Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing
01 Jul 2003-Vol. 3561, pp 1-37
TL;DR: A logging instrument contains a pulsed neutron source and a pair of radiation detectors spaced along the length of the instrument to provide an indication of formation porosity which is substantially independent of the formation salinity.
Abstract: The Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol is intended for use by mobile nodes in an ad hoc network. It offers quick adaptation to dynamic link conditions, low processing and memory overhead, low network utilization, and determines unicast routes to destinations within the ad hoc network. It uses destination sequence numbers to ensure loop freedom at all times (even in the face of anomalous delivery of routing control messages), avoiding problems (such as "counting to infinity") associated with classical distance vector protocols.
Citations
More filters
21 Jul 2001
TL;DR: A robust routing protocol that tolerates up to roughly 40% of variation in the transmission ranges of the mobile hosts and guarantees message delivery in a connected adhoc network whenever the ratio of the maximum transmission range to the minimum transmission range is at most √2.
Abstract: Several papers showed how to perform routing in ad hoc wireless networks based on the positions of the mobile hosts. However, all these protocols are likely to fail if the transmission ranges of the mobile hosts vary due to natural or man-made obstacles or weather conditions. These protocols may fail because in routing either some connections are not considered which effectively results in disconnecting the network, or the use of some connections causes livelocks. In this paper, we describe a robust routing protocol that tolerates up to roughly 40% of variation in the transmission ranges of the mobile hosts. More precisely, our protocol guarantees message delivery in a connected adhoc network whenever the ratio of the maximum transmission range to the minimum transmission range is at most √2.
173 citations
Cites background from "Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (A..."
...General TermsMobile omputing and Communi ations KeywordsWireless Networks, Ad Ho Networks, Routing 1....
[...]
20 Jun 2010
TL;DR: This paper compares Mobile Ad-Hoc network routing protocols DSDV, AODV and DSR using network simulator NS2.34 and the performance matrix includes PDR, Throughput, End to End Delay, Routing overhead.
Abstract: Mobile Ad-Hoc networks are highly dynamic networks characterized by the absence of physical infrastructure. Nodes of these networks functions as a routers which discovers and maintains the routes to other nodes in the network. In such networks, nodes are able to move and synchronize with their neighbors. Due to mobility, connections in the network can change dynamically and nodes can be added and removed at any time. In this paper, we are going to compare Mobile Ad-Hoc network routing protocols DSDV, AODV and DSR using network simulator NS2.34. We have compared the performance of three protocols together and individually too. The performance matrix includes PDR (Packet Delivery Ratio), Throughput, End to End Delay, Routing overhead. We are comparing the performance of routing protocols when packet size changes, when time interval between packet sending changes, when mobility of nodes changes.
173 citations
TL;DR: A survey of current research activities dealing with routing security, cooperation enforcement and key management in wireless ad hoc networks finds that existing solutions seem to only partially address the threats and fall short of providing a comprehensive answer.
Abstract: In wirelesss ad hoc networks basic network operations are carried out through the cooperation of all available nodes. Due to the inherent lack of a managed infrastructure the nodes of an ad hoc network cannot be considered as trustworthy as in a dedicated infrastructure. Wireless ad hoc networks are thus vulnerable to various exposures threatening the basic network operations like routing and packet forwarding. This paper presents a survey of current research activities dealing with routing security, cooperation enforcement and key management in wireless ad hoc networks. Existing solutions seem to only partially address the threats and fall short of providing a comprehensive answer. Wireless security mechanisms in layer 2 that are often considered as part of the solution domain do not meet the specific requirements of wireless ad hoc networks.
173 citations
TL;DR: This article tackles the problem of opportunistic data transfer in mobile ad hoc networks with a pure network layer scheme that can be built atop off-the-shelf wireless networking equipment, and test CORMAN and compare it to AODV, and observe significant performance improvement in varying mobile settings.
Abstract: The link quality variation of wireless channels has been a challenging issue in data communications until recent explicit exploration in utilizing this characteristic. The same broadcast transmission may be perceived significantly differently, and usually independently, by receivers at different geographic locations. Furthermore, even the same stationary receiver may experience drastic link quality fluctuation over time. The combination of link-quality variation with the broadcasting nature of wireless channels has revealed a direction in the research of wireless networking, namely, cooperative communication. Research on cooperative communication started to attract interests in the community at the physical layer but more recently its importance and usability have also been realized at upper layers of the network protocol stack. In this article, we tackle the problem of opportunistic data transfer in mobile ad hoc networks. Our solution is called Cooperative Opportunistic Routing in Mobile Ad hoc Networks (CORMAN). It is a pure network layer scheme that can be built atop off-the-shelf wireless networking equipment. Nodes in the network use a lightweight proactive source routing protocol to determine a list of intermediate nodes that the data packets should follow en route to the destination. Here, when a data packet is broadcast by an upstream node and has happened to be received by a downstream node further along the route, it continues its way from there and thus will arrive at the destination node sooner. This is achieved through cooperative data communication at the link and network layers. This work is a powerful extension to the pioneering work of ExOR. We test CORMAN and compare it to AODV, and observe significant performance improvement in varying mobile settings.
173 citations
Cites methods from "Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (A..."
...We measure the PDR, end-to-end delay, and delay jitter for both protocols and average them over the 5 repetitions of each scenario, as plotted in Figures 3, 4, and 5, respectively....
[...]
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that the performance of the three trust-based reactive routing protocols varies significantly even under similar attack, traffic, and mobility conditions, making them suitable for application in a particular extemporized environment.
Abstract: Ad hoc networks, due to their improvised nature, are frequently established in insecure environments and hence become susceptible to attacks. These attacks are launched by participating malicious nodes against different network services. Routing protocols, which act as the binding force in these networks, are a common target of these nodes. A number of secure routing protocols have recently been proposed, which make use of cryptographic algorithms to secure the routes. However, in doing so, these protocols entail a number of prerequisites during both the network establishment and operation phases. In contrast, trust-based routing protocols locate trusted rather than secure routes in the network by observing the sincerity in participation by other nodes. These protocols thus permit rapid deployment along with a dynamically adaptive operation, which conforms with the current network situation. In this paper, we evaluate the performance of three trust-based reactive routing protocols in a network with varying number of malicious nodes. With the help of exhaustive simulations, we demonstrate that the performance of the three protocols varies significantly even under similar attack, traffic, and mobility conditions. However, each trust-based routing protocol has its own peculiar advantage making it suitable for application in a particular extemporized environment.
172 citations
References
More filters
01 Mar 1997
TL;DR: This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents as well as providing guidelines for authors to incorporate this phrase near the beginning of their document.
Abstract: In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. Authors who follow these guidelines should incorporate this phrase near the beginning of their document:
3,501 citations
12 Nov 2001
TL;DR: In this article, a logging instrument contains a pulsed neutron source and a pair of radiation detectors spaced along the length of the instrument to provide an indication of formation porosity which is substantially independent of the formation salinity.
Abstract: A logging instrument contains a pulsed neutron source and a pair of radiation detectors spaced along the length of the instrument. The radiation detectors are gated differently from each other to provide an indication of formation porosity which is substantially independent of the formation salinity. In the preferred embodiment, the electrical signals indicative of radiation detected by the long-spaced detector are gated for almost the entire interval between neutron pulses and the short-spaced signals are gated for a significantly smaller time interval which commences soon after the termination of a given neutron burst. The signals from the two detectors are combined in a ratio circuit for determination of porosity.
574 citations
01 Jan 1998
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss issues that should be considered in formulating a policy for assigning values to a name space and provide guidelines to document authors on the specific text that must be included in documents that place demands on the IANA.
Abstract: Many protocols make use of identifiers consisting of constants and other well-known values. Even after a protocol has been defined and deployment has begun, new values may need to be assigned (e.g., for a new option type in DHCP, or a new encryption or authentication algorithm for IPSec). To insure that such quantities have consistent values and interpretations in different implementations, their assignment must be administered by a central authority. For IETF protocols, that role is provided by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). In order for the IANA to manage a given name space prudently, it needs guidelines describing the conditions under which new values can be assigned. If the IANA is expected to play a role in the management of a name space, the IANA must be given clear and concise instructions describing that role. This document discusses issues that should be considered in formulating a policy for assigning values to a name space and provides guidelines to document authors on the specific text that must be included in documents that place demands on the IANA.
536 citations
01 Oct 1998
TL;DR: Many protocols make use of identifiers consisting of constants and other well-known values that must be administered by a central authority to insure that such quantities have consistent values and interpretations in different implementations.
Abstract: Many protocols make use of identifiers consisting of constants and other well-known values. Even after a protocol has been defined and deployment has begun, new values may need to be assigned (e.g., for a new option type in DHCP, or a new encryption or authentication algorithm for IPSec). To insure that such quantities have consistent values and interpretations in different implementations, their assignment must be administered by a central authority. For IETF protocols, that role is provided by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).
334 citations
01 Jun 2004
TL;DR: This document defines terms for mobility related terminology out of work done in the Seamoby Working Group but has broader applicability for terminology used in IETF-wide discourse on technology for mobility and IP networks.
Abstract: There is a need for common definitions of terminology in the work to
be done around IP mobility. This document defines terms for mobility
related terminology. The document originated out of work done in the
Seamoby Working Group but has broader applicability for terminology
used in IETF-wide discourse on technology for mobility and IP
networks. Other working groups dealing with mobility may want to take
advantage of this terminology. This memo provides information for the
Internet community.
207 citations
"Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (A..." refers methods in this paper
...This section defines other terminology used with AODV that is not already defined in [3]....
[...]