5. Simulation and Performance Evaluation 5.

1 Simulation Environment: The performance of protocol before and after improved has been compared on NS-2.34 under LINUX (Fedora 14) environment. We have implemented our propose R2 routing protocol by modifying the standard AODV routing protocol of NS-2.34. We have also implemented HPSQR in NS-2.34. The simulation result of AODV, HPSQR have compared with R2 routing result to prove that the performance of the proposed scheme surpass those. 5.1.1 Movement Model: The random way point model is used to generate node movements. We have used setdest command of NS-2.34 for generating scenario file for different no of nodes for a rectangular area for 600 m * 600 m. The required parameters for movement modeling are mentioned in the parameter table 1. 5.1.2 Network size and communication model: The network size for different number of mobile nodes is in a rectangular area of size 600m* 600m. Node uses Constant Bit Rate (CBR) traffic type over a UDP connection between randomly chosen sourcedestination pairs. For connection pattern generation we use cbrgen.tcl file by using the required parameters of the simulation parameter table 1.

Parameter Simulator Protocol Simulation area Simulation time Number of nodes Node movement model Maximum speed Pause time Transport layer Mac layer Traffic type Data packet Bandwidth Sending rate System Loss factor Channel type Radio propagation model Antenna type Initial Energy Transmitted power

Value NS-2.34 AODV 600*600 m 200 sec 60 Random waypoint 5, 10, 15 ms-1 2, 3, 4 sec UDP IEEE 802.11 DCF CBR (UDP) 512 Bytes/packet 2 Mbps 6 packet/sec 1

6Kj

5.2 Metrics of focus The most focusing, crucial and common benchmark metrics like packet delivery ratio, throughput, endto-end delay, normalized routing overhead, energy consumption and network lifetime are visualized to presents the overall performance of the R2 routing protocol.

5.2.1 Packet delivery ratio: It is the ratio of the data packets received by the destination to the data packets sent by the sources 5.2.2 Throughput: The throughput metric indicates the reliability, effectiveness, efficiency and consistency of the routing protocol. Throughput is the ratio of the packets delivered to the total number of packets sent. 5.2.3 End-to-end delay The end-to-end delay measures the average delay for a data packet when travelling from a source node to a destination node. It considers route discovery delay, different interfacing delay, queuing delay, propagation delay and transmission delay of data packets. It designates the successful packet sending time from source node to destination node via forwarder node. 5.2.4 Normalized routing overhead The normalized routing overhead is defined as the ratio of the total number of delivery packets to the total number of routing packets generated throughout the network. 5.2.5 Energy consumption: Energy consumption measures the average energy drop rate for each node. Lower energy consumption indicates higher life time of a node. 5.2.6 Network lifetime: The minimum time of a node is alive in the network represents the network lifetime.

5.3 Simulation results We compare the performance of the routing protocol by focusing two main network constraints of mobile nodes; one is for time varying mobility speed of mobile nodes how the protocol behaves and another is in different no of link failure environment how the protocol behaves.

5.3.1 Varying node mobility speed