1
Traffic Differentiating Queue For Enhancing AODV
Performance in Real-Time Interactive applications
Allaa R. Hilal1 , Amal El-Nahas1 , Ahmed Bashandy2 , and Samir Shahin2
1 German University in Cairo, New Cairo, Cairo, Egypt
2 Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
Abstract— The phenomenal growth rate of Voice over IP
applications is fueling the demand of bridging the gap be-
tween real-time QoS guarantees and QoS in ad hoc networks.
Multimedia applications are designed for stable networks, with
unstable mobile ad-hoc networks presenting a challenge for such
applications. Real-time applications require mechanisms that
guarantee bounded delay and delay jitter. This paper proposes
a Traffic Differentiating Queue (TDQ) for AODV to provide
higher QoS guarantees for real-time interactive applications.
The popular object-oriented network simulator NS2 has been
used for the cross evaluation of the proposed TDQ-AODV. The
modified algorithm provides significant improvement over the
original algorithm in the average packet delay and throughput,
in which the average modification improvement reaches up to
1.5×. Moreover, jitter is generally reduced and stabilized over
the varying number of connections.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Ad hoc wireless networks are self-creating, self-organizing,
and self-administering. Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs)
are intrinsically fault-resilient because they do not operate
under the limitations of a fixed topology. These characteristics
of MANETs made them a suitable match for environments
of battlefield communications and disaster recovery. The easy
deployment and the high mobility of MANETs made them
attractive for commercial use. In recent days, home or small
office networking and collaborative computing with laptop
computers in a small area have emerged as other major areas
of potential application for MANETs. The evolution of the
multimedia technology and the commercial interest of the
industry to reach widely civilian applications made QoS in
MANETs an area of great interest [1], [2].
QoS routing is an important building block for QoS support
in MANETs. Although many solutions were proposed in
literature [2]–[4], still most of the QoS routing protocols
were derived from extensions to the existing routing protocols
to provide QoS features [5], [6]. Most of these protocols
are mainly concerned with bandwidth reservations and are
network-specific [6]–[9].
The routing protocol adaptability to topology changes is a
highly desirable feature which reduces the duration and the
frequency of interruptions resulting from route maintenance.
The Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) algorithm
is a dynamic, reactive, multi-hop routing protocol.
This work aims to enhance the performance of the highly
adaptive AODV routing protocols for the requirements of
real-time interactive application environment. The different
978-1-4244-3367-4/08/$25.00 ©2008 IEEE 378
streams traffic characteristics are studied leading to dividing
the network traffic to basically delay-sensitive and delay-
insensitive traffic. This paper proposes a Traffic Differentiating
Queue (TDQ) for AODV to provide higher QoS guarantees
for real-time interactive applications. The TDQ utilizes the
different traffic streams characteristics to adapt to the quality of
service needs of each stream. Moreover, the TDQ tries to avoid
the starvation of bulk data, thus, leading to better balanced
network. The popular object-oriented network simulator NS2
has been used for the cross evaluation of the proposed TDQ-
AODV verses the AODV.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section
II provides an introduction to the original AODV routing
algorithm followed by a brief review of its QoS extensions. A
study of the difference in traffic characteristics between bulk
and real-time data is offered in Section III. In Section IV, the
proposed TDQ-AODV algorithm is introduced. The simulation
setup and results are discussed in Section V. Finally, the
concluding remarks are presented in Section VI.
II. A D H OC O N -D EMAND D ISTANCE V ECTOR
The Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) al-
gorithm is a dynamic, on-demand-based, self-initiated, and
multi-hop routing protocol. AODV allows participating mobile
nodes, wishing to establish and maintain an ad hoc network,
to obtain routes quickly for new destinations. AODV provides
fast response and recovery to link breakages and changes in
the network topology. The operation of AODV is loop-free and
offers quick convergence when the ad hoc network topology
changes [10]. The AODV routing protocol is designed for
mobile ad hoc networks with populations of tens to thousands
of mobile nodes. Moreover, AODV is designed for use in
networks where the nodes can all trust each other. Further-
more, AODV reduces the dissemination of control traffic and
eliminates the overhead on data traffic to improve scalability
and performance.
A. AODV Operation
AODV basic operation involves two main phases: route
creation and route maintenance.
1) Route Creation in AODV: AODV starts the route cre-
ation phase whenever a route to a new destination is needed.
Figure 1(a) shows a mobile ad hoc network, where a source
node S needs to initiate communication with a destination
2

S RREQ RREP
S S
RREQ RREP
RREQ

RREQ

D D D
RREQ

(a) MANET example. (b) Source S broadcasts RREQ. (c) Intermediate node M uni-
casts RREP.

Fig. 1. Route creation in AODV.

node D. The mobile source node first broadcasts a route
request message (RREQ) to find a route to the destination.
The RREQ is forwarded through the network until it reaches
either the destination itself or an intermediate node with a
fresh enough route to the destination. A fresh enough route is a
valid route entry for the destination whose associated sequence
number is at least as large as that contained in the RREQ [10].
Figure 1(b) illustrates the broadcasting of the RREQ messages
through the ad hoc network until the route to the destination is
determined. In the given scenario in Figure 1(b), the route to
the destination is determined when an intermediate node with
a fresh enough route to the destination receives the RREQ
message. A route reply message (RREP) is unicasted back to
the source mobile node that originated the RREQ message, as
shown in Figure 1(c). The unicast route to the source node is
established as each node receiving the RREQ message caches
the upstream node as a route back to the originator of the
request. The RREP can be unicast from the destination along
a path to that originator, or likewise from any intermediate
node that is able to satisfy the request.
2) Route Maintenance in AODV: The route maintenance
phase in the AODV routing protocol is initiated whenever
a route between two end-nodes in active communication is
lost. Each node is responsible for monitoring the link status
of the next hops along the active routes. The node that is
responsible for monitoring the link will use a route error
(RERR) message to notify other nodes when the loss of
a link occurs. The RERR message indicates that routes to
destinations through that link are no longer valid and that those
destinations are unreachable through the broken link. Figure
2(a) and Figure 2(b) show an example scenario to illustrate
the route maintenance mechanism.
For this route failure reporting mechanism to be efficient,
instead of flooding the network with RERR messages, each
node keeps a precursor list containing the IP addresses for its
neighbors that are likely to use it as a next hop towards each
destination. Figure 2(c) illustrates the route failure notification
mechanism. The information in the precursor list is acquired
during the generation of a RREP message, which by definition
has to be sent to a node in a precursor list. After the source
node receives the RERR message, a RREQ message is again
flooded in search of a new route.
B. QoS Extensions of AODV
There are two main QoS extensions for AODV proposed in
the literature: QoS-AODV [6], [9] and AODV-based QoS [8].
1) QoS-AODV Routing Protocol: QoS-AODV [6], [9] is
designed to work in a TDMA network. This protocol combines
information from both the network and data link layers. QoS-
AODV incorporates path finding with the bandwidth reserva-
tion mechanism and is fully aware of the bandwidth resource
availability by coupling together the routing and MAC TDMA
layers.
The nodes in QoS-AODV compete for the slots contained
in the data phase of the TDMA frame. Each node keeps a
schedule, as a sequence of ones and zeros that represents the
corresponding slot in the data phase of the TDMA frame,
which contains information about both its own and its neighbor
time slots that are used for sending and receiving. The link
bandwidth information is used in the calculation of the path
bandwidth schedules to the source and destination nodes.
Modified AODV HELLO messages are used, which include
slot scheduling information.
2) AODV-Based QoS Routing Protocol: AODV-based QoS
routing protocol, presented in [8], establishes QoS routes with
reserved bandwidth on a per-flow basis in a TDMA network.
The AODV-based QoS routing protocol incorporates an al-
gorithm for calculating the end-to-end bandwidth on a path.

A C A C A C
R
ER
R

F F F
B E B E B E
R
RER
H H H
D D D
G G G

(a) AODV route maintenance. (b) AODV route maintenance link fail- (c) AODV route failure reporting mech-
ure. anism..

Fig. 2. Route maintenance in AODV.

379

This algorithm is included in the path discovery mechanism
of AODV to establish QoS routes. The protocol in [8] protects
active routes using soft-states, i.e., a timer is associated with
an active route at a node and is refreshed every time the route
is used. If the route is not used within a certain amount of
time and the timer expires, the corresponding entry in the
routing table is deleted. The protocol defines the five possible
states of a QoS route, which indicate whether the route exists,
and if so, if it is processed but not established, set-up and
used to forward packets, broken at the node upstream and
is being repaired, or broken at the node downstream and is
being repaired. Transitions between these states is done by
either receiving or transmitting a packet, or expiration of the
timer associated with the state.
III. T RAFFIC C HARACTERISTICS
For mobile ad hoc networks to take its worthy status
in deployment in our day-to-day life, it has to support the
applications used in the commercial market. Many kinds of
network traffic should first be integrated onto the same network
and share the network facilities between them. Each type
of network traffic has its own peculiar characteristics, and
therefore, needs to be treated differently from the others.
Network Traffic
Traditional traffic Multimedia Traffic
Batch Interactive Batch
Audio Audio
Fig. 3. Basic categorization of network traffic.
Network traffic can be divided, from a higher level of
abstraction, into traditional traffic and multimedia traffic, as
shown in Figure 3. Traditional traffic is the traffic stream
that supports data communications, i.e., file transfer or web
browsing. Traditional traffic can be divided basically into batch
traffic and interactive traffic. Batch traffic depends generally
on a client server approach where the client queries a data
transfer from the server to the client through a network like
FTP and HTTP protocols. However, interactive data traffic
results from the traffic scenarios that depend on frequent data
transmission from the two parties for the period of active
connection like SSH protocols. On the other hand, multimedia
traffic is the traffic stream that supports voice and video
communication. Multimedia traffic is also divided into batch
traffic and interactive traffic. An example of batch traffic is
multimedia downloads, while VoIP applications is an example
of interactive multimedia traffic.
A. The Conflicting Characteristics of Voice and Data Traffic
1) Call length: Traditionally, voice calls are on average
shorter than data transmission, which can last for many hours.
3
2) Flow control: The bandwidth required for voice is
dictated by the digitization technique. Voice traffic does not
need flow control since voice must be either handled at full
speed or stopped. On the other hand, data traffic must be
controlled since computers have an almost infinite capacity
(compared to the traditional link speed) for generating data
traffic [11].
3) Blocking characteristics: Data exists in discrete blocks
and are transmitted through the network in the form of packets
with variable sizes. By inspecting the characteristics of the
voice traffic, it is more or less continuous in nature. Voice
traffic is fragmented into smaller more frequent packets than
data traffic.
4) Acceptable transit delay characteristics: Batch data does
not have a problem with transit delays. On the other hand,
for voice traffic, an acceptable network delay is crucial for
guaranteing the real-time operation of voice calls. For an active
voice communication, a delayed packet has a worse effect than
a lost packet. Delayed voice packets consume bandwidth and
processing power while offering no use. For data, it is perfectly
acceptable for the data packet to experience a few seconds of
delay rather than losing the whole packet.
Jitter is the variation in the response time of the network
transmission. The variation of network delay may be annoy-
ing in the data traffic, however, it makes the voice traffic
impossible to understand. Voice traffic must be delivered to
the receiver at a steady uniform rate.
5) Error control: Errors in data traffic must be controlled
either by error detection and correction techniques or retrans-
mission for the recovery of the corrupted data. While, voice
Interactive
traffic can tolerate occasional errors or bursts of errors.
6) Balanced traffic: Most voice calls involve a two-way
conversation, thus, voice traffic is considered reasonably well-
Video balanced. On the other hand, traditional data traffic is a one
way traffic.
7) Data volume: Within all the communication traffic car-
ried over public communication lines, less than 20% of that
traffic is data traffic while the rest is multimedia traffic [11].
Thus, it can be concluded that the volume of voice traffic is
much greater than that of the data traffic.
B. Modeling of Network Traffic
Due to the conflicting characteristics of the diverse network
traffic, the network traffic can be basically divided into delay-
sensitive and delay-insensitive traffic. In this paper, delay-
insensitive traffic will be called bulk traffic and delay-sensitive
traffic will be called real-time traffic (rt-traffic).
IV. P ROPOSED T RAFFIC D IFFERENTIATING Q UEUE
In the original AODV routing algorithm, a single priority
queue is used as the routing output queue. The priority queue
basically gives higher priority to the control packets to be
scheduled for transmission and the same priority with first-
come-first-served approach to all other packets. This approach
leads to neglecting the difference in characteristics between
the different types of traffic.
380
4

To guarantee better quality of service for real-time traffic, of both queues remain unchanged since control packets have
this paper proposes a Traffic Differentiating Queue (TDQ) the ultimate priority to enable fast route establishment and
system. TDQ is an output routing queue added in each node maintenance.
between the routing and link layer. The TDQ algorithm aims Priority weight allocated to each queue guarantees the
to differentiate between the distinctive types of traffic by alternation of the control of the output port between both DS-
taking into consideration the quality of service requirements Q and DIS-Q. The alternation of the control of the output
of each traffic type. In the proposed real-time modification to port aims to avoid the starvation of bulk data, thus, leading to
the AODV routing algorithms, each node is equipped with better balanced networks. Since different packets of the same
a TDQ as an output routing queue. TDQ consists of two data stream may follow different routes, sufficient buffering is
first-come-first-served queues; a Delay-Sensitive Queue (DS- assumed at the destination nodes to decrease the jitter effect.
Q) and another Delay-InSensitive Queue (DIS-Q), as shown
in Figure 4. Real-time data that are delay-sensitive are added A. Traffic Differentiating Queue Advantages
to the DS-Q, while bulk data are added to the DIS-Q.
1) Low overhead: The TDQ provides a low overhead mod-
Routing Layer
ification to existing mobile ad hoc networks routing protocol.
TDQ
The TDQ algorithm operates with complexity O(1), thus, the
DS-Q TDQ does not present any overload on the existing resources;
Input Queue
processing computation, memory utilization, or power con-
Priority
Routing Classifier
based sumption.
Protocol scheduler
2) Transparent operation: From the point of view of the
routing protocol, TDQ operates as a black box with the same
DIS-Q
interfaces as the normal priority queue. Thus, the routing
protocol does not need to adapt in any way to the interface
with the TDQ.
Fig. 4. The network layer including the traffic differentiating queue.
3) Avoids packet starvation: The priority weight technique
proposed guarantees the alternation of the control of the output
When a packet is passed to the TDQ to be enqueued, the
port. This alternation of control enables all data flows to utilize
packet is first categorized according to its type of traffic flow.
the output port periodically. Thus, avoiding the overhead
The classifier first checks the content of the packet, afterwards,
of continuous retransmissions that might be issued by the
the classifier enqueues the packet in the corresponding queue.
bulk traffic source nodes, hence, better utilizing the available
Figure 5 shows the pseudocode for the TDQ enqueue function.
bandwidth and leading to a balanced network performance.
Receive enqueue event Receive dequeue event 4) Reduces end-to-end delay: The TDQ algorithm utilizes
Receive packet RECV-P If DQ-turn > 0 the fact that bulk data can tolerate some delay in delivery
If RECV-P is real-time DS-Q dequeue without degradation in performance, thus, TDQ give tempo-
DS-Q enqueue If DS-Q is empty
Qsize = DS-Q.size + DIS-Q.size DIS-Q dequeue rary priority to real-time data over bulk data. As a result, the
If Qsize < Qlimit DQ-turn = Max-Ratio end-to-end delay of delay-sensitive data is reduced, without
Drop tail (RECV-P) DQ-turn = Max-Ratio the overhead of retransmission of bulk data.
Else Else
DIS-Q enqueue DQ-turn –
Qsize = DS-Q.size + DIS-Q.size Else
If Qsize < Qlimit DIS-Q dequeue B. TDQ Priority Ratio Tradeoffs
Drop tail (RECV-P) If DIS-Q is empty The traffic differentiating queue algorithm has many ad-
DS-Q dequeue
DQ-turn – vantages, however, the performance of the TDQ is dependent
Else on the ratio between the priority weight of both queues;
DQ-turn = Max-Ratio DIS-Q and DS-Q. Delay-insensitive traffic models both the
guaranteed delivery traffic class and the basic traffic class. The
Fig. 5. The enqueue and the dequeue algorithm of the TDQ.
priority weight ratio given to the real-time traffic is bounded,
such that the retransmissions is not invoked due to delay.
The control of the output port depends on the weight
In case of high priority weight ratio given to the DS-Q,
assigned to each queue, thus, the queue with higher priority
retransmission due to packet delay will flood the network.
weight will have control of the port at the given time. Each
traffic queue, either DS-Q or DIS-Q, is assigned a certain
weight that varies with time. Initially, The weight of bulk data V. S IMULATION AND R ESULTS
is lower than that of real-time data to allow larger number of To evaluate the performance of the proposed modifications
real-time packets sent. When the DS-Q sends a packet, the DS- for the AODV routing protocol in MANETs, NS2 simulations
Q priority weight is decreased, hence, after the DS-Q transmits are used to emulate a real-time application environment. The
max-ratio packets over the output port, the assigned DS-Q simulated scenarios consist of 100 nodes moving in an area
priority weight decreases below the DIS-Q priority weight, of 1000 × 1000m2 . Both IEEE 802.11 and either AODV or
thus, shifting the control of the output port to the DIS-Q. TDQ-AODV are used in the simulations as the MAC layer and
When control packets are sent to the output port, the weight routing protocols, respectively. The simulation time is set to

381
 5

200 seconds and the tracing is performed on the MAC, routing, average value of the performance metrics are evaluated in each
and transport layers. In this paper, CBR and TCP traffic types case. In all experiments performed, the weight priority ratio
are used to emulate the network traffic with different delay of the TDQ is set to 20:1, unless otherwise stated.
sensitivity. Figure 6 plots the results for the relative CBR delay,
Since the duration of the real-time sessions is relatively throughput, and jitter of the proposed TDQ-AODV with re-
long, traffic flow with a reasonable rate is natural to model spect to the original AODV algorithm for a low TCP traffic.
such flow. The CBR traffic is used to simulate the delay- The results in Figure 6 show that the proposed TDQ-AODV
sensitive traffic. The CBR traffic flow is set to have a packet outperforms the original AODV over all the values of real-
size of 80 bytes to represent the small packet size of such time connections tested, except for only one point in the jitter
flow resulting from the fragmentation of the multimedia traffic. plot in Figure 6(c). The only justification for the worsening
Moreover, the CBR traffic flow rate is set to 64kbps. On the jitter only in that point is due to the randomization used in
other hand, the bulk data flow is of less delay sensitivity. The generating the simulated scenarios which resulted in a special
TCP transport protocol provides reliable, error-free transfer scenario that favored AODV at this point. An interesting
mechanism, in-order delivery, flow control, and congestion point in Figure 6 is that the average improvement offered by
control, making it suitable for applications like file transfer and TDQ-AODV improves with increasing the number of real-time
e-mail. Moreover, TCP is the transport protocol that manages connections, thus, TDQ-AODV is more suitable for networks
the individual conversations between web servers and web that are heavily loaded with real-time connections.
clients. Since the TCP traffic is less delay subjective, it is Similar results for networks with high TCP traffic are
used in this work to represent bulk traffic. TCP traffic has plotted in Figure 7. Again it can be noticed that the proposed
larger packet sizes than the media traffic; the packet size is TDQ-AODV outperforms the original AODV algorithm in all
set to 512 bytes. Table I lists a summary of the parameters aspects, especially with a large number of real-time connec-
used in the simulations. tions present. Moreover, the fact that improvements are still
TABLE I
witnessed, even with higher TCP traffic, proves the advantages
S UMMARY OF THE SIMULATION PARAMETERS .
of the proposed modification for AODV.
In order to study the impact of the proposed TDQ-AODV
Parameter Value used on bulk data, the relative throughput of TCP traffic in TDQ-
Simulator NS2 over Cygwin environment
Number of nodes 100
AODV with respect to the original AODV is plotted in Figure
Channel Wireless Channel 8. The plots in Figure 8 show that the throughput of TCP traffic
MAC protocol IEEE 802.11 is higher for TDQ-AODV than the original AODV algorithm.
Routing protocol AODV
Traffic flows CBR and TCP
Moreover throughput improvement is even witnessed for the
Mobility 1 meter/sec average human speed high TCP scenario.
Transmission range 250m2
CBR rate 64 kbps
Area 1000 × 1000m2
Simulation type 200 seconds

For the set of simulations performed in this work, seven

CBR traffic scenarios are derived to emulate the different real-
time interactive traffic loads, each with a different number
of connections active during the time of simulation. In the
simulation setup, the number of VoIP connections is varied
from 10 to 99 for each scenario (10, 20, 30, 40, 60, 80,
and 99 connections). Moreover, light and heavy load TCP
traffic scenarios are added to emulate the different traffic types
available in real networks with the different QoS requirements.
For every scenario simulated, five runs are performed and the Fig. 8. TCP Relative throughput for ratio 1 to 20 low bulk traffic.

(a) CBR relative delay. (b) CBR relative throughput. (c) CBR relative jitter.

Fig. 6. Relative modification of TDQ-AODV with respect to AODV across a number of real-time connections for a low TCP traffic.

382
6
(a) CBR relative delay. (b) CBR relative throughput.
Fig. 7. Relative modification of TDQ-AODV with respect to AODV across a number of real-time connections for a high TCP traffic.
Another experiment is performed to find out the optimum
value of the weight priority ratio and the results are plotted in
Figure 9 for high TCP traffic. It should be noted that only the
results for the high TCP traffic scenarios of this experiment are
reported since they represent the limiting factor for the weight
priority ratio. The weight priority ratio is varied from 1:2 to
1:50 and the delay and throughput for CBR traffic, as well as
the TCP throughput are recorded in each case. These values
are then averaged over the number of real-time connections
under investigation. From Figure 9(a), it can be observed that
the CBR delay improves with increasing the weight priority
ratio, which is expected since increasing it gives more priority
to CBR traffic over TCP traffic. However, the improvement in
the CBR delay seems to saturate after the 1:20 ratio. Moreover,
the CBR throughput exhibits a bell-shaped behavior with a
maximum around the 1:10 and 1:20 ratios. Based on these two
observations, a ratio of 1:20 for the weight priority ratio would
be an optimum value. Another point of concern in selecting the
optimum ratio is to make sure that it does not have a negative
impact on the throughput of the TCP (bulk data) traffic. Figure
9(c) shows that for all the values tested for the weight priority
ratio, the TCP throughput of the TDQ-AODV is higher than
that of the original AODV. As a result, it can be concluded
that the 1:20 is an optimum value of the weight priority ratio.
VI. C ONCLUSION
This paper proposes a Traffic Differentiating Queue (TDQ)
for AODV to provide higher QoS guarantees for real-time
interactive applications. The traffic differentiating queue uti-
lizes the different traffic streams characteristics to adapt to the
quality of service needs of each stream. The proposed TDQ-
AODV results in lower average delay and higher throughput
than the original AODV protocol. The improvement is more
vivid for large active real-time connections, suggesting that
(a) CBR relative delay. (b) CBR relative throughput.
Fig. 9. Relative measurement of TDQ-AODV with respect to AODV for different weight priority ratios for a high TCP traffic.
383
(c) CBR relative jitter.
TDQ-AODV is more suitable for high load networks than the
original AODV. Moreover, TDQ-AODV has minimal impact
on the throughput of bulk data traffic. It was concluded that
the optimal value of the weight priority ratio is 1:20, resulting
in an average improvement of 23% and 11% for the delay
and throughput of real-time traffic, respectively, in a high TCP
network, while reducing the variations in jitter by 12% when
compared to the original AODV routing algorithm.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. Chkrabarti and A. Mishra, “QoS Issue in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks,”
IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 142–148, 2001.
[2] C. R. Lin and J.-S. Liu, “QoS Routing in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks,”
IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 1426–1438, 1999.
[3] E. Royer and C.-K. Toh, “A Review of Current Routing Protocols for Ad
Hoc Mobile Wireless Network,” IEEE Personal Commun. Mag., vol. 6,
no. 2, pp. 46–55, 2002.
[4] D. Dharmaraju, A. Roy-Chowdhury, P. Hovareshti, and J. Baras,
“INORA-A Unified Signaling and Routing Mechanism for QoS Support
in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks,” in Proc. Intl. Conf. on Parallel Processing
Workshops, 2002, pp. 86–93.
[5] P. Wang and W. Zhuang, “A Token-Based Scheduling Scheme for
WLANs and Its Performance Analysis,” in Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. on
Communications, 2007, pp. 3716–3721.
[6] I. Gerasimov and R. Simon, “A Bandwidth-Reservation Mechanism for
On-Demand Ad Hoc Path Finding,” in Proc. IEEE Annual Simulation
Symp., 2002, pp. 27–33.
[7] I. Chlamtac, A. Farago, and H. Zhang, “Time-spread multiple-access
(TSMA) protocols for multihop mobile radio networks,” IEEE/ACM
Trans. Networking, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 804–812, 1997.
[8] C. Zhu and M. S. Corson., “ QoS routing for mobile ad hoc networks.” in
Proc. of the Twenty-First Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer
and Communications Societies INFOCOM, 2002, p. 958967.
[9] I. Gerasimov and R. Simon, “Performance analysis for ad hoc QoS
routing protocols,” in Proc. of the International Mobility and Wireless
Access Workshop, MobiWac, 2002, p. 8794.
[10] C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer, and S. Das, “Ad hoc on-demand distance
vector (aodv) routing,” RFC 3561, 2003.
[11] R. O. Onvural, Asynchronous Transfer Mode Networks: Performance
Issues,Second Edition. Artech House, Inc., 1995.
(c) TCP relative throughput.