International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

Volume 01 No.1, Issue: 01 JULY 2012

Performance Evaluation of AODV, DSR and DSDV for Congestion Control in Wireless Sensor Networks
R. B. Dravida Priyaa (M.E CCE), SNS College of Technology, Coimbatore.
Abstract In recent years, Wireless Sensor
Networks plays a vital role in various fields. Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) have emerged as an important new area in wireless technology. Wireless sensor network consists of numerous tiny sensors deployed at high density in regions requiring surveillance and monitoring. There are many existing protocols, techniques and concepts from traditional wireless networks, such as cellular network, mobile ad-hoc network, wireless local area network and Bluetooth are applicable and still used in wireless sensor networks. In WSNs, packet loss occurs due to congestion. In WSN, congestion detection and congestion control are the major research areas. It is important to design protocols for controlling congestion. As wireless sensor networks are evolving to applications where high load demands dominate and performance becomes a crucial factor, congestion remains a serious problem that has to be effectively and efficiently tackled. Congestion in WSNs is mitigated wither by reducing the data load or by increasing capacity (employing sleep nodes). The design of routing protocols for WSNs must consider the power and resource limitation of network nodes, The time varying quality of wireless channels and packet loss and delay. Protocols like AODV, DSR and DSDV have been proposed. Simulation results show that AODV performs better in the case of throughput, average end-to-end delay and packet delivery ratio, whereas DSR performs better in the case of packet drops. Keyword: AODV, DSR, DSDV, Wireless Sensor Networks, Performance Evaluation. efficient as possible and rely on their large number to obtain high quality results. Network protocols must be designed to achieve fault tolerance in the presence of individual node failure while minimizing energy consumption. In addition, since the limited wireless channel bandwidth must be shared among all the sensors in the network, routing protocols for these networks should be able to perform local collaboration to reduce bandwidth requirements. Communication between the sensor nodes and the base station is expensive, and there are no high energy nodes through which communication can proceed. The goal of this paper is to carry out a systematic performance of three dynamic routing protocols for WSN, Ad-hoc On Demand Distance Vector Protocol (AODV), Dynamic Source Routing Protocol (DSR) and Destination Sequenced Distance Vector Protocol (DSDV) in wireless sensor networks using NS2.

II ROUTING OBJECTIVES
Some sensor network applications only require the successful delivery of messages between a source and destination. However, there are applications that need even more assurance. These are the real-time requirements of the message delivery, and in parallel, the maximization of network lifetime.

I INTRODUCTION
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) are defined as an autonomous, adhoc system consisting of collection of networked sensor nodes designed to intercommunicate via wireless radio. These are small with sensing, computations and wireless networking capabilities and as such these networks represent the convergence of important technologies. Sensor networks can contain hundreds or thousands of sensing nodes. It is desirable to make these nodes as cheap and energy

i) Non-Real Time Delivery: The assurance of message delivery is indispensable for all routing protocols. It means that the protocol should always find the route between the communicating nodes, if it really exists. This correctness property cab be very proven in a formal way, while the average case performance can be evaluated by measuring the message delivery ratio. ii) Real Time Delivery: Some applications require that a message must be delivered within a specified time to a location, otherwise the message becomes useless or its information content is decreasing after the time bound. Therefore, the main objective of these protocols is to completely control the network delay. Page 1

International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

www.ijccts.org

International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

Volume 01 No.1, Issue: 01 JULY 2012

iii) Network Lifetime: The protocol objective is crucial for the networks, where the application must run on sensor nodes as long as possible. The protocols aiming this concern try to balance energy consumption equally among nodes considering their residual energy levels. However, the metric used to determine the network lifetime is also dependent. Most protocols assume that every node is equally important and they use the time until the first node dies as a metric, or the average energy consumption of the nodes as another metric. If nodes are not equally important, then the time until the last or high priority nodes die as a reasonable metric. III SIMULATION MODEL Simulation Area Model Transmitting Power Receiving Power Transmission Range Number of nodes Antenna Model Network Interface Type MAC Type Routing Type Interface Queue Type 500*500 Energy 0.660 0.396 250m to 450m 50 Omni Antenna Phy/ Wireless Phy 802.11 AODV, DSR, DSDV Queue/DropTail

Each node also maintains information about its reachable neighbors with bi-directional connectivity. Whenever a node (router) receives a request to send a message, it checks its routing table to see if a route exists. Each routing table entry consists of the following fields: a) Destination address b) Next Hop address c) Destination Sequence number d) Hop Count

V DYNAMIC SOURCE ROUTING (DSR) PROTOCOL

DSR is based on source routing, which means that the originator of nodes through which the packet must pass while travelling to the destination. The DSR protocol consists of two basic mechanisms: Route Discovery and Route Maintenance. a) Route Discovery Route discovery is used only when a source node attempts to send a packet to a destination node and does already know a route to it. To initiate the Route Discovery, the source node transmits a Route Request with a unique ID as a single local broad cast packet. When come intermediate mode receives this route request, at first it determines whether it has seen the route request or not. If the node is already seen the route request earlier, it will discard the packet. Otherwise, it will check its Route Cache whether there is a route to the destination of the packet. If it has the route to the target in its routing cache, it returns a route reply to the initiator of the route discovery, giving a copy of the accumulated route record from the route request. Otherwise, it transmits the route request until the route request is received by the target. b) Route Maintenance

IV AD-HOC ON-DEMAND DISTANCE VECTOR ROUTING (AODV) PROTOCOL

In AODV, each node maintains two separate counters: 1. Sequence number, a monotonically increasing counter used to maintain freshness information about the reverse route to the source. 2. Broadcast-ID, which is incremented whenever the source issues a new route request (RREQ) message.

DSR protocol implements the route maintenance mechanisms while communicating the packets from source node to the destination node. In this scenario, DSR protocols uses the route mechanisms, to detect any other possible known route towards the destination to transmit data. If the route maintenance fails to find an alternative known route to establish the communication then it will invoke the route discovery to find the new route to the destination.

Page 2
International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

www.ijccts.org

International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

Volume 01 No.1, Issue: 01 JULY 2012

delay.

VI DESTINATION SEQUENCED DISTANCE VECTOR ROUTING (DSDV) PROTOCOL

It is table driven routing protocol based on Bellman-Ford routing algorithm with certain improvements. Every mobile station maintains a routing table that lists all available destinations, the number of hops to reach the destination and the sequence assigned by the destination node. The sequence number is used to distinguish stale routes from new ones and thus avoid the formation of loops. The stations periodically transmit their routing tables to their immediate neighbors. A station also transmits its routing table if a significant change has occurred in its routing table from the last update sent. So, the update is both time-driven and event driven.

Fig.1. Average End-to-End Delay Vs Number of b) Packet Drop

DSR packet drop very low when compared to DSDV and AODV. Drop rate is more at less number of sources in the case of DSDV. Drop rate is almost constant in AODV irrespective of varying load. Hence DSR outperforms DSDV & AODV.

VII SIMULATION RESULTS & CONCLUSION a) Comparison of Delay

Simulations were run for varying number of packets with constant packet size. The results shows that the delay of DSR is slightly less than AODV and DSDV for increasing number of packets, the delay is more for DSDV for lower number of packets. According to the above result, it can be said that AODV outperforms DSR for more number of sources or for more network traffic and DSR performs better even though increasing number of packet in terms of

Nodes

Fig.2. Total Packet Drop Vs Number of Nodes

Page 3
International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

www.ijccts.org

International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

Volume 01 No.1, Issue: 01 JULY 2012

c) Packet Delivery Ratio

The ratio of the number of packets originated by the application layer to the number of packets received. The results show that DSDV outperforms DSR and AODV especially when the

Fig.4. Received Packet Rate Vs Number of Nodes VIII CONCLUSION

In this paper, Wireless sensor routing protocols like AODV, DSR and DSDV has been implemented using NS-2.33 and the various performance parameters like Packet delivery ratio, Packet received rate, Total dropped packets, Average End-to-End delay has been compared. DSDV uses the proactive table driven routing strategy whereas DSR uses the reactive on-demand routing strategy with different routing mechanisms. Experimental results showed that AODV perform better for packet delivery ratio as well as throughput. It is also showed that DSR performs better packet received rate for nodes less than 10, but for nodes more than 10, AODV perform better than DSR and DSDV. DSR outperformed than AODV and DSDV for total dropped packets. AODV performs better than DSR and DSDV for average end-to-end delay. The future work is to compare the proposed protocol and the other classes of Ad-Hoc routing protocols with different simulation parameters and metrics.

number of nodes are between 15 and 30.

Fig.3. Packet Delivery Ratio Vs Number of Nodes d) Received Packets

AODV, DSDV and DSR protocols for Received Packets with varying numbers of nodes of 5,10 and 15. From figure it is observed that for small number of nodes up to 10 numbers, the performance of DSR protocol have better performance than AODV & DSDV protocols but for more numbers of nodes that is more than 10 nodes, the performance of AODV protocol have better performance than DSR & DSDV protocol.

References
1. Charalambos Sergiou and Vasos Vassiliou, (2010), DAlPAS: A Performance Aware Congestion Control Algorithm in Wireless Sensor Networks, IEEE transaction. Chonggang Wang1, Kazem Sohraby1, Victor Lawrence2, Bo Li3, Yueming Hu4,(2006), Priority-based Congestion Control in Wireless Sensor Networks, Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Sensor Networks. Charles E. Perkins, Pravin Bhagwat, (1994), Highly dynamic DestinationSequenced Distance Vector routing (DSDV) for mobile computers, In proceedings of the SIGCOMM '94 Conference on Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications, pp 234-244. De Marco, F. Postiglione, M. Longo, (2004), Run-time adjusted congestion control for multimedia: experimental results, Journal of Interconnection Networks (JOIN), vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 249266.

2.

3.

4.

Page 4
International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

www.ijccts.org

International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

Volume 01 No.1, Issue: 01 JULY 2012

5.

C.T. Ee and R. Bajcsy,(2004), Congestion Control and Fairness for Many-to-one Routing in Sensor Networks, in Proc.ACM Sensys.

6.

B. Hull, K. Jamieson, and H. Balakrishnan, (2004), Mitigating Congestion in Wireless Sensor Networks, in Proc. ACM Sensys. 7. M. Ishizuka and M. Aida,(2004), Performance Study of Node Placement in Sensor Networks In Proceedings of the 24th international Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops - W7: EC (ICDSCW'04) Volume 7. 8. Le D. Johnson, D.Maltz, (1996), Dynamic source routing in ad-hoc wireless networks, In proceddings of Mobile Computing, Chapter 5. 9. Josh Broch, David Johnson and David Maltz, (1998), The dynamic source routing in mobile ad-hoc networks, IETF. 10. J. Kang, Y. Zhang, and B. Nath, Tara: Topology-aware resource adaptation to alleviate congestion in sensor networks, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 919931. 11. Mohammad Z. Ahmad and Damla Turgut,(2008), Congestion Avoidance and Fairness in Wireless Sensor Networks, Published in the IEEE GLOBECOM proceedings. 12. N. Pekergin, 1998, Stochastic Bounds on Delays of Fair Queueing Algorithms. Technical Report PRISM, UVSQ 10, Universite de Versailles-St-Quentin.

13. Rong Pan, Balaji Prabhakar, and Konstantinos Psounis,2000, CHOKe, A Stateless Active Queue Management Scheme for Approximating Fair Bandwidth Allocation. IEEE INFOCOM, Mar 2000. 14. C. Sergiou, V. Vassiliou, A. Pitsillides,(2007), Reliable Data Transmission in Event-based Sensor Networks during Overload Situation, in Proc. of the 2nd International Workshop on Performance Control in Wireless Sensor Networks (PWSN 2007), Austin, Texas. 15. R.Then Malar,(2010), Congestion Control in Wireless Sensor Networks Based MultiPath Routing In Priority Rate Adjustment Technique, Published in International Journal of Advanced Engineering & Applications. 16. C. Tien Ee, R. Bajcsy,(2004), Congestion Control and Fairness for many-to-one Routing in Sensor Networks, In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems. 17. C.-Y. Wan, S. B. Eisenman, and A. T. Campbell, (2003) CODA: congestion detection and avoidance in sensor networks, in SenSys 03: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Embedded networked sensor systems. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press, pp. 266279. 18. N.S.M. Usop, A.Abdullah, A.F.A.Abidin, (2009), Performance evaluation of AODV, DSR and DSDV routing protocol in grid environment, IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, Vol. 9, pp 261-268.

Page 5
International Journal Of Communication And Computer Technologies

www.ijccts.org