International Journal of Computer Science Engineering and Information Technology Research (IJCSEITR) ISSN 2249-6831 Vol.

3, Issue 2, Jun 2013, 89-96 TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

A COMPARATIVE SURVEY ON VARIOUS ROUTE RECOVERY SCHEMES IN MANET

POOJA1 & AJAY DUREJA2
1 2

Student of M.Tech, PDM College of Engineering for Women, BGarh, Haryana, India

Assistant Professor, PDM College of Engineering for Women, BGarh, Haryana, India

ABSTRACT
Route failure in MANET is becoming a tenacious issue that needs to be handled as soon as it is detected. In MANET frequent host mobility during the transmission of data is the main cause of route failure and for such failure some route recovery mechanism should be carried out to continue transmission. Various route recovery schemes had been proposed in MANET. In this paper we have examined these route recovery schemes and provide a comparative survey of these schemes. The essence of comparative survey is to provide results that will be beneficial for researchers to develop new route recovery schemes.

KEYWORDS: MANET, Route Recovery, Route Failure, Multiple Paths, Route Discovery INTRODUCTION
What is Mobile Ad Hoc Networks? An autonomous system of mobile nodes connected by a wireless link is termed as MANET. Where mobile refers to random and perhaps constantly changing nodes, Ad Hoc refers to temporary and network refers to network used by wireless nodes to communicate. Frequent mobility, dynamic topology, multi-hop wireless links, self configuration and data transmission through intermediate nodes are some of the features of MANET As mobile ad hoc networks are economically beneficial, they are utilized in the military application, collective and distributed computing, emergency services, wireless mesh and sensor networks and even in hybrid networks. Routing in MANET Routing protocols are used for determining how to reach neighbor for transmission of data packets. Unipath Routing Protocols These protocols are designed to provide the unipath between source and the destination by establishing the multihop wireless link between nodes that are in communication range of node. Here each node behaves like router for finding routes and maintaining them. There are two types of unipath routing protocol table driven and reactive routing protocol. Table driven protocols are also known as proactive protocol that evaluates the routes periodically and maintains routes for each node in the network i.e each node has full topological view and when the packet is need to be transferred route is already known.. The examples of proactive protocols are DSDV, OSPF, OLSR, etc On demand protocol are also known as reactive protocol, these protocols initiate route discovery only when a source needs a route towards a destination. This implies that route is determined only when there is a need to send data. AODV and DSR are two main types of reactive routing protocols. Hybrid routing protocols are the combination of proactive and reactive protocols. Most of hybrid routing protocols are designed as a hierarchical or layered network framework. ZRP and TORA come under the hybrid routing protocols.

90

Pooja & Ajay Dureja

Multipath Routing Protocol Instead of single path these protocols provide multiple paths between source and the destination. Generally these protocols are designed to improve the performance of existing unipath protocols by providing multiple paths using alternate routes at the time of route failure. In this source can send packets to destination by using alternate route when the primary route fails. So multipath protocols are enhancement of unipath protocols. Issues in Routing Protocols Factors like frequent movement of nodes, unpredictability of environment and wireless medium, resourceconstrained nodes, bad condition of channels and packet collision are the main issues that results in faults like failure in route or failure in links or might cause breakage in routes. Route Maintenance and Route Recovery In MANET, data transmission starts immediately after establishing the primary route. But due to frequent mobility of nodes there may be a route failure in primary route .In order to handle this route maintenance is done to eliminate the broken link and to provide the uninterrupted transmission between source and the destination. Route recovery is part o f route maintenance.

Figure 1: Route Failure Due to Frequent Node Mobility In case of route failure route recovery is carried out. Traditionally the detecting node, that detect node failure will send route error (RERR) message to source node after receiving route error message source finds the alternate route if there is no alternate route then again route discovery is carried out to find alternate route, this solution leads to flooding of network Various proactive route failure detection protocols and on demand protocols based on limited broadcast, multiple paths or local error recovery has been widely studied and used in MANET now days for implementing solution to this flooding problem and also for providing efficient route recovery mechanisms. Overview Overview briefly describes the various sections of paper through pictorial representation.

A Comparative Survey on Various Route Recovery Schemes in MANET

91

Figure 2: Overview of Paper

SURVEY ON VARIOUS ROUTE RECOVERY SCHEMES IN MANET

In this section we will briefly examine various route recovery schemes and will discuss their performance criteria. PATCH: A Novel Local Recovery Mechanism (2003) Genping Liu et.al proposed a Proximity Approach to Connection Healing (PATCH) for local recovery mechanism, which reduces the control overhead and provide fast recovery when route breaks. It was simple, robust and effective approach for route recovery [8]. Table 1: Performance Analysis of PATCH Mobility Moderate Throughput PDR Improve up to 10% Overhead Reduced up to 30-50% End to End Delay Reduces up to 50%

Cross-Layer Approach for Fast Link Error Recovery (2006) Justin yacoski et.al proposed CIFLER, cross-layer approach which uses enhanced channel reservation messages that allows alternate nodes to self elect themselves by using only infrred neighbor information this self-election avoids dependence on individual links and minimizes the failure in links [9]. Table 2: Performance Analysis of CIFLER Mobility High Low Throughput Better Worst PDR Worst High Overhead No congestion control No congestion control End to End Delay High low

Location-Based Route Self-Recovery (2007) Sirisha Medidi and Jiong Wang proposed a location-based route self-recovery technique for source-initiated routing protocols. The proposed technique was based on assumption that, when a primary route between source and destination fails then a new route or the recovery route was considered on the basis of most recently used route. The main focus of the approach is to overcome the problem of link failure without disturbing other nodes in the route [7].

92

Pooja & Ajay Dureja

Table 3: Performance Analysis of Location Based Route Self Recovery Mobility High Throughput Increase up to 15% PDR Drops Overhead Better End to End Delay

Probabilistic Counter-Based Route Discovery and Route Failure Recovery (2009) Aminu Mohammed et.al proposed probabilistic counter-based method that can significantly reduce the number of RREQ packets transmitted during route discovery operation. The proposed probabilistic counter-based route discovery method results in significant performance improvements in terms of routing overhead, MAC collisions and end-to-end delay while still achieving a good throughput [2]. Table 4: Performance Analysis of Probabilistic Counter Based Route Discovery Mobility Throughput Better Effective route maintenance and Restoration Schemes (2010) Byung-Seok Kang and In-Young Ko proposed a new flooding mechanism to control route paths. The proposed scheme is its effective tracking of the destinations location based on the beacon messages of the main route nodes. The proposed scheme shows improvements in the data packet delivery ratio and reduces the amount of routing control message overhead [5]. Table 5: Performance Analysis of Effective Route Maintenance and Restoration Schemes Mobility Throughput Better PDR 72% Overhead Slightly Reduced Control Message Reduced up to 9.5% PDR Overhead Lowers End to End Delay Poor

Enhancement of Split Multipath Routing Protocol (2010) Dhirendra Kumar Sharma et.al enhanced the performance of Split Multipath Routing protocols by using route update mechanism. This enhancement is useful in route recovery , they repair the broken route through route update mechanism process and reduce the delay through new updated path it was a heuristic approach to reduce the delay metric and increase the performance of MANET [3]. Table 6: Performance Analysis of Enhancement of Split Multipath Routing Protocol Mobility Throughput PDR Overhead End to End Delay Improved

Route Maintenance Approach for Link Breakage Prediction (2011) Khalid Zahedi et.al proposed a route maintenance approach for prediction of link breakage. In this, the availability of a link is evaluated, and a warning is issued if there is a possibility of soon link breakage. This approach had been implemented on the existing Dynamic Source Routing protocol (DSR). This approach reduces the packet loss and delay that occur in original DSR protocol [6].

A Comparative Survey on Various Route Recovery Schemes in MANET

93

Table 7: Performance Analysis of Probabilistic Counter Based Route Discovery Mobility Throughput PDR Low Fast Route Recovery Scheme (2011) Junghwi jeon et.al proposed a novel fast route recovery scheme which employs local recovery of routes for reliability and reduces the number of control messages for efficiency of the network. This scheme considers a backup nodes mobility and conducts a route recovery process implicitly []. Table 4: Performance Analysis of Fast Route Recovery Scheme Mobility Throughput PDR Better Overhead Reduced End to End Delay Low Overhead End to End Delay Increases with route

Multipath Routing Protocol for Effective Local Route Recovery (2012) D. Jagadeesan et.al proposed (MANET). Multipath routing protocol for effective local route recovery in Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANET) in this protocol, multipath path between the source and the destination is established and they are cached in there route cache at the time of route failure the overhearing node send the recovery route the detecting node select the recovery route on the basis of route with higher available bandwidth route. This approach provides efficient use of bandwidth for increasing network performance [4]. Table 8: Performance analysis of Multipath Routing Protocol for Effective Local Route Recovery Mobility Throughput PDR Increases Fuzzy Based Route Recovery Technique (2012) Devi M. proposed Fuzzy Based Route Recovery Technique .It consists of two phases, Proactive failure discovery, and Route failure recovery. Nodes in the network estimate the metrics Link Expiration Time (LET), Received Signal Strength (RSS), Available Bandwidth (ABW) and Residual Energy (RE) and using fuzzy logic, the type of node is estimated as weak, normal or strong. Fuzzy based route recovery technique provides efficient and accurate prediction of route failure in the Mobile ad hoc networks [10]. Table 9: Performance Analysis of Fuzzy Based Route Recovery Technique Mobility Throughput PDR Good Reliable Route Recovery Scheme (2012) H. Riasudheen and J.N. Rajesh Kumar proposed RRR-AODV (reliable route recovery) scheme. This employs local recovery of routes for reliability and reduces the number of control messages with the help of backup nodes to improve the efficiency of the network. This scheme provides reduction in overhead and control messages which in turn improves the routing performance [11]. Overhead Less End to End Delay Less Overhead Reduced End to End Delay Less

94

Pooja & Ajay Dureja

Table 10: Performance Analysis of Reliable Route Recovery Scheme Mobility Throughput PDR Overhead Reduced Simulation of Carry Protocol (C-Protocol) (2012) Ahmed Alghamdi et.al proposed group of protocols (c-protocols),these protocol at the time of route failure store the packets on any intermediate node and when the failure node is attached to any other node these packets are retransmitted to that node .These protocols focus on issue of dropping packets when the path breaks. So the approach allows transmission of data even when the path fails, carry protocols are generally store and forward protocols.GPS enabled version of these protocols provide highest throughput from all existing protocols [1]. Table 11: Performance Analysis of Carry Protocols Mobility Throughput Increased Route Recovery Scheme for Efficient MANET Narendra Babuji Yadla et.al proposed a distributed routing protocol i.e., Temporally Ordered Routing Algorithm for mobile ad-hoc networks. The protocol provides three basic functions first creation of routes secondly maintenance of routes and thirdly erasing of routes. For these functions protocol uses three different packets. The protocol is efficient and adaptive for scalable networks [12]. Table 12: Performance analysis of Route Recovery Scheme for Efficient MANET Mobility Throughput PDR Worst when no of connection increases Overhead High End to End Delay Increases with route PDR Large Overhead End To End Connectivity Lack of end to end path Control Messages Reduced

COMPARISON OF VARIOUS ROUTE RECOVERY SCHEMES

In this section table summarizes the brief comparison between various route recovery schemes on the basis of parameters like resource, protocol, route discovery and route recovery. Table 13: Showing Comparison between Various Route Recovery Schemes Paper PATCH: A Novel Local Recovery Mechanism(2003) Cross-Layer Inference-Based Fast Link Error Recovery For MANET(2006) Location-based Route Selfrecovery(2007) Resource IEEE Conference Protocol DSR-LR Route Discovery Flooding Route Recovery Broadcast Route request within region where failure happens Prepare in advance all usable alternate nodes.

CIFLER

RTS/CTS Mechanism

NSF grant CNS0454416

DSR

Flooding

Cone shaped recovery zone based on directional information of the destination.

A Comparative Survey on Various Route Recovery Schemes in MANET

95

Paper Probablistic Counter-Based Route Discovery and Route Failure recovery(2009) Effective route maintenance and restoration scheme(2010) Enhancement of Split Multipath Routing Protocol(2010) Route Maintenance Approach for Link Breakage Prediction(2011) Multipath Routing Protocol for Effective Local Route Recovery(2012) Fuzzy Based Route Recovery Technique(2012) Reliable Route Recovery Scheme(2012) Simulation of Carry Protocol(cprotocol)(2012) Route Recovery Scheme for Efficient MANET(2013)

Resource

Table 13 Contd., Protocol Route Discovery

Route Recovery

IWCMC 2009

AODV

PCBR Route Discovery

Article from sensors journal

LBHRP

Directional for wading and flooding

Tracking by beaconing

IJCSE

SMR

Flooding RREQ

Route update mechanism By determining received signal strength indicator and then sending soon link breakage message. Overhearing node send recovery path. Optimal path is selected on the basis of bandwidth. Status of the node is verified before transmission if weak then send route recovery warning. Consider backup nodes mobility and construct route recovery process implicitly By considering first hop in the list routing, closest hop routing or farthest or routing

IJACSA

DSR

Broadcasting RREQ

Journal of computer science European journal of scientific research

MPLRR

AODV

FBRRT

Proactive failure discovery

ICCCE 2012 4TH International Conference on Future computing International Journal for development of computer science and technology

RRRAODV Carry protocols Distributed routing protocol

Flooding RREQ

Sequence of directed links

Broadcasting query packet and checking downstream link.

OBSERVATION
By observing various route recovery schemes we obtain various methods of route recovery that can be implemented at the time of route failure for recovery. These recovery methods are effective for developers who are developing new route recovery schemes , Developers can combine the results obtained and can generate hybrid approach that works more effectively than the existing ones The hybrid solutions can be, detecting node that detects failure, flood the route recovery request to its neighbors that are in range and consider the one which has no other route recovery request pending or on the basis of higher bandwidth, or the neighbor which is closest to the destination or farthest to the destination or checking the neighbor if it has route cache to the destination and many more, by combining any of these two factors a new approach can be developed

REFERENCES
1. Ahmed Alghamdi,John De Dourek, Przemslaw Pochec, 2012,Simulation of Carry Protocol (cprotocol)For

96

Pooja & Ajay Dureja

MANET Network, FUTURE COMPUTING 2012:The Fourth International Technologies and Application, IARIA,2012.ISBN: 978-1-61208- 217-2. 2. Aminu, M., M. Ould-Khaoua, L.M. Mackenzie, route discovery for mobile ad hoc networks.

Confrence on Future Computational

C.Perkins and J.D. Abdulai, 2009. Probabilistic counter-based Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Wireless

Communications and Mobile Computing:Connecting the World Wirelessly, (WCMC 09) ACM New York, NY, USA, pp: 1335-1339.DOI:10.1145/1582379.1582672. 3. Dhirendra, K.S., S. Kumar and C. Kumar, 2010, Enhancement of split multipath Routing protocol inMANET. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng., 02: 679-685. 4. D. Jagadeesan and 2S.K. Srivatsa 2012, Multipath Routing Protocol for Effective Local Route Recovery in Mobile Ad hoc Network, Journal of Computer Science 8 (7): 1143- 1149, 2012, ISSN 1549-3636 2012 Science Publications. 5. Kang, B.S. and I.Y. Ko, 2010, Effective route maintenance and restoration schemes in Mobile adhoc networks, Sensors, 10: 808-821. 6. Khalid Zahedi and Abdul Samad Ismail, 2011, Route Maintenance Approach for Link Breakage Predicttion in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, Vol. 2, No. 10, 2011. 7. Sirisha Medidi and Jiong Wang,2007. Location-based Route Self-recovery for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks. Part of NSF grant CNS-0454416, 6577-4 V. 5 (p.1 of 7) / Color: No / Format: Letter / Date: 3/15/2007 1:30:26 PM. 8. Genping Liu,Kai Juan Wong,Bu Sung Lee,Boon Chong Seet,Chuan Heng Foh, Lijuan Zhu ,2003,PATCH:Anovel Local RECOVERY Mechanism For Mobile Ad-hoc Networks,Vehicular Technology Conference, 2003. VTC 2003-Fall. 2003 IEEE 58th,Vol 5,6-9 oct 2003. 9. Justin Yackoski, Chien-Chung Shen: Cross-layer inference-based fast link error recovery for MANETs. WCNC 2006: 715-722. 10. Rhymend Uthariaraj, 2012, Fuzzy Based Route Recovery Technique for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.83 No.1 (2012), pp.129-143. 11. H. Riasudheen and J.N. Rajesh Kumar,2012, Reliable Route Recovery Scheme for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, International Conference on Computing and Control Engineering (ICCCE 2012), 12 & 13 April, 2012. 12. Narendra Babuji Yadla#1, CH.SURESH BABU#2,2013, Route Recovery Schemes for Efficient MANET, International Journal for Development of Computer Science & Technology Issue-1, Volume-1(January 2013)