International Journal of EmergingTrends & Technology in Computer Science(IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com

Volume 3, Issue 2, March April 2014 ISSN 2278-6856


Volume 3, Issue 2 March April 2014 Page 237


Abstract: A mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is a multi-
hop wireless network with dynamically moving topology. With
the improvement of MANET technology, various routing
protocols have been proposed over the years with minimum
control overhead and network resources. AODV is the most
popular routing protocol among others. It is a single path,
loop free, On-demand type routing protocol and its
performance is improved than other routing protocols in
MANET environment. However, single path construct is
considered one of the major drawbacks of AODV. Also, it has
additional routing overhead both at the time of route
discovery and route repair. In the networks with light traffic
and low mobility AODV scales flawlessly to the larger
networks with low bandwidth and storage overhead. But in
networks with dense traffic, a big number of routes will break
resulting in frequent route discoveries and error reports in
the network, which is an overhead. The mobile nodes in
MANET have restricted resources such as battery power,
limited bandwidth which the single path protocols cannot
handle powerfully. Thus routing is a dynamic issue in the
design of a MANET. Multipath routing permits the
construction of multiple paths between a single sources to
destination node. Researchers have proposed many multipath
extensions of AODV protocol to establish reliable
communication and ensure better load balancing than the
traditional protocol. This paper reviews some multipath
extensions of AODV routing protocol and a comparative
study is done. There is no frontrunner of the comparison, but
there are essential implications for researchers who will
design new routing protocols in future.

Keywords: MANET, Multipath Extensions, Routing
Protocols, AODV, AODV-BR, SMORT, AOMDV and
AODVM.

1. INTRODUCTION
Mobile AD hoc Network (MANET) concept is developed
recently to convoy the increasing demand on mobile and
permeating access to network resources, specially the
internet. Thus, MANET is a key part in the next
generation network construction in which the wireless
internet will be complicated. A MANET is a collection of
mobile nodes that form a dynamic topology and highly
resource constrained network, Unlike Wireless LAN
which is a single hop and an infrastructure-based
network, MANET is considered a multi-hop and an
infrastructure less network which means that MANETs
operate without provision of any fixed infrastructure or
centralized supervision.
In MANETs, mobile node are arbitrary and dynamically
connected to form a network depending on their positions
and transmission ranges. A node in MANETs is an
autonomous terminal which means that it function as
both a host and a router. Nodes must cooperate to provide
connectivity in a multi-hop manner and this is the
reason why MANETs are called multi-hop networks.
Routing issue is one of the most challenging and
interesting research areas in MANETs. Generally, the
main function of routing in a network is to detect and
maintain the optimal route to send data packets between a
source and destination via intermediate node. Multipath
routing concept is a new trend addressed in so many
extensions to traditional routing protocols in MANETs.
Generally, multipath routing is considered as an
advantage due to easy recovery from a route failure, and
thus multipath protocols are considered more reliable and
robust then single path protocols. In a broad sense,
multipath routing enables route reliability and also
facilitates load balancing which are commonly used in
several application, especially in routing fault tolerance
and Quality of Service provisioning for heavy multimedia
and real-time traffic. Both single path and multipath
routing protocols in MANETs usually consist of two main
processes, Route Discovery Process (RDP) and Route
Maintenance Process (RMP). Most extensions to
traditional routing protocols in MANETs try to optimize
either RDP or RMP, or both.

2. ROUTING IN MANET
Routing protocols offered in MANETs are settled so as to
handle topology changes sound but they may have huge
control overhead which is the primary challenge in
making a protocol effective. Different types of routing
protocols are obtainable in Fig.1

Figure 1 Basic categories of MANET routing protocols

Pro-active protocols (or table-driven protocols) work in a
way similar to wired networks: they try to retain an up-to-
date map of the network, by constantly evaluating known
routes and attempting to determine new ones. This way,
when a path to a destination is desired at a node, or a
RELATIVE STUDY OF MULTIPATH
EXTENSIONS OF AODV

Vishal Patel
1
, Prof. Amit Lathigara
2


1
RK University, School of Engineering, CE Department
Bhavnagar Road, Rajkot 360002, India

2
RK University, School of Engineering, HOD CE Department
Bhavnagar Road, Rajkot 360002, India
International Journal of EmergingTrends & Technology in Computer Science(IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 2, March April 2014 ISSN 2278-6856


Volume 3, Issue 2 March April 2014 Page 238


packet needs to be forwarded, the route is previously
known and there is no extra delay due to route discovery
[3].
Re-active protocols (on-demand protocols) only start a
route detection procedure when needed. When a route
from a source to a destination is desired than route
discovery process is start. This does not require the
constant updates being sent through the network. . In
some cases the desired route(s) are still in the route cache
maintained by nodes. When this is the case there is no
additional delay since routes do not have to be exposed. It
is the responsibility of the route request receiver node to
give reply back to the source node for the possible route to
the destination. The source node uses this path for data
transmission to the destination [3].

4 AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL
AODV routing protocol design for mobile ad-hoc
network. AODV is modified version of DSDV routing
protocol. AODV is ability to unicast and multicast
routing. AODV builds route between nodes only on
demand by source node. It is self-starting and extent to
huge number of mobile node
4.1 Route Discovery
When a source node requests a route to a destination for
which it does not previously have a route, it broadcasts a
route request (RREQ) packet the network. Nodes
receiving this packet update their information for the
source node and set up backwards pointers to the source
node in the route tables. In addition to the source node's
IP address, current sequence number, and broadcast ID,
the RREQ also contains the most present sequence
number for the destination of which the source node is
responsive. A node receiving the RREQ may send a route
reply (RREP) if it is either the destination or if it has a
route to the destination with corresponding sequence
number greater than or equal to that contained in the
RREQ. If this is the case, it unicast a RREP back to the
source. Otherwise, it rebroadcasts the RREQ. Nodes
continue track of the RREQ's source IP address and
broadcast ID. If they receive a RREQ which they have
already processed, they discard the RREQ and do not
forward it [4].
4.2 Route Reply
As the RREP propagates back to the source, nodes set up
onward pointers to the destination. Once the source node
receives the RREP, it may start to forward data packets to
the destination. If the source node receives a RREP
having a larger sequence number with a smaller hop
count, it may inform its routing information for that
destination and start using the upgraded path [4].
4.3 Route Maintenances
Only if the route remains dynamic, it will remain to be
maintained. A route is active as long as there are data
packets hardly transmitting from the source to the
destination along that path. Once the source halts sending
data packets, the links will time out and at last be deleted
from the agent node routing tables. If a link failure occurs
while the route is dynamic, the node upstream of the halt
propagates a route error (RERR) message to the source
node to advise it of the now faraway destination(s). When
receiving the RERR, if the source node still wants the
route, it can reconstruct route detection [4].

5 MULTIPATH EXTENSIONS OF AODV
AOMDV (Ad Hoc on-demand Multipath Distance Vector
Routing) is fundamentally multipath extensions on top of
AODV. The route discovery process has been changed to
support multiple paths. They pressure on link disjoint
ness of multiple paths such that the paths may share
nodes but no edges. Also the loop freedom stuff of paths
is definite by using sequence numbers of nodes. After
mentioning link disjoint ness with a high importance, it is
curious that the authors prefer to use one path at a time
rather than concurrent usage of multiple paths. Their
reason to choose single path at a time is the requirement
of addressing issues, splitting traffic along each path and
packet reordering at the destination. And as a different
characteristic of AOMDV than AODV, the usage of
periodic HELLO messages to discover stale paths can be
revealed [5].
The AODV-BR (Backup Routing in Ad Hoc Networks)
protocol is created on AODV and conserves multiple
paths. After the broadcast of route request, the multiple
paths are recognized during route reply phase. Also a
mesh is designed from the overheard packets and the
neighboring nodes are verified as the next hops to
destination in equivalent nodes alternate route table.
Another paths are use only when the main link fails and
to prevent packets tracing a loop, the mesh nodes forward
a data packet only if the packet is not from their next hop
to destination. Since one path is used at a given time,
AODV-BR is not a genuine multipath idea. There is no
concurrent usage of multiple paths [6].
AODVM (Ad Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing
Multipath) has variations on top of AODV to allow
multiple node disjoint paths. The variations are typically
to route request and reply processes while route recovery
and maintenance are related to AODVs. Only the
destination node replies to a request to ensure node
disjoint ness. Rather than edge disjoint ness, node disjoint
ness is selected on resolve due to the fact that multiple
paths passing through one crossing node might fail
concurrently upon that nodes failure. This is of course a
valid concern and significant issue to discourse from the
reliability point of view. Also, the authors note that as the
distance between source and destination is amplified, the
number of paths connecting them is very limited even at
moderate node densities. So trying to achievement the use
of these paths will be useful for routing concerns and
issues. The main purpose AODVM is to primarily
project a multipath routing structure for providing
improved robustness to node failures. In order to offer
the reliability of paths, AODVM presents reliable path
segments, which is formed by reliable nodes. They
International Journal of EmergingTrends & Technology in Computer Science(IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 2, March April 2014 ISSN 2278-6856


Volume 3, Issue 2 March April 2014 Page 239


succeed their goal and confirm it with simulations [7].
SMR (Split Multipath Routing) founds and uses multiple
paths of maximally disjoint routes. The main purpose
behind this strict maximally disjoint ness idea is to
prevent certain nodes from being congested. In route
discovery phase, the intermediate nodes do not reply even
if they have a path to destination. This is due to the
algorithm of [SMR] which is based on selection of paths
by destination node only. The duplicate route requests are
not dropped if they are received from a different incoming
link and whose hop count is less than or equal to the link
from which the first received request. Then the
destination chooses two maximally disjoint paths from
which many received. The route maintenance is started in
one of two cases: start the route discovery process when
any route of the session is shattered or start route
discovery process only when both routes of the session are
shattered. In [SMR], after stating that two paths will be
chosen by the destination, the authors say that the number
of paths may be changed to a higher number. But it is
problematic that the algorithm will be accessible in that
case. Because the maximally disjoint path selection by the
destination will need a long time and greater handling
power to select more than two paths [8].

Table 5 Comparative analysis of Protocols
Protocols
Route
Selectio
n
Route
Reconfigura
tion
Stored
Information
Advanta
ges
AODV
Newest
and
shortest
path
Deleteroute,
Informsource
Next hop for
desired
destination
Flexible
to highly
dynamic
topologie
s
AOMDV
Newest
&
First
available
Route
Deleteroute,
Informsource
Next hop,last
hop, hop
count
for desired
destination
Low
inter-
nodal
coordinat
ion
overhead.
AODV-
BR
Newest
&
shortest
path
Local repair,
Informsource
& neighbors
Next hop,
number of
hops,
destination
Better
throughp
ut
Performa
ncethan
AODV
AODVM
Strictly
node
disjoint,
selected
by
destinatio
n
Deleteroute,
Informsource
SourceId,
Next hop, last
hop, hop
count
Efficient
Load
Balancin
g
SMR
Shortest
Delay
Routes
selected
at
destinatio
n.
Two options;
recover even
a
singlebreak
occurs or
only when
both fails
source ID and
unique
sequence
number
minimizi
ng
route
recovery
process
and
control
message
overhead

6. CONCLUSIONS
Multipath routing protocols have been recommended for
mobile ad hoc networks throughout years. Multipath
routing can offer load balancing and reduce the frequency
of route discovery mechanism effectively in comparison to
their single path equivalents. Researchers have made
massive progress in ad hoc networks, but uncertainty
remains regarding the fact that which of them has an
overall higher performance. Many multipath extensions
of AODV have been suggested. However, we cannot
make a comparative study amongst these protocols,
basically because there are several limitations in each of
them and it is difficult to choose the best of them all. This
paper strives to study these extensions based on their
characteristics and compares them with respect to the
described comparison framework. The table that holds all
the comparative data is shown above.

References
[1] Arti and Dr. S. S. Tyagi, International Journal of
Advanced Research in Computer Science and
Software Engineering, Volume 3 , Issue 5 , May
2013 ISSN: 2277 128X.
[2] Simmi Jain, Prof.Hitesh Gupta, Prof.Mukesh Kumar
Baghel, Survey on MANET Routing Protocol and
proposed Multipath Extension in AODV, Volume 2,
Issue 7, July 2012 ISSN: 2277 128X.
[3] Aarti Bairagi , Shweta Yadav, A Proposed Route
Selection Method in AODV Routing Protocol for
MANET Volume 3, Issue 2, April 2013
[4] Joo-Han song, Vincent Wong and Victor Leung,
efficient on-demand for mobile ad-hoc wireless
access network
[5] M. K. Marina and S. R. Das. On-demand multipath
distance vector routing in ad hoc networks,
Proceedings IEEE ICNP, pages 1423, 2001.
[6] S.-J. Lee and M. Gerla, AODV-BR: Backup Routing
in Ad hoc Networks, In Proceedings of IEEE
WCNC 2000, Chicago, IL, Sep. 2000.
[7] Ye, Z., Krishnamurthy S.V., and Tripathi, S.K., A
Framework for Reliable Routing in Mobile Ad hoc
Networks, IEEE INFOCOM 2003.
[8] S. Lee and M. Gerla. Split multipath routing with
maximally disjoint paths in ad hoc networks,
Proceedings IEEE ICC, pages 32013205, 2001.