PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT OF GPSR ROUTING PROTOCOL … · 2020. 7. 18. · dasar geografi. Salah satu contoh protokol routing yang dikategorikan dibawah dasar geografi adalah GPSR.

PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT OF GPSR ROUTING

PROTOCOL BY VARYING NODE DENSITY AND MOBILITY

SPEED

NUR ALIA BINTI HAMDAN

BACHELOR OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

(COMPUTER NETWORK SECURITY) WITH

HONORS FACULTY OF INFORMATICS AND

COMPUTING

UNIVERSITI SULTAN ZAINAL ABIDIN

2020

DECLARATION

I declare that the work in this dissertation carried out according to the requirement for

the award of a Bachelor of Computer Science (Computer Network Security) with

Honors at University Sultan Zainal Abidin (UniSZA). This project is based on my own

effort with helps obtain information from sources of references and research of

knowledge based and I have identified all material in this dissertation that it is not my

own work through appropriate referencing and acknowledgement.

Signature: ________________________

Name: NUR ALIA BINTI HAMDAN

Date: ____________________________

CONFIRMATION

I have read this report and in my point of view, this project fulfils a condition and

requirement to be awarded a Bachelor of Computer Science (Computer Network

Security)

Signature:____________________________

Name: DR. NOR AIDA BINTI MAHIDDIN

Date:________________________________

iv

DEDICATION

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious and the Most Merciful. I would like to

thanks to Allah for this opportunity in order to complete my research for Final Year

Project with the title of Performance Enhancement of GPSR Routing Protocol by

varying Node Density and Mobility Speed.

Next, I would like to sincerely thanks to my thesis adviser Dr. Nor Aida binti

Mahiddin for her guidance, ideas, motivation, understanding and support

throughout this study and specially for her confidence in me. I would like to express

my appreciation to my panels of honor, Dr. Wan Nor Shuhadah binti Wan Nik, Dr.

Aznida Hayati binti Zakaria @ Mohamad and Prof. Madya. Dr. Zarina binti

Mohamad for their thoughtful questions and comments regarding my research.

Lastly, I would like to thanks to my parents and siblings for their loves, moral

support and prayers throughout my life. Thank you both for giving me strength to

reach for the stars and chase my dreams. Next, to all others lecturers who share

their knowledge in my 3 years studies and all of my friends that help me through

thick and thin especially my classmate in order to complete this Final Year Project.

1

ABSTRACT

Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) is a group of wireless network devices (or nodes)

in which nodes collaborate by forwarding packets for each other to allow them to

communicate outside range of direct wireless transmission. MANET is a kind of

wireless ad-hoc network and it is a self-configuring networks of mobile routers and

associated hosts that are connected by the wireless links. The MANET routing protocol

can be categorized into two types: topology-based and position-based. One of the

routing protocol under the position-based is Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing

(GPSR) routing protocols. Simulation were used to assess the performance of the GPSR

routing protocol with the respect to node density and mobility speed. From the

modification of node density and mobility speed, the performance in terms of

throughput, packet loss rate and packet delivery ratio will be analyzed and evaluate. The

routing protocol will be simulated by using OMNeT++ version 4.6.

2

ABSTRAK

Rangkaian ad hoc mudah alih (MANET) adalah kumpulan peranti tanpa wayar

rangkaian (atau nod) yang mampu bekerjasama dengan menghantar paket antara satu

sama lain untuk membolehkan mereka untuk berkomunikasi antara satu sama lain

menggunakan penghantaran tanpa wayar. MANET adalah sejenis rangkaian ad-hoc

tanpa wayar dan ia adalah rangkaian yang mengkonfigurasi sendiri router mudah alih

dan yang berkaitan yang dihubungkan dengan pautan tanpa wayar. Protokol routing

dalam MANET boleh dikategorikan kepada dua kategori iaitu dasar topologi dan

dasar geografi. Salah satu contoh protokol routing yang dikategorikan dibawah dasar

geografi adalah GPSR. Protokol routing akan disimulasikan dan parameter seperti

ketumpatan nod dan kelajuan pergerakan akan diubahsuai dan prestasi dari segi

pemprosesan, kadar kehilangan paket dan nisbah penghantaran paket akan dianalisis

serta dinilai. Protokol routing akan disimulasikan dengan menggunakan OMNeT++

versi 4.6.

3

TABLE OF CONTENT

DECLARATION ..................................................................................................... ii

CONFIRMATION .................................................................................................. iii

DEDICATION ......................................................................................................... iv

ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. 1

ABSTRAK ................................................................................................................ 2

TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................................................................ 3

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................. 6

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... 7

LIST OF ABBREVIATION ..................................................................................... 8

CHAPTER 1 ............................................................................................................. 9

1.1 Background .................................................................................................. 9

1.1.1 Table Driven or Proactive protocol ...................................................... 10

1.1.2 On-Demand or Reactive protocol ........................................................ 11

1.1.3 Hybrid ................................................................................................. 11

1.1.4 Position-based ..................................................................................... 12

1.2 Problem Statement...................................................................................... 12

1.3 Objective .................................................................................................... 12

1.4 Scope.......................................................................................................... 13

1.5 Limitation of works .................................................................................... 13

1.6 Expected Result .......................................................................................... 14

4

1.7 Summary .................................................................................................... 14

CHAPTER 2 ........................................................................................................... 15

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 15

2.2 Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR) ............................................... 15

2.3 Related works ............................................................................................. 17

2.3.1 Parameter ............................................................................................ 17

2.4 Summary .................................................................................................... 20

CHAPTER 3 ........................................................................................................... 21

3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 21

3.2 Research of Methodology ........................................................................... 21

3.3 Simulation .................................................................................................. 23

3.4 Project Framework ..................................................................................... 25

3.5 Project Flowchart ....................................................................................... 26

3.6 Summary .................................................................................................... 28

CHAPTER 4 ........................................................................................................... 29

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 29

4.2 Installation of OMNeT++ Version 4.6 ........................................................ 29

4.3 Simulation Environment ............................................................................. 32

4.4 Configuration of MANET Routing Protocols in OMNeT++ ....................... 33

4.5 Performance Evaluation and Result Analysis .............................................. 34

CHAPTER 5 ........................................................................................................... 38

5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 38

5

5.2 Finalization of Project................................................................................. 38

5.3 Limitations and challenges ......................................................................... 39

5.4 Future works............................................................................................... 39

5.5 Summary .................................................................................................... 40

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 41

APPENDIX ............................................................................................................. 44

6

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Categories of Routing Protocol ................................................................ 10

Figure 2.1 Greedy Forwarding .................................................................................. 16

Figure 3.1 Research Methodology ............................................................................ 22

Figure 3.2 OMNet++ Simulation Tool ...................................................................... 24

Figure 3.3 Inet Manet Framework ............................................................................. 24

Figure 3.4 Framework of GPSR Routing Protocol .................................................... 25

Figure 3.5 Right Thumb Rule ................................................................................... 26

Figure 3.6 GPSR Flowchart ...................................................................................... 27

Figure 4.1 Simulation of 50 numbers of nodes .......................................................... 34

Figure 4.2 Simulation Running for 50 nodes ............................................................. 35

Figure 4.3 Packet Delivery Ratio at Different Number of Nodes and Mobility Speed 35

Figure 4.4 Throughput at Different Number of Nodes and Mobility Speed................ 36

Figure 4.5 Packet Loss Rate at Different Number of Nodes and Mobility Speed ....... 37

7

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Simulation Parameter ................................................................................ 32

8

LIST OF ABBREVIATION

MANET Mobile Ad-hoc Network

GPSR Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing

DSDV Destination Sequenced Distance Vector

OLSR Optimized Link State Routing Protocol

WRP Wireless Routing Protocol

ZRP Zone Routing Protocol

ZHLS Zone-Based Hierarchical Link State

Routing Protocol

DREAM Distance Routing Effect Algorithm

LAR Location-Aided Routing Protocol

CBR Constant bitrate

GBR Guaranteed bitrate

VANET Vehicular Ad Hoc Network

9

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

A mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) also known as Wireless Ad-Hoc Network is

defined as a set of mobile nodes which communicate through wireless links with

no central infrastructure. In this networks nodes are always moving and could enter

to or exit from the network at any time. Since it is an infrastructure network, one

cannot rely on use of access point or other infrastructure for routing thus leaving

only one option of building multi-hop routes from source to destination where the

nodes act as a routers. To have a reliable data, transmission in MANET efficient

routing protocol must be used. The types of routing protocol are topology-based

and position-based. Topology-based routing protocol depends on current topology

of the network. Topology-based routing is also known as table-based routing can

be classified into 3 categories as shown in Figure 1.1. Position-based which also

known as geographic routing protocol require only the location information of

nodes for the routing. It does not require a node to establish a route to the destination

before transmitting packets.

10

Figure 1.1 Categories of Routing Protocol

1.1.1 Table Driven or Proactive protocol

This category of protocol find path in advance and every node attempt to keep up-to-

date topological map of entire network and continuously evaluate the routes when a

nodes needs to forward a packet, the route is already available so there is no delay in

searching for a route. It is an attempt to maintain consistent, up-to-date routing

information. When the network topology changes, the protocol responds by propagating

updates throughput the network to maintain a consistent view. In this type of table-

driven techniques, routing overhead is high. Some common example of proactive

routing protocols are as following:

i. DSDV

ii. OLSR

iii. WRP

11

1.1.2 On-Demand or Reactive protocol

The protocols find route on demand by flooding the network with Route Request

(RREQ) packets to the nodes. In reactive routing protocols, the route is calculated only

when a node needs to send data to an unknown destination. Thus, route discovery is

initiated only when needed. Determine a route only when there is data to transfer. These

protocols have longer delay and low routing overhead. Some common example of

reactive routing protocols are as following:

i. AODV

ii. DSR

iii. TORA

1.1.3 Hybrid

Hybrid routing is a third classification of routing algorithms. It is the combination of

Proactive and Reactive. It has advantages of both. It integrates merits of both proactive

and reactive routing protocols to overcome their demerits. Generally, hybrid routing

protocols for MANET exploit hierarchical network architectures. At initial, all routers

will establish certain proactive routes and start computing. Afterwards, an on-demand

scenario will start working by flooding multiple RR packets. Some common example

of hybrid routing protocols are as following:

i. ZRP

ii. ZHLS

12

1.1.4 Position-based

Position-based routing were also known as geographical routing. The geographic

location information can improve the routing protocol performance in an ad hoc

environment. Position-based algorithms will work in tandem with the location services

in which were tasked to inform the nodes about each other positions. More attentions

will be needed in this mobile environment because the location may be not accurate by

the information will be used. In this environment, the forwarding decision were

primarily made based on the position of a packet‘s destination and the position of the

node’s one-hop neighbor. The example of Position-based routing protocol were:

i. GPSR

ii. DREAM

iii. LAR

1.2 Problem Statement

i. Network topology changes frequently and unpredictable.

ii. Lack of centralized entity.

1.3 Objective

i. To study GPSR routing protocol in MANET.

ii. To modify the parameters that are affected the network performances such

as node density and mobility speed.

iii. To analyze the performances of GPSR in terms of throughput, packet

delivery ratio and packet loss rate.

13

1.4 Scope

The scope of the project are as follows:

i. To simulate GPSR routing protocol performance evaluation using

OMNET++ simulator.

ii. To implement routing algorithm scheme in GPSR routing protocol.

1.5 Limitation of works

i. Provide high cost

In real life environment, it required a really large area such disaster area or military

area. Not only that it will also cost a lot since it required many hardware like

mobile, computer and laptop in order to perform this task.

ii. Timing of study

Usually, the time taken to configure MANET is too long since it also requires a

large area in real life such as for the disaster area like tsunami, earthquakes or

floods. So it will not enough my time to configure the MANET itself.

iii. Configuration time

One of the problem during performs this project is the configuration time. It is

because, in the real life mobile ad-hoc network requires a very large area. So that,

it will take a long time to build this environment and the time taken to run the

simulation is too long.

14

1.6 Expected Result

At the end of this project, the expected result are the throughput and the packet delivery

ratio are increase meanwhile the packet loss rate will decrease.

1.7 Summary

This first chapter are about background, problem statement, objectives, scope,

limitation of works and expected results of this project.

15

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter will discuss about literature review. Literature review is a text of

scholarly paper, that includes the current knowledge include the substantive

findings, as well as theoretical and methodological contribution to a related works.

There are a few of routing protocol in MANET. One of the routing protocol in

MANET is GPSR.

2.2 Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR)

Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR) was a routing algorithms that comes

under the position-based protocol or also known as geographic routing. Geographic

routing has become one of the most suitable routing strategies in MANET mainly

due to its numerous advantages over the traditional topology based protocols like

Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV), Ad hoc On Demand Distance

Vector Routing (AODV) and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR). GPSR is a

geographic routing protocol that each nodes will maintains the addresses and

16

geographical coordinates of their neighbors or the other nodes that was in its range.

The nodes will advertise their locations periodically by sending beacons. If there

were no beacons received from a neighboring node, then the node is assumed to be

out of range and its table entry is deleted. The table entry for a node is also deleted

after the link failure. The nodes will be attach their location data on all sent and

forwarded packet as well.

With respect to the figure 2.1(a), GPSR greedily forwards a packet from the source

node(x) to the closest next hop (y) to the destination node (D). Sometimes, greedy

forwarding becomes impossible as shown in figure 2.1(b) in which case no neighbor

node is closer to destination D than x itself. For this case, GPSR tried to go around the

void area using perimeter nodes (w then v or y then z) as shown in figure 2.1(b). The

packets will follows a path formed by perimeter forwarding. Whenever it is possible,

the packet will forwarded according to greedy forwarding again. Other than the

knowledge of its location, every source node in GPSR needs to know locations of its

one hop neighbors and the destination node.

Figure 2.1 Greedy Forwarding

17

2.3 Related works

2.3.1 Parameter

Firstly, the parameter measured in [1] were the number of nodes,

topology size and buffer size. The routing protocol used for this experiment were only

GPSR. The number of nodes used for this experiment were (50, 75, 100, 125, 150) in

the topology size of 670m*670m. The buffer size for this experiment were 512m. As

for the result, the Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR) when the speed of nodes is 20m/s were

increased as the number of node increase. For the terms of Throughput, at the number

of nodes of 40 to 80 the throughput were stable and slowly getting higher.

Secondly, journal “Ferry-Assisted Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing Protocol for

Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (FA-GPSR)” [2], the simulation area used for this project

were 4500m*7500m, 50-200 of free mobile nodes and packet size were 512 bytes. As

the result of the experimentation, it does not successfully deliver many packets due to

the connectivity failures as often a route between the source and the destination does

not exist.

According to the journal [3], the number of nodes used in the simulations

were 50, 112, and 200 with a nominal 250meter range. All of the nodes move according

to the random waypoint model with a maximum velocity of 20m/s. The pause time for

the simulations were 0,30,60 and 120 seconds. The packet delivery success rate for

GPSR were successfully by varying the beaconing intervals as a function of pause time.

For the terms of network diameter, GPSR traffic overhead remains flat as it is a non-

reflective protocol. The diameter has no effect on GPSR local routing protocol message

18

traffic since GPSR never sends routing packets beyond a single hop. GPSR traffic

delivery ratio remains high at all pause times on larger scale network because it use only

local topology information that allows the protocol to maintain this delivery ratio.

Finally, GPSR recovers from loss of a neighbor by greedily forwarding to another

appropriate neighbor thus the failover is instantaneous.

Next, based on the journal [5] the number of nodes were 50, 100, 150, 200, 250,

300 and 350. The routing protocol used in this experimentation were GPSR, AODV,

OLSR and HDVG. The percentage of packet delivery ratio for GPSR were the lower

compare to HDVG and OLSR the other as the number of nodes is increases. While for

the terms of average packet delivery time, GPSR were the second highest after OLSR

for the range of nodes from 50 to 300 nodes.

In [9] the number of nodes used were 30, 50, 70, 90 and 130 in the simulation time of

150 seconds. The network area size were 2000m*2000m, 512 bytes of data packet size

and the data packet type used were CBR. As conclusion, the packet delivery ratio was

increasing as the number of node increases and become stable at the number of nodes

of 90 and 130. For the terms of average end-to-end delay it was highest for the 30 nodes

simulations and the lowest delay was the simulation for the 90 nodes. The throughput

of GPSR were increasing as the node increase but there were slightly decreasing when

the node used were 130.

In [10] the routing protocol tested were GRB and GPSR with variety number of nodes

(50, 112, 200) and also variety network area (1500m*300m, 2250m*450m,

3000m*600m). As regards of the successful packet delivery ratio (SPDR), it shown that

GRB performs better than the GPSR. The protocol efficiency in the efficient

19

transmission of data packets is almost the same and in some cases GRB higher than that

of GPSR. Even so, when greedy routing fails due to a void in the direction of the

destination, GPSR has to planarize the local network graph and use to route around

voids.

In [11] the number of nodes simulated were 30, 50, 70, 90 and 110 with the maximum

node speed of 15m/s. The network area size were 1100m*1100m, 200s of simulation

time, 250m of node transmission range and the data packet type were CBR. It can be

conclude that the packet loss rate of GPSR is higher compared to the MM-GPSR, but

as the number of nodes is increase, the packet loss rate were decreased. It was almost

the same with the end-to-end delay result, GPSR were higher than MM-GPSR and it

was decreased as the number of nodes were increased. Finally, for the term of

throughput the MM-GPSR were higher than the GPSR as the number of nodes increase.

Lastly, from the article [6] the project was done for GPSR in the simulation area

of 2000m*2000m with the number of nodes of 100, packet size of 1024 bytes and the

simulation time of 300s. The changed of queue length and the size in GPSR attribute

produced a better performance of the GPSR protocol in terms of packet delivery ratio,

end-to-end delay, throughput and packet loss. GPSR performs better in PDR,

throughput and packet loss with the parameter of 96bytes of queue length and 45

seconds of queue time.

20

2.4 Summary

In this second chapter, it is about the summary about the research of the methods to

overcome the routing issue in MANET used in other research paper.

21

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter will discuss the methods and alternatives used from the start to the

end of the project. This chapter also discusses the simulation tools that will use in the

project. The network simulation tool used is OMNeT++ simulator. To go further into

the project, this chapter includes the framework structure and flow chart for a better

understanding of visualization while executing the project.

3.2 Research of Methodology

In research methodology, the preparation of the project is very relevant to

develop the project. A few phases of methodology are usable. The phases are shown in

figure 3.1 below. The first phase is about identifying the problems regarding the area.

For this project, the problems in MANET are defined. The problem statement is defined

on the basis of the related research paper or literature review in order to gain a better

understanding of MANET and the issues that have arisen on MANET. The second

phase is designed and developed which tell about this project’s overall development.

22

This process describes the correct and relevant approaches used to solve the problems.

GPSR routing protocol is used for this project with different node mobility speeds. Next

phase is project simulation. The simulation to be used in the project will be addressed

in this phase. The OMNeT++ version 4.6 is the simulation used for this project. And

the final phase is the performance evaluation. Performance metrics must be evaluated

and analyzed for this project. The performance metrics to be measured are throughput,

packet delivery ratio, and packet delay.

Figure 3.1 Research Methodology

23

3.3 Simulation

The project experiment has been conducted by using a simulation network

because in real-life environment required a lot of cost and consumes extensive time.

OMNeT++ is an open source, extensible, modular, component based discrete event

simulator tool like NS-2 and NS-3 and completely written in C++. It offers an IDE

based on Eclipse, a graphical runtime environment, and a variety of other tools. It is a

general-purpose simulator that can simulate any network that consists of interacting

devices. OMNeT++ provides an architecture that is component-based, hierarchical,

modular and extensible. A Visual Network Editor (GNED), a NED compiler,

graphical (Tkenv) and command line (Cmdenv) simulation interfaces are included in

the simulation environment. OMNeT++ simulations can be run under various user

interfaces. Graphical, animating user interfaces are highly useful for demonstration

and debugging purposes. The best interfaces for batch execution are command line

user interfaces. There are domain specific features such as sensor network support,

wireless ad hoc networks, Internet protocols, performance modelling, and photonic

networks. OMNeT++ also supports parallel distributed simulation. The parallel

simulation algorithm can easily be extended or new ones can be plugged in. Models

do not need any special instrumentation to run in parallel, it is just a matter of

configuration. The reason for using OMNeT++ for this project because it is only

possible to install this simulation tool directly on Windows 7. This simulation tool

also provides a small-scale network, which makes implementation in the MANET

environment very appropriate.

24

After the installation of OMNeT++, inetmanet framework imported to

OMNeT++ simulator. The purpose of inetmanet framework is to make the

implementation and configuration of MANET easier because inetmanet framework is

required for MANET environment in OMNeT++.

Figure 3.2 OMNet++ Simulation Tool

Figure 3.3 Inet Manet Framework

25

3.4 Project Framework

Figure 3.4 Framework of GPSR Routing Protocol

26

3.5 Project Flowchart

In this section, the flowchart of project implementation will be described. Figure 3.6

shows the flowchart of GPSR routing protocol. Once there were received a packet

data, the tagged node checks whether the received data packet were in greedy or in the

perimeter mode. If the data packet were in the greedy mode, the tagged nodes will

search their neighbour table to identify the set of nodes that can satisfy the link

reliability criterion. The node that belonging to the set that is geographically closer to

the packet’s destination will be selected as the forwarding node. When the set of

neighbour nodes that satisfy the link reliability criterion is empty, the tagged nodes

marks the packet to the perimeter mode. In the perimeter mode, the nodes will find the

next hop from the neighbour table by using the right hand thumb rule to forward the

packet. The right hand thumb rule in figure 3.5 show on how the node Y send the

packet to the node X and the node X forward packet to the node Z technically.

Figure 3.5 Right Thumb Rule

27

Figure 3.6 GPSR Flowchart

28

3.6 Summary

The following chapter clarifies and shows the concept of the research

methodology, framework, and flowchart of the project. It provides a better

understanding for the implementation of the simulator that we selected in this project.

29

CHAPTER 4

IMPLEMENTATION AND RESULT

4.1 Introduction

This chapter discussed the configuration of the network simulator that used in this

project which is OMNeT++ and also the implementation of Performance Enhancement

of MANET by varying node density and the mobility speed. This chapter is important

in order to make sure that the objective of this project is achieved. The evaluation and

results of the performance metric are also shown in this chapter.

4.2 Installation of OMNeT++ Version 4.6

A platform that used to install OMNeT++ version 4.6 is windows 10. The steps below

show the installation of OMNeT++ version 4.6 and all of the steps must be followed to

obtain a successful and complete installation.

Step 1: Download the OMNeT++ version 4.6 from the link

https://omnetpp.org/download/

30

Step 2: Extract the downloaded file into C:\

Step 3: After the extracting process completed, select mingwenv file in the

omnetpp-4.6 and run the file.

Step 4: Type three command as shown above in mingwenv to install omnetpp

into the system.

31

i. ./configure

ii. make

iii. omnetpp

32

4.3 Simulation Environment

The simulation was done to analyze the performance of GPSR routing protocol by using

the OMNeT++ version 4.6 with the implementation of inetmanet. The simulation

environment discussed the parameter implemented to simulate the MANET

environment in the simulation tools. The simulation parameter were summarized in the

table 1.

Parameters Value

Routing protocol Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing

Simulation tool OMNeT++

Number of nodes 50, 75, 100

Size of simulations 2500m*2500m

Speed 0,1,2

Table 4.1 Simulation Parameter

33

4.4 Configuration of MANET Routing Protocols in OMNeT++

This file indicates the main function of the simulation that consists of declaration

number of nodes, mobility speed, simulations area and simulation time limit.

Algorithm : Simulation Environment

Simulation time – 900s

Number of nodes – 50

Mobility speed – 1Mbps

Simulation area – 2500m*2500m

The declaration can be changed. For example, the declaration number of nodes

in this project set as 50, 75 and 100, the mobility speed are 0, 1, 2Mbps as explained in

the simulation parameter before. The simulation area, simulation time and pause time

are fixed during the whole simulation.

34

4.5 Performance Evaluation and Result Analysis

The performance evaluation of the routing protocols analyzed through the following

performance metrics:

1. Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR) is the ratio of the total received packets at the

destination to total initiated packets from the source node. It specifies the packet

loss rate which limits the maximum throughput of the network.

2. Throughput is the number of successful packets delivered per unit time.

3. Packet Loss Rate (PLR) is the difference between a total number of data packets

received and data packets sent during the transmission.

Figure 4.1 Simulation of 50 numbers of nodes

35

Figure 4.2 Simulation Running for 50 nodes

Figure 4.3 shows the Packet Delivery Ratio with different number of nodes. The number

of nodes used were 50, 75 and 100. GPSR with 50 number of nodes in the 3m/s of

mobility shows a better performance compared to the other.

Figure 4.3 Packet Delivery Ratio at Different Number of Nodes and Mobility

Speed

95

95.5

96

96.5

97

97.5

98

50 nodes 75 nodes 100nodesP

acke

t D

eliv

ery

Rat

io (%

)

Number of nodes

Packet Delivery Ratio

Mobility speed= 1m/s

Mobility speed= 2m/s

Mobility speed= 3m/s

36

Figure 4.4 show the result of throughput. The throughput were compared by varying

the number of nodes (50,75 and 100) and the mobility speed (1,2,3 m/s). The figure

above show that the environment of 75 number of nodes with 3 m/s mobility speed has

the lowest throughput.

Figure 4.4 Throughput at Different Number of Nodes and Mobility Speed

Figure 4.5 shows the result of Packet Loss Rate. From the graph below, it can be

conclude that the packet loss rate with the node of 50 in the mobility speed of 2m/s has

the lowest percentage means that there were the lower packet loss during the

transmission that give a better performance.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

50 nodes 75 nodes 100 nodes

Thro

ugh

pu

t (K

bp

s)

Number of nodes

Throughput

Mobility speed = 1m/s

Mobility speed= 2m/s

Mobility speed= 3m/s

37

Figure 4.5 Packet Loss Rate at Different Number of Nodes and Mobility Speed

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

50 nodes 75 nodes 100 nodes

Pac

ket

Loss

Rat

e (%

)

Number of nodes

Packet Loss Rate

Mobility speed = 1m/s

Mobility speed = 2m/s

Mobility speed = 3m/s

38

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

5.1 Introduction

This chapter discusses the conclusion, constraints and challenge that were faced

during the process of completing this project. Some enhancement for the future works

are also proposed in this chapter. The conclusion discusses the conclusion of this

project. The project limitations and challenges state all the difficulties that have been

faced throughout the development of this project. Future work discusses on the

suggestion in a future projects.

5.2 Finalization of Project

In the real world, MANET gives more benefits to users that residing in

restriction situations or areas where obtaining the wired network would be very

impractical such like the military or any natural disaster area. For example, this

situations can help to save the people that were involved with the unpredictable natural

disaster or any other emergency cases. In this project, the GPSR routing protocol was

implemented to run the simulation instead of run the experimental in the real life

39

situation to evaluate the performance. The results and simulation are shown in the

previous chapter. The results are evaluating the performance of packet throughput,

packet delivery ratio and the average end-to-end delay after the implementation of the

GPSR routing protocol in OMNeT++.

5.3 Limitations and challenges

There are a few limitations and challenges that occurred throughout the development of

this project in order to achieve the objectives. The first challenges is the unstable

internet connection that bring a lot of problem during the installation of OMNeT++.

The file size were big and it take a long time and also a lot of internet data. All of the

installation file of OMNeT++ must be completely installed so that the simulation can

be run successfully. Secondly, it was also difficult to fix the errors of the simulation

after the installation. As the example, it was a bit challenging to import the inet

framework into the OMNeT++ because the version of the simulation is older. Lastly,

the major challenge were during the adjusting and run the GPSR routing protocol since

it was not so familiar and a bit hard to understand how the environment works.

5.4 Future works

There are some suggestions that can be done for the future work in which can be used

to upgrade the efficiency and the performance of this project. The first thing is the

simulation can change into a bigger environment by adding the number of nodes in the

simulation environment. Secondly, this project can also be done in the Vehicular Ad-

Hoc Network (VANET) and the Internet of Things in order to improve the performance

of the routing protocol.

40

5.5 Summary

This chapter had explain the benefits of the project that has been done and the struggling

faced during the development process. Besides that, the future work highlighted could

be possibly done in different better tool for the development process which can be more

useful in the future. Not only that, the simulation of MANET using the OMNet++

simulator is one of the network simulator tools that had been used by the researcher to

make an experiment about a new things and at the same time give the others a better

understanding about the operation of MANET in the real-world environment. Finally,

this simulation is employed to cope with the problems operatively.

41

REFERENCES

1. Baban A. Mahmood, D. M. (2018). GRB: Greedy Routing Protocol with Backtracking

for Mobile Ad Hoc Network.

2. Babu, S. S. (2015). Link Realibility Based Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for

Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks. International Journal of Vehicular Technology, 16.

3. Brad Karp, H. T. (2016). GPSR: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for Wireless

Networks.

4. C. Bouras, V. (2015). A GPSR Enhancement Mechanism for Routing in VANETs. 13th

International Conference on Wired / Wireless Internet Communication (WWIC),.

5. Chilmula, R. (2018). Study of Obstacle effect on the GPSR protocol and a Novel

Intelligent Greedy Routing protocol for VANETs. MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL

UNIVERSITY.

6. Chilmula, R. (2018). STUDY OF OBSTACLE EFFECT ON THE GPSR PROTOCOL

AND A NOVEL INTELLIGENT GREEDY ROUTING PROTOCOL FOR VANETS.

MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY.

7. Hosam Rowaihy, A. B. (2016). Performance of GPSR and AOMDV in WSNs with

Uncintrolled Mobility. Procedia Computer Science, 48-55.

8. L. Nithyanandan, G. S. (2015). Modified GPSR Protocol for Wireless Sensor

Networks. International Journal of Computer and Electrical Engineering, 324-328.

9. Lili Hu, Z. D. (2016). An Improved GPSR Routing Strategy in VANET. China:

Department of Communication Engineering.

10. Martin Mauve, J. W. (2018). MobiHoc Poster: Position-Based Multicast Routing for

Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks. Germany.

42

11. Mauve, M. F. (2013). Position-based multicast routing for mobile Ad-hoc networks.

ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 53-55.

12. Mr. L Raja, C. D. (2014). An Overview of MANET: Applications, Attacks and

Challenges. International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing, 408-

417.

13. Mrs. G. Sujatha, N. S. (2015). Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing in Manet's.

14. Mrs. Isha, N. (2015). Analysis of enhanced Hybrid Approach using Greedy Perimeter

Stateless Routing in VANET. Department of Computer Science and Technology.

15. Najim Abdulleh, M. &. (2015). Performance Analysis of AODV, OLSR and GPSR

MANET Routing Protocols with Respect to Network Size and Density. Research

Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 400–406.

16. P. Samundiswary, D. a. (2014). SECURED GREEDY PERIMETER STATELESS

ROUTING FOR WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS. International Journal of Ad

hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing( IJASUC ).

17. Prozoro D.E, M. A. (2017). Simulation of a Hierarchical Routing Protocol for MANET.

18. Raed Alsaqour a, n. M. (2014). Dynamic packet beaconing for GPSR mobile ad hoc

position-based routing protocol using fuzzy logic. Journal

ofNetworkandComputerApplications.

19. Reza Firsandaya Malik, M. S. (2017). Evaluation of Greedy Perimeter Stateless

Routing Protocol On Vehicular Ad Hoc Network in Palembang City. International

Conference on Data and Software Engineering (ICoDSE). Palembang .

20. Sebastian, A. a. (2016). Routing Mechanism for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks with

Improved Security Features. Journal of Telecommunications System & Management.

43

21. XIAOPING YANG, M. L. (2018). Improvement of GPSR Protocol in Vehicular Ad

Hoc Network. Digital Object Identifier.

22. Yang Guo, L. G. (2013). Performance Model for a Cache Enabled Content Distribution

Framework over MANET. International Conference on Computer Communication and

Networks (ICCCN), 1-8.

23. Yasser AI-Roqi, S. P. (2016). Ferry-Assisted Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing

Protocol for Mobile Ad hoc Networks (FA-GPSR).

24. Zhuocheng Lin, H. H. (Dec 2018). A Hybrid Rouing Protocol Based on GPSR Protocol

and LTE in VANET. International Journal of Computer Techniques.

44

APPENDIX

GANTT CHART (FYP1)

TASK/WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Project Title

Proposal

Research

Proposal

Presentation

Development of

Methodology

Report Drafting of

Proposal

Final Presentation

Report

Submission

45

GANTT CHART (FYP2)

TASK/WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Project Meeting

with Supervisor

Project

Development

Proposal Progress

Presentation and

Evaluation

Project

Development

(continued)

Project Testing

FYP Format

Writing

Workshop

Submit Draft

Report

46

Presentation and

Evaluation

Discussion and

Correction Report

Final Thesis

Submission