IMPROVED NETWORK CONNECTIVITY IN MANETS

International Journal of Computer Networks & Communications (IJCNC), Vol.1, No.3, October 2009
IMPROVED NETWORK CONNECTIVITY
IN MANETS
B RSujatha(1)
, M V Satyanarayana (2)
(1)
Assistant Professor (2)
, Professor
Dept of E&C, Malnad College of Engg, Hassan
Email: brs_hsn@rediffmail.com
Abstract:
The growth in wireless communication technologies has resulted in a considerable amount of
attention given to mobile adhoc networks. All mobile hosts in an adhoc network are embedded with
packet forwarding capabilities. It is decentralized and is independent of infrastructure. Since mobile
hosts in an adhoc network usually move freely, the topology of the network changes dynamically and
disconnection occurs frequently. These characteristics require the routing protocols to find an
alternative path towards the destination for data transfer. The existing on-demand routing protocols
does the alternative path establishment only after the disconnection of links in the existing path. The
data sent by the source during alternate path establishment period will be lost leading to incomplete
data transfer. The network traffic will therefore increase considerably. This problem can be overcome
by establishing an alternative path when the existing path is more likely to be broken, by sending a
warning message to the source indicating the likelihood of disconnection. In this paper an attempt has
been made to analyze a protocol that improves the network connectivity by preempting the alternative
path before the existing link gets failed by monitoring the signal strength and ‘age of the path’.
Keywords:
Mobile Adhoc Networks (MANETs), Dynamic Source Routing (DSR), Preemptive routing
1 INTRODUCTION
In recent days, connectivity with mobility is in great demand. This has given boost to lot
of research in the field of adhoc networks. MANETs are self-organisable, infrastructure less,
wireless, peer-peer, multi hop networks. They adopt distributed control in providing connectivity
from the source to the destination. Therefore the mobile units themselves need to take the
responsibility of discovering its nearest neighbors who are ready to route data packets to the
destination. Co-operation among all the mobile nodes is very essential in such cases. [1, 2].Typical
applications of these networks are outdoor events such as conferences, concerts and festivals,
places with no network infrastructure, outdoor emergencies and natural disasters and military
operations. A typical adhoc network is as shown in figure 1, which depicts its dynamic topology.
Fig 1 A Typical Adhoc Network
1

If a node A1 wants to send a data packet to node B1, it can do so via node C1, which is in
the common range of both the nodes. However if C1 moves away and is beyond the range of A1,
the link is broken and a different route has to be established.
In the literature, routing protocols are broadly classified into three categories viz proactive,
reactive and hybrid protocols. Proactive protocols are also known as table driven protocols in
which the route to each destination in the network is stored in tables. Hence when a data packet is
to be transferred, the node will refer to its routing table to determine a route towards the
destination [3, 4]. An example for this type of routing is Destination Sequenced Distance Vector
(DSDV). In reactive protocols, which are also known as on demand routing protocols, the path
towards the destination is discovered as and when it is required. DSR (Dynamic source routing)
and AODV (Adhoc on demand vector) come under this category [5, 6, 7]. Hybrid protocols
combine the advantageous features of both proactive and reactive protocols. CEDAR (Core
Extracted Distributed Adhoc Routing) is one such protocol [8, 9].
On demand protocols are proved to perform better. But the major drawback of such
protocols is that the alternate route discovery process is initiated only after the existing link has
been reported as broken. This may considerably increase the network traffic as the data sent during
the transition period will be lost and will have to be retransmitted [10]. This problem can be
overcome by slightly modifying the existing on-demand protocols. Preemptive routing protocol is
one such protocol [11, 12].
In preemptive routing, alternate route discovery process is initiated in anticipation of a link
failure. This can be done by examining the signal strength continuously and the age of the path at
regular intervals. Once the signal strength falls below a threshold or the age of the path increases
beyond a threshold value, the process of route discovery will be initiated.
The rest of the paper is organized in various sections as follows. Section 2 highlights the
previous works done on routing in MANETs, in particular Dynamic Source Routing (DSR).
Section 3 describes the Preemptive routing protocol. Section 4 provides a comparison of the
preemptive protocol with the traditional on-demand protocol using simulations. Finally section 5
gives the conclusion and the possible future work.
2 PREVIOUS WORKS
Routing plays a vital role in MANETs. The dynamic nature of the network along with the
wireless communication poses many challenges on the routing protocols. Many proposed routing
protocols for adhoc networks operate in an on-demand fashion. Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) is
a routing protocol adapted for MANETs with dynamic topology due to frequent movement of the
nodes in the network [13]. DSR has two phases viz. route discovery and route maintenance.
2.1Route Discovery
This is a process of determination of a suitable route to the destination. To perform route
discovery, the source node broadcasts a route request packet with a recorded source node
addresses. Each node that hears the route request forwards the request (if appropriate), adding its
own address to the recorded source route field in the packet. The route request packet propagates
hop-by-hop outwards from the source node until either the destination node is found or until
another node is found that can offer a route to the destination [13].
A node will forward the route request if it is not the destination node and if it is not
already listed as a hop in the route. When a node wishes to send a packet, it examines its own route
cache and performs route discovery only if no suitable source route is found. Further, when a node
receives a route request for which it has a route in its cache, it does not propagate the route request
2

but instead returns a route reply to the source node. The route reply contains the full concatenation
of the recorded route from the source and the cached route leading to the destination. Naturally, if
a route request packet reaches the destination node, the destination node returns a route reply
packet to the source node with the full source to destination path listed.
2.2 Route Maintenance
Conventional routing protocols integrate route discovery with route maintenance by
continuously sending periodic routing updates. If the status of a link or node changes, the periodic
updates will eventually reflect the change in all other nodes, presumably resulting in the
computation of new routes. If a node along the path of a packet detects an error, the node returns a
route error packet to the sender. The route error packet contains the addresses of the nodes at both
ends of the hop in error. When a route error packet is received or overheard, the ‘hop in error’ is
removed from any route caches and all routes which contain this hop must be truncated at that
point. Route maintenance can also be performed using end-to-end acknowledgments rather than
the hop-by-hop acknowledgments described above [13].
In DSR, an alternative path discovery is initiated only after the path disconnection due to a
link failure. This will result in loss of a number of data packets. Therefore there is a need to
modify the conventional DSR protocol.
3 PREEMPTIVE ROUTING
Conventionally, a change of path occurs in networks when: (i) a link along the path fails or
(ii) a shorter path is found. A link failure results in multiple retransmissions being required to
detect the failure and a new path has to be found and used as in on-demand routing. In MANETs,
as the network topology frequently changes, path disconnections occur and this proves to be very
costly.
As soon as a chance of link failure is identified, the preemptive routing invokes the routing
algorithm to discover an alternative path before the actual link failure occurs. Thus, the
connectivity of the network can be improved. This technique is similar to the soft handoffs in
mobile telephone networks. The route maintenance algorithm is as follows:(i) Detect the path
which is more likely to be broken (ii) Invoke routing algorithm to discover an alternate path. (iii)
Continue the transmission with the new path [14].
The key factor in the algorithm is to decide, when to rediscover a new path. This can be
done on the basis of the quality of the path which may incorporate several criteria such as signal
strength, age of the path, the number of hops to the destination etc. In this paper, we have
considered two ‘path quality’ parameters viz the signal strength and the age of the path. As the
link failures in adhoc networks can be attributed to node’s mobility, signal strength measurement
provides estimate of nodes ability to converse with each other. However, signal variations due to
fading and other temporary disturbances may generate erroneous signals resulting in unnecessary
new path discoveries and increasing the path overheads. The other parameter, the age of the path
also plays a vital role in deciding the maintenance of existing paths. As the age of the path
increases (under conditions of low mobility) with the same set of nodes participating in data
transmission, there are chances of these nodes failing because of battery drain. Hence, if the age of
the path increases beyond a threshold, inspite of the path being active, an alternate path with more
number of nodes (may or may not be) has to be discovered to avoid the total drain of the batteries
of the intermediate nodes. Although this method increases the network control traffic required for
new path discoveries, it improves network connectivity.
3.1 Generating the Warning Message based on Signal Strength
3

The threshold value selected to generate warning plays a vital role in defining the
efficiency of this algorithm. If the value is too small, there may not be sufficient time to discover a
new path before the existing link is broken. On the contrary, if it is too high then unnecessary route
discoveries will be done increasing network control traffic. Hence, a trade off has to be made in
deciding an optimal threshold value for new path/route discovery.
A Preemptive region is defined around every node as shown in the figure 2 for node A. As
soon as node C enters the preemptive region, a warning message is sent to the sender node A.
Then the node A initiates a route discovery process. With the establishment of a new route, data
transmission is continued along this new route. The time required to discover a new path can be
termed as recovery time Trec. Hence the time between the warning and the path break Twarn should
be atleast or slightly greater than Trec.
Figure 2: Preemptive Region
In order to determine the optimal range, it is necessary to exchange the location and
velocity information of the nodes amongst all the nodes depending on the receiver signal power.
The receiver signal power,
at a distance r from the transmitter, where P0 is the transmitted power and path loss exponent n is
typically between 2 and 4.
The minimum power receivable by the device is the power at the maximum transmission
range,
Pd = P0 / d4
Similarly, the preemptive signal power threshold is the signal power at the edge of the
preemptive region. In addition, for a preemptive region of width of w, the signal power threshold is
Where dsafe is equal to (d- w) and w=relative speed*Twarn
The preemptive ratio α is defined as α =Psafe / Pd = range/ (range- w)
In reality, the received signal power may experience sudden fluctuations due to channel
fading and multipath effects which will trigger a false warning, causing unnecessary route request
floods. This may result in lower quality routes being initiated and also increasing the routing
overheads. In cellular networks, an exponential average of the signal power is used to verify that
the signal power drop was not due to fading. However, if the traffic is bursty or infrequent, the
preemptive region may be fully crossed by the time enough packets are received to drop the
4
Pr = P0 / rn
Psafe = P0 / d4
safe

average below the threshold. Therefore quicker power estimates can be achieved by sending a
warning whenever the instantaneous power drops below the threshold and checking the warning
packet received power when it is received by the source. If the warning packet power is also below
the threshold, there is a good probability that the warning is real.
3.2 Generating the Warning Message based on ‘Age of the Path’
With transmissions being done along the same path, relay nodes will experience a
continuous drain of their battery power for the same source destination pair which may result in
path failure. Therefore alternate route discoveries are required before the onset of failure.
Nodes keep a record of their most recent encounter times with all other nodes. With a path
discovery being made, the source node sets a timer. The preemptive warning is generated based on
two parameters- Age of the path defined as the time difference Tage between the transmissions of
two consecutive route discovery packets from the source to the same destination and threshold
value Γ is defined for the age of the path. As long as Tage is lesser than Γ, data transmission can be
continued on the same path. When the timer value exceeds the threshold Γ, a warning message is
generated leading to a new path discovery. However this new path may or may not be the shortest
path to the destination. The choice of the threshold depends on node density of the network. If the
node density is small with lesser number of paths available, Γ must be large.
4 SIMULATION RESULTS
The following assumptions were made for carrying out simulation [15, 16].
• The discrete event network simulator NS-2 has been used for analysis and
comparison of the adhoc routing protocols.
• The mobility model uses the random waypoint model in a rectangular field.
• The mobile node movement is restricted to a square cell of 600 X 600m
containing 70 nodes.
• A 512-byte User Datagram Protocol (UDP) generated by a constant bit rate (CBR)
traffic source is used.
• Simulation lasts for 600 seconds.
A comparison of preemptive routing with the traditional DSR algorithm is discussed here.
Figure 3: Comparison wrt to Broken Paths
5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Preemptive Ratio (α)
NoofBrokenPaths
DSR-High
Mobility
DSR-Low
Mobility
PDSR- High
Mobility
PDSR-Low
Mobility

0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Preemptive Ratio (α)
DSRPacketsSent
DSR-High
Mobility
DSR-Low
Mobility
PDSR-High
Mobility
PDSR-Low
Mobility
Figure 4: Comparison wrt to Routing Overheads
The direct effect of preemptive routing can be seen by examining the number of broken
paths (Figure 3). The horizontal lines on each figure correspond to conventional DSR (with no
modifications whatsoever) under high mobility and low mobility conditions.
Figure 4 shows the overhead of PDSR compared to DSR. While the overhead is higher, it
can be noted that most of the overhead was experienced also by the non-preemptive version of
PDSR but with increased network connectivity.
The effect of number of active nodes with respect to the simulation time is as shown in
figure 5. It can be seen that if the threshold is small, number of active nodes will be more as new
routes will be initiated before the node’s battery gets drained completely.
.
Figure 5: Comparison wrt to Number of Active Nodes
The effect of packet loss with reference to various node densities is as shown in the figure
6. It is clear that at low node densities the packet loss will be more as there will be less chances of
having an alternative path using the available limited number of nodes. As the node density
increases there will be more routes possible for the same destination resulting in the decrease in
the packet loss.
6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
100 200 300 400 500 600
Simulation Time
NoofActiveNodes
DSR
PDSR

Figure 6: Comparison wrt to Packet Loss
5 CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, an attempt has been made to improve the data connectivity in the network by
preemptively selecting an alternate path as soon as the signal strength falls below the threshold
value and the age of the path exceeds the predefined threshold. An analysis of preemptive protocol
is made with the DSR algorithm.
The performance of the preemptive algorithm is dependent on the preemptive ratio α. It is
clear from the analysis that preemptive algorithm performs better than DSR. But the offered load
on the network is more in preemptive protocol as continuously the signal strength and the age of
the path has to be examined and warning messages are to be sent back immediately.
As a part of future work, this algorithm can be implemented over energy aware routing
protocols available in the literature.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to thank everyone, including the anonymous reviewers.
REFERENCES
[1] B. Cameron Lesiuk, “Routing in Adhoc Networks of Mobile Hosts”, MECH 590, Directed
studies with Dr.Gerard McLean, December 2, 1998
[2] Mehran Abolhasan, Tadeusz Wysocki, Eryk Dutkiewicz, “A Review of Routing Protocols for
Mobile Adhoc Networks”, Elsevier, Ad Hoc Networks 2004
[3] C Siva Ram Murthy and B S Manoj, “Adhoc Wireless Networks-Architectures and Protocols”,
Pearson education, 2004
[4] Ismail Ari, Neelu Jethani, Aniruddha Rangnekar, Sushma Natarajan, “Performance Analysis
and Comparison of Adhoc Routing Protocols”, IEEE transaction on Mobile Computing, 2000
[5] Elizabeth M. Belding-Royer, Charles E. Perkins, “Evolution and Future Directions of the
Adhoc On- demand Distance Vector RoutingPprotocol”, Elsevier, Adhoc Networks 2003
[6] C E Perkins and E M Royer, “On- demand Distance Vector Routing”, Proceedings, IEEE
workshop on mobile computing systems and applications, February, 1999
7
0
200
400
600
800
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Node Density
PacketLoss
Γ=0.6
Γ=0.7
Γ=0.8

[7] Mohammad Al-Shurman and Seong-Moo Yoo, Seungjin Park, “A Performance Simulation for
Route Maintenance in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks”, ACM,2004
[8] B R Sujatha, K S Shivaprakasha, Siddiq Iqbal, M V Satyanarayana, “A Comparative Study of
Routing Protocols in Mobile Adhoc Networks”, Proceedings of National Conference on VLSI
design, Signal processing and Communication, NCVSPCom-2007,pp 148-151
[9] T. Bheemarjuna Reddy, I. Karthigeyan, B.S. Manoj, C. Siva Ram Murthy,” Quality of service
Provisioning in Ad hoc Wireless Networks: A Survey of Issues and Solutions”, Ad Hoc Networks 4
(2006) 83–124, Elsevier
[10] K S Shivaprakasha, B R Sujatha, Siddiq Iqbal, “Performance Analysis of Routing Protocols
in MANETs”, Proceedings of National Conference on Recent Trends in Electronics and
Communication, Kurnool, AP, pp 35-39
[11] T. S. Rappaport, “Wireless Communication Systems”, Prentice Hall, 1996.
[12] M C Domingo, D Remondo and O. Leon, “A Simple Routing Scheme for Improving Adhoc
Network Survivability”, GLOBECOM, IEEE, 2003
[13] D B Johnson and D A Maltz, “DSR-The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Multihop
Wireless Adhoc Networking”, Charles E, Perkins,Addison Wesley,2001
[14] Tom Goff, Nael B. Abu-Ghazaleh, Dhananjay S. Phatakand Ridvan Kahvecioglu
“Preemptive Routing in AdHoc Networks”, ACM SIGMOBILE 7/01 Rome, Italy
[15] NS-2: Network Simulator
[Courtesy: http:// www.isi.edu/ nsnam/ns/]
[16] Kevin Fall Kannan Varadhan, “The ns Manual”
[Courtesy: http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/ns-documentation.]
Authors
8
Ms. Sujatha.B.R is a Ph.D student and also working as
Assistant Professor in the Department of Electronics and
Communication at Malnad College of Engineering, Hassan,
India. She received her ME degree in Electrical
Communication Engineering from Indian Institute of
Science, Bangalore and BE degree from University of
Mysore. Her research spans Wireless Communication,
Computer Networks and Ad Hoc Networks.
Dr. M V Sathyanarayana is Professor in the Department
of Electronics and Communication at Malnad College of
Engineering, Hassan, India. He received his Ph.D degree
in Electrical Communication Engineering from Indian
Institute of Science, Bangalore, MTech from National
Institute of Technology, Karnataka and BE degree from
University of Mysore. His research spans Optical
Communication, Computer Networks, Ad Hoc Networks
and Data Mining.

IMPROVED NETWORK CONNECTIVITY IN MANETS

More Related Content

What's hot (17)

Similar to IMPROVED NETWORK CONNECTIVITY IN MANETS (20)

More from IJCNCJournal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

IMPROVED NETWORK CONNECTIVITY IN MANETS