driven routing protocols.
In positive routing, each node needs to maintain a number tables
to shop routing information, and any alterations in network
topology have to be reflected by propagating updates through the
entire network to be able to maintain a regular network view.
Example of such schemes include the conventional routing
techniques: Destination sequenced mileage vector (DSDV). They
attempt to maintain consistent, up-to-date routing information in
the whole network. It minimizes your delay in communication
and invite nodes to rapidly determine which nodes are present or
reachable within the network.
Example: Destination-sequenced distance vector (DSDV),
Wireless routing protocol (WRP), Global state routing
(GSR),OLSR (Optimized Link State Routing)
Reactive Protocols: Reactive routing is also called on-demand
routing protocol since they just don't maintain routing data or
routing activity on the network nodes when there is no
communication. If a node would like to send a packet completely
to another node then this protocol pursuit of the route within the
on-demand manner and establishes the connection to be able to
transmit and receive the packet. The route finding occurs by
inundating the route request packets through the entire network.
Examples of reactive routing protocols include the Ad-hoc On-
demand Range Vector routing (AODV) and Dynamic Source
routing (DSR).
Hybrid Protocols: They features a hybrid type that combines
reactive and proactive routing standards. The Zone Course-
plotting Protocol (ZRP) is often a hybrid routing process that
divides your network into areas and specific zones. ZRP provides
any hierarchical architecture where by each node needs to
maintain additional topological data requiring extra memory
space. Example: Zone routing protocol (ZRP),Distributed
dynamic routing (DDR)
2. Related Work
Rajeev Agrawal (2001) [1] has adopted probabilistic modeling to
model the effect due to multipath fading and shadowing. The
BER for each link affected by the fading is estimated using the
proposed model. Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP) maintains the
BER associated with a particular link, a packet/ data is routed
with optimum BER route from a set of discovered route by
protocol. B.Malarkodi et al. (2009) [2] the impact of different
mobility models on Multicast Routing Protocols. The results
showed that the throughput of ADMR is higher than of ODMRP
at high mobility. This is achieved at the cost of increase in delay
and transmission over head. Under low mobility, ODMRP has
higher throughput than AMDR.
V.A Gajbhiye and R. W.Jasutkar(2013) [3] showed that Swarm
Intelligence based routing protocol has shown promising results
in VANET. For this they compared and evaluated the
performance of AODV, OLSR, and Swarm Intelligence based
routing protocol in terms of throughput, latency and data packet
delivery ratio for VANET. Simulation results have shown that
SWARM Intelligence based routing protocol showed promising
results in VANETs as compared to AODV and OLSR.
Nathaniel Gemelli et al. (2003) [4] Introduced Bluetooth wireless
technology, examine current routing protocols and present the
objectives and considerations for the design of a new Bluetooth
routing protocol. The protocol design would consider the
capabilities of the devices (nodes) within the range of the
network. It was envisioned that capabilities Aware Routing
(CAR) protocol would make routing decisions based on such.
Factors as device power constraints E.Ahila Devi and
K.Chitra(2014 )[5] Introduced a Privacy Protecting Secure and
Energy Efficient Routing Protocol (PPSEER) was proposed. In
this protocol, first the classifications of network node take place
based on their energy level.
Hiba Hachichi et al. (2011) [6] created and maintained locally a
hierarchy that was well suitable for routing packets in an Ad hoc
network. The contribution of this work was mainly based on the
construction of a virtual topology where cluster heads and
gateways collaborate for searching the destination node.
Istikmal et al. (2013) [7] presented about investigation result of
AODV, DSR and DSDV that applied an Ant-algorithm which
were AODV-Ant, DSR-Ant, and DSDV-Ant. DSDV represents of
proactive routing type protocol based on table driven, while
AODV and DSR represents of reactive routing protocol type
based on demand. Performance analysis included end to end
delay, throughput, routing overhead and hop count for various
scenario of node velocity, pause time and network traffic.

WWW.IJCATR.COM 621
Sikkandar Ali and Vashik Ali et al.. (2012)[8] presented routing
in wireless mobile ad-hoc networks using Destination Sequenced
Distance Vector (DSDV) and Ad-hoc on demand Distance Vector
(AODV) protocols. The performance of bandwidth, throughput
and packet loss of DSDV and AODV has been modelled under
various network configurations and mobility conditions..
Geethu Mohandas(2013) [9] The Mobile Ad hoc Networks
(MANET) are networks with self-configuring capacity of mobile
devices interconnected by wireless links. During the last few
years, research in various aspects of MANETs has been
prominent, prompted mainly by military, disaster relief, and law
enforcement scenarios. An instinctive footstep was to take up
such location-based operation to MANETS.
KomalPatel et al.(2006)[10] proposed a cross layer approach that
uses the MAC layer link stability information to improve the
routing efficiency. Signal strength of the link was captured from
the MAC Layer and used at network layer to predict the future
signal strength value using double exponential smoothing model.
This information was used to categorize the link as stable or
unstable.
Rashmi Rohankar et al. (2012) [11] analyzed the effect of random
based mobility models on the performance of Proactive Routing
Protocol (DSDV Destination Sequence Distance Vector) and
Reactive Routing Protocol (AODV- on Demand Distance Vector,
DSR- Dynamic Source Routing). Performance analysis was done
with respect to end-to-end delay, throughput and Packet delivery
ratio for varying node densities.
Yudhvir Singh(2010)[12] performed simulation based
experiments were performed to analyzed the performance of On
Demand Multicast Routing Protocol by evaluating Packet
Delivery Ratio, End to End delay and average throughput. These
results were compared with AODV and FSR routing protocols by
varying number of nodes and mobility. The comparison showed
that ODMRP for ad hoc networks performs better as compared to
AODV and FSR.
3. Proposed Technique
Following are the various steps required to successfully simulate
the proposed algorithm.
Figure 1: Flowchart of the proposed technique
Step 1: First of all initialize ad-hoc network with their
respective characteristics like moving range, maximum
dimensions, number of nodes etc.
Step 2: Define cluster heads having multi-radio and multi-
channel facility.
Step 3: Sender(s) will be initiated to multicast its data to
defined nodes.
Step 4: Sender will hand over its data to nearest cluster head
using Euclidian distance.
Step 5: Cluster head will multicast data to available cluster
heads depends upon the ACO based shortest path.
Step 6: Evaluate energy dissipation as well as other QoS
features, and move to step 3
4. Result Analysis
fFig1: Execution Time

WWW.IJCATR.COM 622
The Figure represent the information about the Execution time of
Existing and Proposed Technique X-axis signify the value of
number of Nodes and Y-axis correspond to the value of Number
of Rounds. Moreover, in which two type of color are used i.e Red
and Blue. Red color symbolize the Proposed technique and Blue
color symbolize the Existing Technique.
Fig2: Multicast Tree Delay Jitter
The Diagram represent the information about the Multicast Tree
Delay Jitter of Existing and Proposed Technique X-axis signify
the value of number of Nodes and Y-axis correspond to the value
of Number of Rounds. Moreover, in which two type of color are
used i.e Red and Blue. Red color symbolize the Proposed
technique and Blue color symbolize the Existing Technique.
5. Conclusion
The main problem of QoS routing is to setup a multicast hierarchy
that may meet particular QoS constraint. Nevertheless, the
situation of making a multicast tree below several constraints is
available to be NP Complete. Therefore, the issue is often settled
by heuristics or smart optimization. Lately, some meta-heuristic
algorithms including the ant colony algorithm, genetic algorithm
and compound swarm optimization have been employed by the
analysts to eliminate the multi-constrained QoS routing problem.
In order to reduce the constraints of the earlier work a new
improved technique is proposed in this work. In the proposed
technique the issue of multi-cast tree is eliminated using
clustering based technique. First of all multi-radio and
multichannel based clustering is deployed and these cluster head
are responsible for the multicasting. It will diminish the overall
energy consumption of nodes and complexity of intelligent
algorithms. The path will be evaluated based upon the ant colony
optimization. Thus it has produced better results than other
techniques.
This work has not considered the effect of node failures on the
network. Therefore in near future we will evaluate the node
failures while data communication is in progress.
6. REFERENCES
[1] Agrawal, Rajeev. "Performance of routing strategy (bit error
based) in fading environments for mobile adhoc networks." IEEE
International Conference on Personal Wireless Communications,
pp. 550-554, 2005.
[2] Malarkodi, B.P. Gopal and B.Venkataramani. "Performance
Evaluation of Adhoc Networks with Different Multicast Routing
Protocols and Mobility Models." IEEE International Conference
on advanced in recent technologies in communication and
computing, pp. 81-84, 2009.
[3] Gajbhiye, V. A and R. W. Jasutkar. "Biologicaly inspired routing
protocol for vehicular ad hoc network."6th
IEEE International
Conference on Advanced Infocomm Technology, pp. 202-206,
2013.
[4] Gemelli, Nathaniel, Peter LaMonica,Paul Prtzke, John
Spina."Capabilities aware routing for dynamic ad hoc networks."
IEEE International Conference on Integration of knowledge
Intensive Multi-Agent Systems, pp. 585-590, IEEE, 2014. 2003.
[5] Devi, E.Ahila, and K.Chitra. "Security based energy efficient
routing protocol for Ad hoc network." IEEE International
Conference on Control, Instrumentation, Communication and
Computational Technologies, pp. 1522-1526, 2014.
[6] Hachichi, Hiba, Samia Chelloug and Fatima Athmouni. "A
virtual topology for routing in adhoc networks." IEEE
International Conference on Electronics, Communication &
Phtonics, 2011.
[7] Ali, Sikkandar AliVashik, W.R.Salem Jeyaseelan and
Shanmugasundaram Hariharan. "Enhanced Route Discovery in
Mobile Adhoc Networks." IEEE Third International Conference
on. Computing Communication and Networking Technologies,
pp. 1-5,2012.
[8] Istikmal,Leanna, V. Y and Basuki Rahmat. "Comparison of
proactive and reactive routing protocol in mobile ad hoc network
based on ―Ant-algorithm." IEEE International Conference on
Computer, Control, Informatics and its Applications, 2013.
[9] Mohandas, Geethu, Salaja Silas and Shini Sam. "Survey on
routing protocols on mobile ad hoc networks." IEEE
International Multi-Conference on Automation, Computing,
Communication, Control and Compressed Sensing, pp. 514-
517,2013.
[10] Patel, Komal, S. Srivastava and R. B. Lenin. "MAC Layer aware
Stable Link Routing (MACSLR) in Mobile Ad hoc Networks."
IEEE International Symposium on Ad hoc and Ubiquitous
Computing, pp. 298-301, 2006.
[11] Rohankar, Rashmi, Rinkoo Bhatia and Deepak Kumar
Sharma."Performance analysis of various routing protocols
(proactive and reactive) for random mobility models of Ad hoc
networks."Ist
IEEE International Conference on Recent Advance
in Information Technology, 2012.
[12] Yudhvir Singh, Yogesh Chaba, Monica Jain and Praba Rani.
"Performance Evaluation of On-Demand Multicasting Routing
Protocols in Mobile Adhoc Networks." IEEE, International
Conference on Recent Trend in Information, Telecommunication
& Computing, pp.298-301, 2010.

Enhanced Quality of Service Based Routing Protocol Using Hybrid Ant Colony Optimization and Particle Swarm Optimization

More Related Content

What's hot (14)

Viewers also liked (17)

Similar to Enhanced Quality of Service Based Routing Protocol Using Hybrid Ant Colony Optimization and Particle Swarm Optimization (20)

More from Editor IJCATR (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Enhanced Quality of Service Based Routing Protocol Using Hybrid Ant Colony Optimization and Particle Swarm Optimization