Tora Reactive Pro Active Reactive And Reactive Computer Science Essay

Published:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Quite a few researches have been done on the mobile ad hoc network routing protocols performance analysis where they used different simulator to obtain the performance. In this Project I have analysis the performance of four mobile ad network routing protocols which are as fellows TORA (reactive), OLSR (pro-active), DSR (reactive) and AODV (reactive). Every routing protocols performance is analyse with the following performance parameters media access load, traffic overhead, load, through and end to end delay. That's why the reason I used OPNET simulation software to analyse the performance of these routing protocols in different scenarios.

I have selected, FTP traffic for each of the mobile nodes as each nodes in transmitting the data to mutual destination using the TCP.

Now after choosing the FTP traffic for each mobile nodes I have evaluate the performance of all of these four MANET protocols using the end to end delay and through puts and discover that OLSR performance is better than all other three protocols while OLSR is also perform well when it set up to the low mobility and high load networks but OLSR got really bad performance routing over head as it is only suitable for the large volume of network. That's why the reason OLSR quality of maintaining and discovering the route for large routing traffic makes incompatible for the small volume of networks.

However, DSR is completely different than the OLSR as DSR performing the same facility in the same circumstances where OSLR can't do that but DSR and OLSR got performance is same in the packet delivery. DSR only got edge in the routing overhead while OLSR performance is better in all other performance parameters that's why reason I prefer to use the OLSR rather than the DSR.

CHAPTER 3: Research Methodologies

3.1 Research Methodology:

Research idea is accomplish done by the research methodology. Information about the project gained from the different research materials such as papers, books, conferences and websites etc. In Chapter one related to basics wireless networks, different networks wireless network technologies and history and background study of mobile ad hoc networks. Mobile ad hoc network routing protocols discuss in the second chapter which is literature review. Literature review consists of deep study of different mobile ad hoc network protocols and its utility, properties and mechanism.

Four MANET routing protocols choose from all protocols discussed in literature review because of their properties and characteristic. OPENT Software is used in analysis period to compare the performance of these protocols. OLSR protocols selected from proactive protocols while AODV, TORA and DSR are chosen from reactive routing protocols.

To check the performance of these protocols, there are types of different software available but OPNET is used to analyse the performance as it is freely available in lab.

Designing of the mobile ad hoc network, is really important task as each scenario should be different than others on the basis of different traffic. All four routing protocols performance will be examined in different scenarios with different traffic. FTP traffic use where all mobile nodes use this traffic and design in MANET server.

As Designing is the really vital so, these are points below use to design the mobile ad hoc network.

There are numbers of scenarios in the network.

FTP traffic configured in every scenario application.

Designated application defined in every scenario profile.

Support application is use to configured the server.

Profile is use to configure the mobile nodes and server.

Routing protocols is use to configured the mobile nodes.

Mobility is use to configure the movement of the mobile nodes.

Performance limitation will be selected.

Comparison of different scenarios will be accomplished with the selection similar Performance limitations for all of the scenarios. After design next step is its implementation. Running the Simulations and attained results will be done in implementation. Appropriate results will be obtained to run the Simulation for certain time period. Selected performance limitations will be used as Results and will be documented in graphics and table format.

After implementation next step is the estimated the Results which get from the implementation. Quality of services will be put main criteria to compare all four protocols DSR, TORA, AODV and OLSR. To Estimate the results all limitations will be compared which are delay, access of media, load of network and throughput of all four protocols.

After estimated results next will be all difficulties you got to complete this project, technologies come in future time and what are outcomes you got from this project. Conclusions will be come at the end which will be considered on the basis of results.

CHAPTER 4: Design of MANET

4.1. Introduction:

Mobile ad hoc network routing protocol AODV, OLSR, TORA and DSR are selected for designing two campus network using OPNET simulator in lab. Networks are configured with wireless workstation, FTP server, profile configuration and application configuration under single subnet. Both networks have random way point topology. The division of this network are as under.

Network with five nodes

Network with thirty nodes

Parameters of Network with five nodes are designed and configured which are shown in figure 1 and table 1 as under.

Table 4.1 Network with five nodes

Protocols

Wireless station

Work space

Mobility speed

Server

Pause time

Simulation

Topology

OLSR, TORA, DSR and AODV

5

1000m*1000m

10 m/s

1 (FTP)

300 sec

30 minutes

Random

OLSR, TORA, DSR and AODV

5

1000m*1000m

20 m/s

1 (FTP)

300 sec

1 hour

Random

Network with five nodes figure 4.1

Parameters of Network with thirty nodes are designed and configured which are shown in figure 2 and table 2 as under.

Table 4.2 Network with thirty nodes

Protocols

Wireless station

Work space

Mobility speed

Server

Pause time

Simulatiom

Topology

OLSR, TORA, DSR and AODV

Thirty

1000m*1000m

10 m/s

1 (FTP)

300 sec

30 minutes

Random

OLSR, TORA, DSR and AODV

Thirty

1000m*1000m

20 m/s

1 (FTP)

300 sec

1 hour

Random

Network with thirty nodes Figure 4.2

4.2. Configuration of MANET

Designed network are configured with the number of configuration which are explained bellow.

Configuring the application in network

Configuring the profile in network

Configuring the wireless station and server

Configuring the mobility of wireless station

4.2.1 Configuring the application in network

Networks are configured with FTP high load traffic in application definition so TCP application with FTP traffic is used in network.

4.2.2 Configuring the profile in network

The application that is defined in application definition is selected in profile definition and start and end time is selected according network configuration. The network with 30 nodes are defined with uniform (100, 1800) start time profile and end with simulation which shows that profile start at 100 sec and end at 1800 sec. Similarly network with five nodes the profile start time is set to uniform (100, 3400). Under profile repeatability left the default. Start time under FTP is constant 0 and end is 10 sec which set the application time with profile. Constant 3 sec is the repetitions number and inter repetition time is uniform (10, 20) under ftp. By this a session is randomly started with the use parameters, distribution name and next application session is started.

4.2.3 Configuring the wireless station and server

Profile and routing protocol is configured in each wireless workstation therefore each scenario has one protocol (TORA, OLSR, DSR, and AODV). FTP is selected in application supported services in server. Network has IP v4 addressing scheme.

4.2.4 Configuring the mobility of wireless station

Both networks are configured with 10 m/s and 20m/s node speed in mobility configuration as workstations can change their position randomly. The mobility configuration is shown in figure 4.3.

Mobility configuration Figure 4.3

Network with five workstations are moving with 10, 20 m/s and pause time is 300 sec and thirty work stations are moving with speed 10 and 20 m/s and pause time 300 sec. Pause time is the stop time of the node after that node will star again.

Network simulation Figure 4.4

Network simulation will start after configuring the network in OPNET and simulation will be set according to profile time as shown in figure 4.4.

CHAPTER 5: Implementation of MANET

5.1. Introduction

In this chapter simulation outline and global result of routing protocols will be discussed.

5.2 Simulation Progress

Simulation speed, messages, memory used and simulation time are shown in figure 5.1.

Simulation Summary Figure 5.1

For comparing the whole network only global statistic are selected. Therefore performance metrics are chosen for wireless LAN and routing protocol specific as shown below in figure 5.2.

Global statistics Figure 5.2

5.3 OLSR Global Results

OLSR is a proactive routing protocol in which control packet size is compressed by using link state algorithm. Control packets have the link state information and control packets are flooded to network by overcoming the transmissions number. Following are the performance metrics in OLSR.

5.3.1 Hello traffic sent (bits/s)

Route connection is done by Hello message which include detection of neighbour, sensing of links and MPR signalling. Hello traffic sent in all scenarios is shown in figure 5.3.

OLSR traffic sent Figure 5.3.

There is less neighbour detection, sensing of links, rebuilding and connection break in 5 nodes network because of only 5 nodes are moving so hello messages are less. In 30 nodes network the hello messages are more due to the number of nodes which causes more connection breaking.

5.3.2 TC traffic sent in OLSR

Data traffic is controlled by TC traffic by which destination received reliable data therefore these are overhead bits of traffic. Figure 5.4 shows control traffic sent.

OLSR TC sent Figure 5.4.

From figure 5.4, 5 nodes have low TC traffic than 30 nodes because with limited no of nodes routing table has minimum entries as compare to large network.

5.3.3 OLSR Throughput

The total data received by destination from sender over the time transported by network since receiving the last packet. Figure 5.5 shows the throughput of OLSR.

Average Throughput Figure 5.5

It is observe from figure 5.5 that the throughput of 30 nodes network is higher than 5 nodes network as number of traffic resources varies the throughput.

5.3.4 End to End Delay by OLSR

The time taken by a packet from sender to receiver across network is called end to delay. The end to end delay is shown in figure 5.6.

End to End Delays Figure 5.6.

A figure 5.6 show that delay of large and small network is not too much as OLSR is designed for large networks.

5.3.5 Network Load by OLSR

Network Load Figure 5.7

Figure 5.7 shows the network load by 30 nodes and 5 nodes network. It is observe that large network has more network load than smaller as the traffic generated by nodes is increased

5.3.6 Media access Delay by OLSR

Accessing the network resources by a node causes delay like bandwidth etc. This is shown in figure 5.8 below.

Media Access Delay Figure 5.8

Media access by a network with fewer nodes is lower than more nodes as shown in figure 5.8.

5.4 GLOBAL Traffic of TORA

Multi path routing and on demand routing are used in TORA which is reactive protocol. Routes are selected by DAG graph in TORA. Following are the performance metrics used in TORA.

5.4.1 Control traffic sent

Low overhead causes low delay due to less control traffic which is sent by any protocol is the efficiency of protocol which is achieved by control traffic. The average control traffic sent is shown in the figure 5.9.

Control traffic sent Figure 5.9

It is observe for the figure 5.9 that 5 nodes network has less traffic overhead than 30 nodes. Due to reactive in nature TORA has the view of topology when it changes so there is a slight traffic overhead. TORA send the QRY packet to keep the network information and UDP packet are used to update the table.

5.4.2 TORA Network Throughput

The network throughput is shown in the figure 5.10.

TORA average Network Throughput Figure 5.10

The throughput of 30 node network is greater than the 5 nodes network as shown in the figure 5.10.

5.4.3 TORA Network Load

With the increase of data load of network is increased so to handle the network load is the efficiency of routing protocol. Figure 9 shows the network load of TORA protocol.

Network Load Figure 5.11

From figure 5.11 it is observe that network load of 30 nodes network is greater than 5 nodes network. No of nodes causes traffic overhead this is cause of increase network load.

5.4.4 TORA End to End delay

A packet that takes the time to go through the network is the end to end delay. Figure 5.12 shows the end to end delay.

End to End Delay Figure 5.12

The end to end delay of 30 nodes network is higher than 5 nodes network. So it is observe that a network which dense generates more traffic overhead which increase congestion in network. TORA takes time in discovering route which is also causes end to end delay.

5.4.5 Media Access delay by TORA

Media Access Delay Figure 5.13

Figure 5.13 shows that media access delay of TORA high in both scenarios. The data channel are required by the traffic in network is one kind that causes media access delay.

5.5 GLOBAL Results of AODV

5.5.1 Routing Traffic sent

Routing traffic sent Figure 5.14

Figure 5.14 show that AODV has routing overhead low routing over head. This routing overhead is high in 30 nodes network than 5 nodes network.

5.5.2 AODV Network Throughput

AODV network throughputs Figure 5.15

Figure 5.15 shows the network throughput of 5 node and 30 nodes network. The throughput of AODV in large network is better than small network.

5.5.3 AODV Network Load

AODV Network LOAD Figure 5.16

Figure 5.16 shows the network load of 4 nodes and 30 nodes network. The network load is increased with the number of nodes generating traffic overhead.

5.5.4 AODV End to End Delay

AODV end to end Delay Figure 5.17

Figure 5.17 shows the end to end delay of 5 nodes and 30 nodes network. It is observe from the figure 5.17 that 30 nodes have less end to end delay than 5 nodes network.

5.5.5 AODV Media access delay

Media access Delay by AODV Figure 5.18

Media access delay by 5 nodes network and 30 nodes network is shown in figure 5.18.

5.6 GLOBAL Results of DSR

5.6.1 DSR Routing Traffic sent

DSR Routing traffic sent Figure 5.19

Routing traffic sent is shown in figure 5.19. From this figure it is observe that 30 nodes network has high routing overhead than 5 nodes network.

5.6.2 DSR Network Throughput

DSR throughput Figure 5.20

Figure 5.20 shows the network throughput of 5 nodes network and 30 nodes network.

5.6.3 DSR Network Load

Figure 5.21 DSR network load

Network load is shown in figure 5.21. The network load of 30 nodes network is high than 5 nodes network due to no of nodes generating traffic.

5.6.4 DSR End to End Delay

DSR End to END Delay Figure 5.22

Figure 5.22 shows the end to end delay of 30 and 5 nodes network. The end to end delay of 5 nodes and 30 nodes network are consistent as shown in the figure 5.22.

5.6.5 DSR Media Access Delay

Media Access Delay by DSR Figure 5.23

Figure 5.23 shows the media access delay of 5 nodes network and 30 nodes network. There is a consistency in media access delay 30 nodes and 5 nodes network.

CHAPTER 6: Evaluation and Result Comparison

6.1 Introduction

Result obtain from simulation will be compare in this chapter. This comparison will done based on select performance metrics which are routing traffic overhead, end to end delay, network load, media access delay and network throughput. The result of TORA, DSR, AODV and OLSR will be shown in same figure for 5 nodes network and 30 nodes network. Justification and comparison of each performance metric will do separately.

6.2 OLSR, AODV, DSR and TORA Routing Overhead Comparison

Routing Overhead Comparison Figure 6.1

Figure 6.1 shows that the routing overhead of OLSR is high and after OLSR, TORA shows routing over head. AODV and DSR followed the TORA. It is observe that the performance of DSR is much better in small nodes network there for DSR outperform than other protocols. Unnecessary overhead is eliminated by DSR as it only sends routing overhead when it sends the data. In DSR the source is always remain aware of path the data will follow. During route discovery intermediate nodes are not sending any reply which due to the use of cached information and only receiver will reply to the request of route. Link failure is eliminated by DSR due the presence of many paths. With these factors DSR manage generate low routing overhead.

The routing overhead of AODV is bit more than DSR because every intermediate node send reply to the sender. Therefore reply to single route request is increased. When route failure happens error message is sent to same path because of the absence of multiple path.

Routing overhead of TORA is due to hello packet and route sensing. OLSR perform badly than the other three protocols. This is because it keeps its routing table up to date periodically.

6.3 OLSR, DSR, AODV and TORA End to End Delay Comparison

Figure 6.2 end to end delay comparison Figure 6.2

Figure 6.2 shows the comparison of end to end delay of 5 nodes network and 30 nodes network. It is observed from the figure that the end to end delay of OLSR is low in all scenarios. As network always knows the path due to proactive nature of OLSR and fresh routes are available due to routes update.

The performance of OLSR in 30 nodes network is quite similar with AODV. OLSR is proactive protocol so there is consistency in end to end delay. It is noted that TORA and AODV performance is similar in 5 nodes network and their performance is better than DSR. Mobility does not affect the TORA but shows sight deference in AODV. The end to end delay of TORA is increased in 30 nodes network which is higher than other protocols.

6.4 OLSR, AODV, DSR and TORA Network Load Comparison

Network Load comparisons Figure 6.3

Figure 6.3 shows the network load of 5 nodes and 30 nodes network. OLSR has high network load in all scenarios. The network load of AODV is low in all scenarios. DSR shows more load in 5 node networks than TORA and TORA shows high load in 30 nodes network. The network load of OLSR is decreases than TORA in 30 nodes network when simulation proceeded.

6.5 OLSR, DSR, AODV and TORA Network Throughput Comparison

Network Throughput comparison Figure 6.4

Figure 6.4 shows the comparison of network throughput in 5 nodes and 30 nodes network. The performance of OLSR is much better in all scenarios as shown in the figure 6.4. Because OLSR is a proactive protocol and knows its path already. Due to low delay routes are consistently available. Therefore low delay increases the throughput of network. In five nodes network the performance of DSR is better than the AODV and TORA. This is due to DSR has low routing overhead in 5 nodes network. But in 30 nodes network the throughput of DSR is decreases as traffic overhead increases. So DSR perform well in small network than TORA and AODV and AODV perform well in large network than DSR and TORA.

6.5 OLSR, DSR, AODV and TORA Media Access Delay Comparison

Media Access delay Comparison Figure 6.5

Figure 6.5 the comparison of media access delay by 5 nodes network and 30 nodes network. Media access by OLSR in nodes network and 30 nodes network is quite low as compare to other protocols. In 5 nodes network the media access delay of DSR is high and TORA shows delay in 30 nodes network. AODV shows less media access delay in large network as shown in the figure 6.5.

CHAPTER 7: Conclusion

7.1. Introduction:

In this chapter I will discuss the all consequences of this project which is get during the completion of this project.

7.2. Problems:

During this project I got lots of problems occur which are as below.

To design the networks is really difficult phase specially to configure the mobility.

Second after designing, next phase to collect all the result from OPNET which more difficult the designing as you don't know which results right and which is wrong.

Third during the simulation phase I got really serious problem about licencing issue of OPNET.

Forth during the result collection i got problem with O drive as I didn't have much space to collect my result but thanks for CMS Lab staff, they increase my O drive space.

7.3 Conclusion:

In this project, I compared the performance of four MANET protocols TORA (reactive), OLSR (pro-active), DSR (reactive), and AODV (reactive) with the use of OPNET simulator. To compare the performance of these protocols I have selected some of the performance parameters media access delay, network throughput, network load, control traffic overload and end to end delay. These performance parameters give the real performance of the network in two different ways. First, consistency of network achieve with the end to end delay and with through put. Second, control traffic overload gives the efficiency of the network with the use of routing protocol. Protocols need be effective and consistent for the network.

In this project I have selected, FTP traffic for each of the mobile nodes as each nodes in transmitting the data to mutual destination using the TCP.

Now after choosing the FTP traffic for each mobile nodes I have evaluate the performance of all of these four MANET protocols using the end to end delay and through puts and discover that OLSR performance is better than all other three protocols while OLSR is also perform well when it set up to the low mobility and high load networks but OLSR got really bad performance routing over head as it is only suitable for the large volume of network. That's why the reason OLSR quality of maintaining and discovering the route for large routing traffic makes incompatible for the small volume of networks.

However, DSR is completely different than the OLSR as DSR performing the same facility in the same circumstances where OSLR can't do that but DSR and OLSR got performance is same in the packet delivery. DSR only got edge in the routing overhead while OLSR performance is better in all other performance parameters that's why reason I prefer to use the OLSR rather than the DSR.

Writing Services

Essay Writing
Service

Find out how the very best essay writing service can help you accomplish more and achieve higher marks today.

Assignment Writing Service

From complicated assignments to tricky tasks, our experts can tackle virtually any question thrown at them.

Dissertation Writing Service

A dissertation (also known as a thesis or research project) is probably the most important piece of work for any student! From full dissertations to individual chapters, we’re on hand to support you.

Coursework Writing Service

Our expert qualified writers can help you get your coursework right first time, every time.

Dissertation Proposal Service

The first step to completing a dissertation is to create a proposal that talks about what you wish to do. Our experts can design suitable methodologies - perfect to help you get started with a dissertation.

Report Writing
Service

Reports for any audience. Perfectly structured, professionally written, and tailored to suit your exact requirements.

Essay Skeleton Answer Service

If you’re just looking for some help to get started on an essay, our outline service provides you with a perfect essay plan.

Marking & Proofreading Service

Not sure if your work is hitting the mark? Struggling to get feedback from your lecturer? Our premium marking service was created just for you - get the feedback you deserve now.

Exam Revision
Service

Exams can be one of the most stressful experiences you’ll ever have! Revision is key, and we’re here to help. With custom created revision notes and exam answers, you’ll never feel underprepared again.