Performance Analysis and Comparison of Multiple Routing Protocols in a Large-Area, High-Speed Mobile Node Ad Hoc Network
Versandkostenfrei!
Versandfertig in über 4 Wochen
54,99 €
inkl. MwSt.
PAYBACK Punkte
27 °P sammeln!
The U.S. Air Force is interested in developing a standard ad hoc framework using "heavy" aircraft to route data across large regions. The Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) has the potential to provide seamless large-scale routing for DoD under the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) program. The goal of this study is to determine if there is a difference between routing protocol performance when operating in a large-area MANET with high-speed mobile nodes. This study analyzes MANET performance when using reactive, proactive, and hybrid routing protocols, specifically AODV, DYMO, Fisheye, and ZRP. Thi...
The U.S. Air Force is interested in developing a standard ad hoc framework using "heavy" aircraft to route data across large regions. The Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) has the potential to provide seamless large-scale routing for DoD under the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) program. The goal of this study is to determine if there is a difference between routing protocol performance when operating in a large-area MANET with high-speed mobile nodes. This study analyzes MANET performance when using reactive, proactive, and hybrid routing protocols, specifically AODV, DYMO, Fisheye, and ZRP. This analysis compares the performance of the four routing protocols under the same MANET conditions. Average end-to-end delay, number of packets received, and throughput are the performance metrics used. Results indicate that routing protocol selection impacts MANET performance. Reactive protocol performance is better than hybrid and proactive protocol performance in each metric. Average ETE delays are lower using AODV (1.17 secs) and DYMO (2.14 secs) than ZRP (201.9 secs) or Fisheye (169.7 secs). Number of packets received is higher using AODV (531.6) and DYMO (670.2) than ZRP (267.3) or Fisheye (186.3). Throughput is higher using AODV (66,500 bps) and DYMO (87,577 bps) than ZRP (33,659) or Fisheye (23,630). The benefits of ZRP and Fisheye are not able to be taken advantage of in the MANET configurations modeled in this research using a "heavy" aircraft ad hoc framework.
Andere Kunden interessierten sich für
