Survey on routing protocols in vanets by IJRTER

Survey on Routing Protocols in VANETs Shimaa Suliman Mahmoud1, Dr. Mohamed Abaker Hussein2 1, 2

Telecommunication Engineering,AlNeelain University,Khartoum, Sudan

Abstract:The vehicular Ad-hoc Networks (VANET) is a new technology and particular class of Mobile Ad-hoc Network MANET with special characteristics. VANET provides a communication among vehicle and vehicle (V2V) or vehicle to road side infrastructure (V2I). Due to dynamic topology changing and frequent disconnection it is difficult to design an efficient routing protocol for routing data. This paper gives an overview of various routing protocol proposed for VANETs in city and highway environments. I. INTRODUCTION Vehicular Ad hoc Network (VANET) is a network without infrastructure and support a vehicle to vehicle communication which is called V2V and with infrastructure support vehicle to road side called V2I. It is autonomous & self-organizing wireless communication network, where the vehicles are considered as mobile nodes in VANET and sharing information with each other [12] . Generally the purpose of the VANETs is to provide traffic safety and provides the comfort application to drivers and passengers such as speed limit, parking, fuel station and media downloading [9]. Based on the standard of IEEE 802.11p, VANET has been considered as an important part of the intelligent transportation system (ITS). VANET deploys the technique of dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) to enhance the driving safety and to comfort of drivers. The U.S. Federal Communication Commission FCC allocated 75 MHz of the DSRC spectrum at 5.9 GHz to be exclusively used for vehicle-to-vehicle and infrastructure-to-vehicle communications [13]. II. LITERATURE SURVEY A. Husain et al [1] Evaluated the performance of LAR protocol in Highway Scenario under varying metrics such as packet delivery ratio (PDR), throughput, average end-to-end delay, and normalized routing load by using ns2. And also using The Intelligent Driver Model (IDM) based tool VanetMobiSim to order investigation realistic mobility model. The result showed that the LAR is dependent on node density and number of lanes. S. Jibhkate [2] studied the performance of OLSR and AODV under varying metrics such as end to end delay, throughput and packets delivery ratio for implements an efficient routing algorithm in highway and city scenarios by using NS2 simulator. The result showed the distance between the nodes affects the performance in highway scenario. Both AODV and OLSR are suitable for both city and highway scenarios. T. Song et al [3] proposed cluster based directional routing protocol for highway scenario and compared with AODV and GPSR protocols by using NS2 simulator. The result of simulation showed that CBDRP is outperformed from AODV and GPSR protocols. P. Singh et al [4] analyzed the performance of AODV, OLSR and DSR protocols for highway and city scenario by using SUMO and NS2 simulators. Packet Delivery Ratio and End To End delay are the metrics used for performance analysis of VANET protocol. The result of analysis is AODV had a best Packet Delivery Ratio from other protocols but had highest end to end delay this lead to be a good for sensitive information and the DSR For quick transmission due to low end to end delay. A. Husain and S.C. Sharma [5] analyzed the DREAM and LAR routing protocols in VANET under varying metrics such as PDR, routing overhead, delay, throughput and lost packet ratio by using NS-

216

International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 02, Issue 08; August - 2016 [ISSN: 2455-1457]

2.33 simulator with (IDM_IM) of VanetMobiSim. The result showed LAR had a better performance than DREAM in both scenarios. T. Sivakumar and R. Manoharan [6] proposed a Stable Routing Protocol (SRP) for Vehicular Ad hoc Network using Reliability Index metric to choose a best route between source and destination. By using NS2 simulator and SUMO under varying metrics such as Packet Delivery Ratio, Control Overhead Ratio and Average End-to-End Delay and SRP compared with AODV, DSDV and AOMDV routing protocol. The result of simulation showed that SRP provides an improvement in the PDR and decreasing in end-to-end delay and control overhead ratio according to other routing protocols. BhushanT.Dhok et al [7] introduced a cluster Based routing protocol: CBLR and HCR and compared it before and after applying Bee Colony Optimization techniques. By using NS2 simulator under varying metrics like mean delay, mean throughput, PDR, available energy, jitter and packet loss. The result had shown is the performance metrics had been better after applying BCO. O. Kaiwartya and S. Kumar [8] proposed Geocasting through Particle Swarm Optimization (GeoPSO) protocol. Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique used for select Next Hop Vehicle (NHV). GeoPSO has been simulated using NS-2.34 and SUMO simulators under metrics like packet delivery and network load and compared the analyzed with P-GEDIR. The result of analysis is GeoPSO give a high packet delivery ratio compared to P-GEDIR and with increasing number of vehicles in the network the network load of GeoPSO decreased to the half of that of P-GEDIR. O. Kaiwartya and S. Kumar [9] proposed a geocast routing protocol ‘‘Enhanced Caching for Geocast routing (ECGR)” that is enhanced caching technique using full radio transmission range power to find the best next forwarder node. By using NS-2.34 to evaluate the performance of ECGR and compared with CTRC in terms of packet loss, end-to-end delay, and throughput. The result of simulation is ECGR performed better than CTRC with increases of vehicles speed. W. Viriyasitavat et al [10] proposed a new broadcast routing protocol UV-CAST for urban scenario. Performance of the UV-CAST protocol is evaluated in terms of reachability, received distance, and network overhead in a regular Manhattan Street scenario and real city by using NS2 and SUMO simulators. UV-CAST protocol support no infrastructure and infrastructure. The result showed that performance of UV-CAST is excellent in a regular scenario and real cities. Ozan K.Tonguz et al [11] presented the design of a new distributed vehicular multihop broadcast protocol DV-CAST for highway scenario. By using NS-2 simulator in terms of Broadcast success rate, Network reachability and Network overhead. The result showed that the DV-CAST performs well in different traffic conditions. III. DISCUSSION [1][5], Evaluated the performance of LAR and DREAM routing protocol in VANET under varying metrics such as PDR, routing overhead, delay, throughput and lost packet ratio by using NS-2.33 for highway and city scenario. In [1] the result showed that the LAR is dependent on node density and number of lanes, while in [5] LAR had a better performance than DREAM in both scenarios. [2][4], Analyzed the performance of AODV, OLSR and DSR protocols for highway and city scenario by using SUMO and NS2 simulators. Packet Delivery Ratio and End To End delay are the metrics used for performance analysis of VANET protocol. In [4] the result of analysis is AODV had a best Packet Delivery Ratio from other protocols but had highest end to end delay this lead to be a good for sensitive information and the DSR For quick transmission due to low end to end delay. But OSLR had average performance in both scenarios. And in [2] the distance between the nodes affects the performance in highway scenario. Both AODV and OLSR are suitable for both city and highway scenarios. [3] proposed CBDRP for highway scenario and compared with AODV and GPSR protocols by using NS2 simulator. The result of simulation showed that CBDRP is outperformed from AODV and GPSR protocols. [6], Proposed a Stable Routing Protocol (SRP) for Vehicular Ad hoc Network using Reliability Index metric to choose a best route between source and destination. By using NS2 simulator and SUMO

217

International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 02, Issue 08; August - 2016 [ISSN: 2455-1457]

under varying metrics such as Packet Delivery Ratio, Control Overhead Ratio and Average End-toEnd Delay and SRP compared with AODV, DSDV and AOMDV routing protocol. The result of simulation showed that SRP provides an improvement in the PDR and decreasing in end-toend delay and control overhead ratio according to other routing protocols. [7], Introduced a cluster-Based routing protocol: CBLR and HCR and compared it before and after applying Bee Colony Optimization techniques. By using NS2 simulator under varying metrics like mean delay, mean throughput, PDR, available energy, jitter and packet loss. The result had shown is the performance metrics had been better after applying BCO. [8], Proposed Geocasting through Particle Swarm Optimization (GeoPSO) protocol. Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique used for select Next Hop Vehicle (NHV). GeoPSO has been simulated using NS-2.34 and SUMO simulators under metrics like packet delivery and network load and compared the analysis with P-GEDIR. The result of analysis is GeoPSO give a high packet delivery ratio compared to P-GEDIR and with increasing number of vehicles in the network the network load of GeoPSO decreased to the half of that of P-GEDIR. [9], Proposed a geocast routing protocol ‘‘Enhanced Caching for Geocast routing (ECGR)” that is enhanced caching technique using full radio transmission range power to find the best next forwarder node. By using NS-2.34 to evaluate the performance of ECGR and compared with CTRC in terms of packet loss, end-to-end delay, and throughput. The result of simulation is ECGR performed better than CTRC with increases of vehicles speed. [10][11], Proposed a new broadcast routing protocol UV-CAST for urban scenario and distributed vehicular multi-hop broadcast protocol DV-CAST for highway scenario. By using NS2 simulator under varying parameters. The results showed that the DV-CAST performs well in different traffic conditions and the performance of UV-CAST is excellent in a regular scenario and real cities. Routing protocol

Scenario

Mobility model

Forwarding Strategy

Recovery strategy

LAR

IDM_IM

Un-known

AODV

Highway &City City

IDM

StoreForward

high

OLSR

City

MOVE

Multi hop forwarding

medium

low

GPSR

Highway &City Highway &City

MOVE

StoreForward StoreForward

Random Waypoint

Unknown low

DSR

City

IDM

StoreForward

less

average

DREAM

IDM_IM

Un-known

high

SRP

Highway &City City

Wireless Multi Hop forwarding Wireless Multi hop forwarding greedy forwarding Wireless Multi Hop forwarding Wireless Multi Hop forwarding Un-known

MOVE

Un-known

high

low

CBLR

City

Random Waypoint

Wireless Multi Hop forwarding Wireless

StoreForward Flooding

low

Flooding

Un-

CBDRP

HCR

Random

Metrics PDR Delay 80% more high

218

International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 02, Issue 08; August - 2016 [ISSN: 2455-1457]

Waypoint GeoPSO P-GEDIR ECGR

UV-CAST

City City Highway &City Highway &City City

DV-CAST

Highway

CTRC

MOVE MOVE Random Waypoint Random Waypoint Random Waypoint Random Waypoint

Multi Hop forwarding Un-known Un-known NHV

known

Un-known Un-known Flooding

more less more

low high low

NHV

Flooding

less

high

Opportunistic

store-forward

Opportunistic

store-forward

Unknown more

Unknown high

Table1: Comparison between Routing Protocols.

IV. CONCLUSION: In this paper we investigated and reviewed papers on Routing protocols for highway and cities scenarios. From the paper reviewed, it is shown that routing protocol is important in VANETs to enhance the performance and avoid collision between vehicles. REFERENCE 1.

3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

Akhtar Husain, Brajesh Kumar and Amit Doegar, “A Study of Location Aided Routing (LAR) Protocol for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks in Highway Scenario”, International Journal of Information Technology and Web Engineering, 2010. ShubhrantJibhkate, Smith Khare, Ashwin Kamble and Amutha Jeyakuma, “Aodv and Olsr Based Routing Algorithm for Highway and City Scenarios”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer and Communication Engineering, 2015. Tao Song, Wei wei Xia, Tiecheng Song, Lianfeng Shen, “A Cluster-Based Directional Routing Protocol in VANET”, 12th IEEE International Conference on Communication Technology (ICCT), 2010. Pranav Kumar Singh, Kapang Lego, Dr. Themrichon Tuithung, “Simulation based Analysis of Adhoc Routing Protocol in Urban and Highway Scenario of VANET”, International Journal of Computer Applications, 2011. Akhtar Husain and S.C. Sharma, “Simulated Analysis of Location and Distance Based Routing in VANET with IEEE802.11p”, “www.sciencedirect.com”, 2015. T. Sivakumar and R. Manoharan, “SRP: A Stable Routing Protocol for VANETs”, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 2016. Bhushan T.Dhok, AtulD.Deshmukh and Dr.S.S.Dorle, “Optimization of Cluster Based Routing Protocol Using Bee Colony Optimization for VANet”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Electronics and Communication Engineering (IJARECE), 2016. Omprakash Kaiwartya and Sushil Kumar, “Geocasting in Vehicular Adhoc Networks Using Particle Swarm Optimization”, ISDOC, 2014. Omprakash Kaiwartya and Sushil Kumar, “Enhanced Caching for Geocast Routing in Vehicular Ad Hoc Network”, “www.researchgate.com”, 2013. Wantanee Viriyasitavat, Fan Bai and Ozan K. Tonguz. “UV-CAST: An Urban Vehicular Broadcast Protocol”, IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference, 2010. Ozan K.Tonguz, Nawaporn Wisitpongphan and Fan Bai, “DV-CAST: A DISTRIBUTED VEHICULAR BROADCAST PROTOCOL FOR VEHICULAR AD HOC NETWORKS”, IEEE Wireless Communications, 2010. Bijan Paul, Md. Ibrahim and Md. Abu Naser Bikas, “VANET Routing Protocols: Pros and Cons”, International Journal of Computer Applications, 2011. Qing Wang, Supeng Leng and Yan Zhang, “An IEEE 802.11p-Based Multichannel MAC Scheme With Channel Coordination for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks”, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, 2012.

219