The Implications of Deploying MANETs Routing ...

9 downloads 0 Views 678KB Size Report
The basic operation of networks is to facilitate the tasks of conveyance and ..... Asha, C., Mahadevan, G.: An Adaptive Cross-layer Architecture to Optimize QOS.
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Volume 119 No. 16 2018, 2233-2243 ISSN: 1314-3395 (on-line version) url: http://www.acadpubl.eu/hub/ Special Issue

http://www.acadpubl.eu/hub/

The Implications of Deploying MANETs Routing Protocols in WLANs Setup Abraham Ayegba Alfa1, Misra Sanjay2, Robertas Damaševičius3, Rytis Maskeliūnas3, Ravin Ahuja4 1

Kogi State College of Education, Ankpa, Nigeria 2 Covenant University, Otta, Nigeria 3 Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania 4 University of Delhi, Delhi, India [email protected],[email protected],{robertas.damasevicius, Rytis.maskeliunas}@ktu.lt, [email protected]

Abstract. Wireless LANs are distinct networks type because; they requires a central system for controlling devices such base station, wireless access point, and wireless router. The basic operation of networks is to facilitate the tasks of conveyance and delivery of data packets among various participants or connected nodes. In the case of WLANs, this is achieved by means of a network base offering wireless medium. On the other hand, Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs) allow a one-to-one exchange of packet data between senders and receivers with a wireless baseless station. The Quality of Service offered by WLANs structures is limited due to the network congestions, cost of maintaining base station, large delays and small throughputs. This paper assesses the implications of using MANETs routing protocols in WLANs situations. The results are expected to further improve the QoS issues and other related challenges of WLANs. Keywords: WLANs, MANET, routing protocols, network load, throughput, delays, network congestion, packet exchange.

1 Introduction Wireless networks are interconnections of diverse nodes without the need of physical wires. In fact, one major property of wireless network is portability because; it provides minimal installation rate [1]. Mores so, they perform fundamental tasks including routing of packets from sending-point to receiving-point, regulation of flow control and control of errors across the network. Wireless local area networks (WLANs) and wireless ad-hoc networks (MANETs) are categorized under infrastructure-less networks due to their domain of applications [1]. Nevertheless, WLANs schemes are problematic in several ways such as the overhead incurred in station bases maintenance, congestions of network due to traffics, small throughput and large delays [2]. This paper assesses the implications of using MANETs routing protocols (that is, AODV and DSR) in WLANs situation for certain parameters such as network load, packet end-to-end delay and throughput.

2233

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

2 Literature Review

2.1 Wireless Local Area Networks In general, distance is the major point of reference for mainstream communication networks. One of these networks is the extensively distributed including Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs), Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPAN), Wireless Wide Area Networks (WWANs) and Wireless Metropolitan Area Networks (WMAN) [3]. In case of LAN, prominence is given to speed and efficient transmission of data in a locally situated zone. Similarly, WAN is capable of broadcasting data packets across diverse media situated farther apart [2]. Composite network arrangements consist of several subnets which are relatively autonomous. Each subnet can assume any available topologies and transmission protocols. In addition, every participant is capable of detecting available communication parties for a straightforward addressing. More so, communication parties are required to seek admittance into broadcast medium. On the basis of the protocol specified by the access scheme, the various participants are assigned channels of transmission [3]. Customarily, the wireless adapter is used to provide interconnection to the wireless service. Desktop PCs establish links to wireless networks and services with PCI cards, whereas Notebooks utilize PC Cards for networks connections. A WLAN setup is unrelated to a traditional wired LAN on a number of aspects [2]. Firstly, the physical location is a non-determining factor when considering the target address. Secondly, WLANs operate stationary, mobile and handy stations. Lastly, the physical layers of WLANs are mostly dissimilar to those of wired media [4]. Most importantly, wireless networks share scarce transmission bandwidth in effectively manner by means of the medium access control (MAC) protocol. The strength of the protocol is determined by amount of channel bandwidth consumed to effectually broadcast messages. The MAC protocol is effective when it delivers the highest capacity value of communicating nodes. The wireless network configuration with IEEE 802.11 encompasses the infrastructure and Ad-hoc variants [2]. WLANs are capable of delivering seamless connectivity to wireless service and valuable network resources. WLANs are higher to wired networks due to ease of setup and flexibility. On the other hand, wireless networks have lower bandwidth, larger bit-error rates, higher delays, and larger operational expenses when compared to wired networks. These wireless network applications have distinct requirements superior to the basic network protocol suite. Nowadays, high bandwidth Internet links is a key constraint for many networks arrangements [3]. 2.2 Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks A wireless ad-hoc network is a network with no definite base station. It is known as a multi-hop infrastructure-less network. This network encompasses two or several devices coupled together using wireless links and networking infrastructure to enable

2234

Special Issue

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

computational tasks to carried out any point in time or location as shown in Fig. 1. A common kind of this network is MANETs [6].

Fig. 1. A typical MANET structure. [6]

MANETs are self-governing objects that interconnect through wireless multi-hops in which each node performs the functions of clients and routers in passing on data packets [7]. The main benefits of MANETs consisted fault tolerance, on-demand arrangement, and unrestricted services. In addition, MANETs are useful replacements for wired network in case of unproductive or infeasible mobile access [8]. Routing is used to select the appropriate paths in a network in which packets are transported from sources to target nodes. The Internet Engineering Task Force has advanced standards and specifications to deal with obvious problems such as loss of packets, transmission errors, short ranges, battery efficiency and changes in routes, undetectable terminals. In recent time, a number of routing protocols have evolved in order to set benchmarks for the selection of route for broadcast of packets between nodes in MANETs [4]. Ad-hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) protocol, Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocol, and Temporary Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA) protocol make use of reactive routing scheme [4]. These routing schemes offer minimal medium collision for real-time traffic [6] The IEEE 802.11e standard delivers a modernized access scheme which is effective for dealing with numerous classes of traffics. The Enhanced Distributed Coordination Function (EDCF) falls in the latter routing protocol category [5]. 2.3 Transmission Control Protocol Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) started as the Internet functional way out that enabled transmission of data across numerous networks of media. TCP was introduced on the Internet due to the need to expand applications range [9]. TCP is the typical networking protocol deployed on the Internet purposely transport protocol for data services such as Electronic Mail (e-mail), File Transfer Protocol (FTP), and

2235

Special Issue

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

Special Issue

Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (HTTP). In practice, flow control, acknowledgement, sequence number, and timer are utilized to guarantee that the sending process delivers to the receiving process accordingly, free of error and orderly [10]. 2.4 Routing Protocols The routing protocols are classified in accordance with the routing scheme adopted for searching a route (path) through to the desired target. And, the setup for routing tables can be used to classify them as proactive, on-demand (reactive) and hybrid. This is illustrated in Fig. 2. [8]

MANET Routing Protocol

Hybrid

Proactive

Reactive

Fig. 2. Classes of MANET routing protocols. [8]

Reactive routing protocols: Routes (or paths) are built between sender and receiver whenever the need arises [11]. This process is referred to as on-demand protocols. The source node is responsible for initiating the task of paths creation. There is a drastic reduction of networks overhead. Though, records of all routes originated previously to receivers throughout the network are not maintained. Again, there is no support for intermittent broadcast of control messages [5]. Reactive protocols are incapable of maintaining prevailing topology of network [11]. Large latency is added during the route search scheme known as acquisition latency. Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocol, Ad-hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) protocol, and Temporary Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA) protocols are examples of reactive routing scheme [4]. Proactive routing protocols: These are offshoot of customary routing schemes. Unlike the reactive scheme, it maintains records of available paths and fresh route. This is achieved by the global broadcast of routing tables. Again, it updates routes details for nodes accessible to the link [12]. They are table-based with capability to create and preserve additional routing details for several network nodes regardless of demand for the path or otherwise. There is allowance for a time-to-time transmission of control messages even if data flows were absent. Again, every node is allowed to build own routing table for the purpose of maintaining paths details connected to other nodes in the network. Route updates are prompted at specified time frame

2236

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

without recourse to the traffic and mobility properties of the links [12]. Whenever is need for repeated updates of the routes table, it is highly supportive. The major fallout is the overhead incurred in stock piling large route information on real world networks situation. Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP), Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector (DSDV), Fisheye State Routing (FSR), and Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR) are grouped into proactive routing protocols [4]. Hybrid routing protocols: These inherit the characteristics of reactive and proactive routing protocols. Usually, the nodes are assembled into geographical parts. Whenever data exchanges were to be carried out inside a zone, the proactive routing protocol is utilized. Similarly, reactive routing protocol is deployed whenever data exchanges occur outside of routing zones. Instances of this kind of routing protocol include: Zone-Based Hierarchical Link State (ZHLS) and Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) [6].

3 Methodology The OPNET 14.5 Modeler Version is used to analyze the concept of MANETs routing protocols in WLANs, due to the few similarities and dissimilarities in the frameworks of networks [8]. The toolbar menu offered the different units for the mobile ad-hoc networks arrangement including nodes, server, profile, application, and mobility which are obtainable on the object palette. The FTP, Email and HTTP are traffic propagated and processed on matching networks servers when configuring the application for Delay and Throughput. The mobile nodes have a trajectory vector of 20m/s by means of a random waypoint mobility arrangement [8]. The module is used to manage the traffic for mobile protocols chosen; and TCP alternative is selected during server setup. The workstations composed of server-client applications running over TCP and UDP define the mobile nodes. The IP addresses of all the routing protocols, mobile nodes, and server are assigned through the dynamic mobility method [8]. The WLAN server operates on TCP applications with IEEE 802.11 standard compliance. The server service connection is set to 11Mbps [8]. The WLAN global parameters were used to measure the reliability and practicability of the mobile routing protocol, which are throughput, network load and packet end-to-end delays [8]. 3.1 Experimental Settings The OPNET 14.5 minimal parameters for the networks demonstration and analysis are presented in Table 1.

2237

Special Issue

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

Table 1. Minimum simulation parameters. Parameter

Value

Evaluation

Throughput and Packet end-to-end delay

Interval

130 s

Traffic type

Email, HTTP and FTP

Size of Network

(1500 x 1500) m

Quantity of nodes

50 and 100

Speed of node

20 m/s

Size of packet

1 KB

Model of mobility

Random waypoint

Mobile routing protocols

DSR and AODV

Rate of data

10Mpbs

In Table 1, Throughput evaluates the rate of network resources depletion and wireless medium access. This is expected to be low because scarce wireless bandwidth. The packet end-to-end delay estimates the arrival time of data to the MAC layer up until it is conveyed out of the wireless medium completely, which is expected to be lower to support real-time flows. These parameters are used to determine the reliability of mobile routing protocols in WLANs situation.

4 Results The outcomes of deploying the AODV and DSR MANET routing protocols in a WLAN is achieved in two setups with varying number of mobile nodes. These are discussed as follows. 4.1 Network Delay of Mobile Nodes In first setup, the WLAN network delay is analyzed for DSR and AODV routing protocols with 50 mobile nodes is depicted in Fig. 3.

2238

Special Issue

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

Fig. 3. WLAN Delay for DSR and AODV with 50 mobile nodes.

In Fig. 3, the output of the WLAN delay simulation depicts both AODV and DSR commenced broadcast at the matching time of 10seconds. The AODV witnessed the largest delay at 0.025 seconds (33.33%) 10 seconds later and diminished continuously to attain the smallest delay at 0.08 seconds of period (130 seconds). Though, DSR recorded the largest delay of 0.12 seconds (66.67%). After 20 seconds, it slides down to its smallest delay of 0.06 seconds. This means that, in the WLAN setup for 50 mobile nodes, AODV offers the smallest delays when compared to DSR, because the time interval required for searching the path is lesser. Similarly, the WLAN delay measured for AODV and DSR routing protocols for 100 nodes is shown in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. WLAN Delay for DSR and AODV with 100 mobile nodes.

In Fig. 4, the WLAN delay surges as number of nodes increased in the network. This implies that more time is consumed in discovering path for packets transmission

2239

Special Issue

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

through the network from the source to the target when the number of nodes increased considerably. AODV offered the smallest WLAN delay of 0.88 seconds (45.6%) after 30 seconds of the experiment. Unlike AODV, DSR offers the largest WLAN delay of 1.05 seconds (54.4%) 13 seconds later. Consequently, DSR is inefficient for WLAN applications. However, AODV reasonably consumed time in discovering paths for broadcasting data packets between originating and target nodes. Conversely, this delay improved over time when more routes are connected successfully to more nodes. 4.2 Throughput of Mobile Nodes In second setup, the Throughputs of the WLAN measured for DSR and AODV for 50 mobile nodes is shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 5. WLAN Throughput for DSR and AODV with 50 mobile nodes.

In Fig. 5, the WLAN throughputs for the DSR and AODV were observed to be smallest after 10 seconds by 200 to 1800 bps accordingly. The throughput for DSR rises steadily to climax at 2800 bps (28.87%) after 110 seconds. In case of AODV, throughput improved slightly for the period of simulation and climaxed at 6900 bps (71.13%). These showed clearly that AODV trailed DSR on amount of data packets successfully broadcast between sender and receiver mobile nodes using 50 mobile nodes in WLAN setup. Again, the throughput of the WLAN measured for DSR and AODV based on 100 mobile nodes is illustrated in Fig. 6.

2240

Special Issue

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

Fig. 6. WLAN Throughput for DSR and AODV with 100 mobile nodes.

In Fig. 6, the observed WLAN throughput for DSR and AODV were 210 bps (33.33%) and 420 bps (66.67%) respectively after 10 seconds for a 100 mobile nodes. The least throughput of 250 bps and 200 bps were offered by AODV and DSR eventually. The AODV routing protocol is suitable for WLAN applications because bits processed per second remains stable when the amount of mobile nodes over a period of time is increased. This paper found that WLANs performance improved tremendously when mobile routing protocols were implemented including better throughputs, increased network media access, and reduced delays and congestions. These further corroborated the work of [8] by increasing the evaluation parameters and doubling up on the quantity of mobile nodes deployed.

5 Conclusion The design of MANETs routing protocols was to improve exchange of information among diverse mobile nodes in a direct manner needless of base stations which is characteristic of customary WLANs. The introduction of TCP in WLANs assists in the control of messages for large number of nodes; these are either senders or receivers through the base stations. This paper examined the implications of applying mobile routing protocols in WLANs situation using varied network capacities, setups and evaluation parameters. The paper revealed that, MANETs are successful in WLANs too especially for scalability, increased network capacity, lower packets losses and delays. Also, the AODV is most effective mobile routing protocol for WLAN situation than the DSR reason being that the amount of network nodes is inconsequential on the basis of bits processed per second (throughput) in the long run. Also, there is reduction in cost of setting up base stations, improved QoS and lesser network congestion problems.

2241

Special Issue

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

References 1.

Harpreet, S. C., Ansari, M. I. H., Ashish, K., Prashant, S. V.: A survey of Transmission C.P over mobile ad-hoc networks. International Journal of science and Technology Research, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 146 – 150 (2012) 2. Dhanalakshmi, S., Sathiya, M.: An Overview of IEEE 802.11 Wireless LAN Technologies. International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 85-93 (2015) 3. Menal, D.: Evolution of Wireless LAN in Wireless Networks. International Journal on Computer Science and Engineering, vol. 9, no. 3, 109-113 (2017) 4. Raza, N., Aftab, M.U., Akbar, M. Q., Ashraf, O., Irfan, M.: Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks Applications and Its Challenges. Communications and Network, vol. 8, pp. 131-136 (2016) 5. Wu, W. C., Liaw, H. T.: A Study on High Secure and Efficient MANET Routing Scheme. Journal of Sensors, vol. 2015, no. 365863, pp. 1-10 (2015) 6. Asha, C., Mahadevan, G.: An Adaptive Cross-layer Architecture to Optimize QOS Provisioning in MANET. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 16-25 (2017) 7. Dorri, A., Kamel, S. R., Kheyrkhah, E.: Security Challenges in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks: A Survey. Internaional Journal of Computer Science and Engineering Survey, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1-15 (2015) 8. Alfa, A. A., Misra, S., Adewumim A., Salami, F. O., Maskeliunas R., Damasevicius R. (2018) Implementation of MANETs Routing Protocols in WLANs Environment: Issues and Prospects. In: Antipova T., Rocha Á. (eds) Information Technology Science. MOSITS 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Springer, Cham, vol. 724, pp. 1-9 (2018) 9. Papanastasiou, S., Mackenzie, L. M., Ould-Khaoua, M., Vassilis, C.: On the interaction of transmission control (TCP) and routing protocols in mobile ad-hoc networks. (MANET). Department of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, United Kingdom (2006) 10. Muhammad, A., Muhammad, A., Zahid, U. K., Abdulsalam, A., Shazad, R.: Comparison of optimized link state routing (OLSR) and Dynamic in-demand routing protocol (DYMO) on the basis of different performance metrics in mobile Ad-hoc Networks. American Journal on Scientific Research Institute of management Sciences Peshawar, Pakistan, vol. 2, no. 2, 67- 85 (2011) 11. Yufei, C., Egemen, K. C., James, P. G.: Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols for Transaction Traffic over Aeronautical Network. International Telemetery Conference, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Kansas, 5, 243-276 (2011) 12. Yamsani, R. K., Sarath, C. K.: A Case Study on MANET Routing Protocols Performance over TCP and HTTP. Master’s Thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering, COM/School of Computing, Blekinge Institute of Technology MEE10:49,45 (2010)

2242

Special Issue

2243

2244