{"title":"A simulation study on the stability-oriented routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks","authors":"N. Meghanathan","doi":"10.1109/WOCN.2006.1666628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We present an extensive ns-2 (K. Fall and K. Varadhan) simulation-based performance comparison of three widely known stability-oriented mobile ad hoc network routing protocols: associativity-based routing (ABR) protocol (C-K Toh, 1997), flow-oriented routing protocol (FORP) (W. Su et al., 2001) and route assessment based routing (RABR) protocol (S. Agarwal et al., 2000). The order of the ranking of the protocols in terms of the packet delivery ratio and the number of route transitions is as follows: FORP, RABR, and ABR. The order of ranking in terms of the average hop count per route and end-to-end delay per packet is: ABR, RABR, and FORP. Thus, we see a stability-delay tradeoff within the class of stability-oriented routing protocols","PeriodicalId":275012,"journal":{"name":"2006 IFIP International Conference on Wireless and Optical Communications Networks","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2006 IFIP International Conference on Wireless and Optical Communications Networks","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/WOCN.2006.1666628","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16
Abstract
We present an extensive ns-2 (K. Fall and K. Varadhan) simulation-based performance comparison of three widely known stability-oriented mobile ad hoc network routing protocols: associativity-based routing (ABR) protocol (C-K Toh, 1997), flow-oriented routing protocol (FORP) (W. Su et al., 2001) and route assessment based routing (RABR) protocol (S. Agarwal et al., 2000). The order of the ranking of the protocols in terms of the packet delivery ratio and the number of route transitions is as follows: FORP, RABR, and ABR. The order of ranking in terms of the average hop count per route and end-to-end delay per packet is: ABR, RABR, and FORP. Thus, we see a stability-delay tradeoff within the class of stability-oriented routing protocols
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
