Simulation of EDCA Internal Contention: The simulation generated Tx packets comprising both messages DENM and CAM.

Below is the average number of Tx packets of each message generated as the data rate was increased from 1Mbps to 3 Mbps.

Data Rate (Mbps) 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Tx Packets: DENM 2499 3749 4998 6248 7498

Tx Packets: CAM 2499 3749 4998 6248 7498

I used a modified awk command like so: awk '{s+=$2} END {print 1.0," " s/NR}' delayDenm1.dat > DENM_avgDelay.txt awk '{s+=$2} END {print 1.5," " s/NR}' delayDenm1_5.dat >> DENM_avgDelay.txt awk '{s+=$2} END {print 2.0," " s/NR}' delayDenm2.dat >> DENM_avgDelay.txt .. .. The part in Red corresponds to the Data Rate used. The awk command operates on the data file, for example delayDenm1.dat, extracts and sums up each entry in the second column (s+=$2) and then computes the average by dividing the sum by NR which is the number of records in the input file. The output of the series of awk commands is the file DENM_avgDelay.txt which has the following contents: 1 0.00289617 1.5 0.00459621 2 0.00481576 2.5 0.564857 3 1.14085 This was then used as an input to GNUPLOT to generate the plot: set title "DENM Average Delay" set xlabel "Data Rate (Mbps)" set ylabel "Average Delay (ms)" set grid set output "DENM_avgDelay.png" plot "DENM_avgDelay.txt" with lines The same steps were used to generate the other plots.

1 a. Variation of Throughput as a function of data rate Plotting the Average Throughput which is given by the ratio of the number of received packets and the number of transmitted packets:

2. The Priority sub-field of the QOS Control field in the 802.11 header of the UDP Packets is set to 1 for Background priority (CAM) and 0 for Best Effort priority (DENM). 6.2 Simulation of general contention

Data Rate (Mbps) 0.1 0.5 1 2

Tx Packets: DENM 249 1248 2496 6248

Tx Packets: CAM 249 1248 2496 6248

Increasing the data rate from 0.1 Mbps to 2 Mbps and plotting the throughput as a function of data rate for both traffic classes, the following plots are obtained:

Observations: CAM Throughput drops very sharply as the data rate increases beyond 0.1 Mbps. DENM Throughput also drops but not as sharply since DENM traffic belongs to a higher priority class (Voice). 7 Receiver Model: Evaluating the receiver ability to receive packets and differentiate traffic sources 1. Reception statistics with only CAM or DENM traffic Only Car 1 transmits DENM. The CAM application on Car 2 is disabled. Below are the SNR and PER results: SNR=246.019, PER=0 SNR=19.6677, PER=0 SNR=246.019, PER=0 SNR=19.6677, PER=0 The reception statistics are identical. If only one car is transmitting data, there is no congestion in the network, consequently the received SNR at Car 0 is the same in both cases. Note that this is due to identical transmit power configurations for both cars. Only Car 2 transmits CAM. The DENM application on Car 1 is disabled. Below are the SNR and PER results:

2. Reception statistics with simultaneous transmission: start at channel 1 start at channel 1 start at channel 1 sync to signal (power=4.9356e-11W) drop packet because already in Rx (power=4.9356e-11W) drop packet because already in Tx (power=3.94571e-12W) drop packet because already in Tx (power=3.94571e-12W) EndREceive: mode=3000000, snr=246.019, per=1, size=1066 failure Tx packets App 2 We observe that the PER is 1 which means no packets are received successfully at Car 0. The SNR reported is incorrect due to a bug in the computation at the NS-3 PHY module. 3. Effect of increasing the transmission power of Node 1 on the reception statistics Instead of increasing the tx power by 5 db, I increased the tx power in steps of 3 dB (doubling) in order to notice the variation of PER with increasing Tx power of one transmitter. The results are below: 8 Congestion Control:

The average reception probability is the same when only CAM or DENM traffic is trasmitted in the network. 2. 3. Reducing