International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 7July 2013

ISSN: 2231-2803http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 2049

Stable Route Aware Routing in Mobile Ad-Hoc
Networks
Mamta Dhanda
#1
, Shikha Chaudhry
*2

1#
Department Of Computer Science &Engineering, JMIT, Radaur, Yamunanagar, India

2#
Department Of Computer Science &Engineering, JMIT, Radaur, Yamunanagar, India



Abstract To find a stable path from source to destination node
we propose a reliable multipath routing protocol. Path
discovered in our protocol is link by link verified .For choosing
the path in the proposed protocol, each link should satisfy a
chosen threshold value. If it doesnt satisfy it will not be used in
the paths. Therefore, the stable and reliable paths will be
constructed. This protocol reduces the routing overhead and the
energy consumption at the same time with improving packet
delivery ratio and throughput, especially in high mobility
scenarios .we introduce a new approach stable route aware
routing protocol that is capable of predicting the stability (i.e.,
expiration time) of multiple routes. Proposed protocol selects the
route that minimizes hop count while staying available for the
expected duration of packet transmission. The Stable route
aware routing (SRAR) resolve the problem of SADSR protocol
indicate a significant increase in route discovery success rate
with comparable route establishment and maintenance
overheads.

Keywords Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, Dynamic Source Routing
(DSR), Dynamic Power Management (DPM), Stability Aware
Routing.
I. INTRODUCTION
A Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of
mobile nodes forming as autonomous networks without the
support of any fixed infrastructure such as base station or
access point. In MANET, each node functions as a router/host
and forwards packets for other nodes in the network. The
network topology is not fixed due to the node mobility,
topology of the network changes frequently, which results in
obstruction, multipath dissemination and route loss. While
designing routing procedures, there are certain restraints on
mobile nodes in MANET that need to be kept in mind like
limited battery power, computation capacity, bandwidth and
wireless channel. To solve these problems researchers have
developed new and new mechanisms to find feasible routing
paths and sending packets in distributed environment where
network topology changes frequently. In a static network the
most favourable route is the path that contains minimum
number of hops from source to destination node; this concept
of minimum hops is not easily extended to Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks.
Routing protocols in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks are classified
into three categories: Proactive (Table Driven), Reactive (On-
Demand) and Hybrid routing protocols. In proactive routing
protocols (DSDV, WRP, FSR, CGSR, OLSR, GSR) the path
from source to destination is determined in advance prior to its
need. In reactive routing protocol (AODV, DSR, ABR, TORA)
the route from source to destination is determined when it is
needed. Hybrid routing protocols are combination of both
proactive and reactive protocols [1].
Mobile nodes in MANET are constrained by battery power.
In Mobile Ad Hoc Networks the lifetime of a mobile node is
limited due to finite battery capacity of the node. Each and
every packet sent from source and every computation
performed consumes the battery. Power awareness routing is
one solution for power conservation in Mobile Ad-Hoc
Networks. Thus routing protocol made the routing decisions
based on the power-status of the nodes[2]. For forwarding data
packets nodes with low battery power will be less preferably
than nodes with full battery power, this increase the lifetime of
the mobile nodes [3]. By minimizing control traffic in Mobile
Ad Hoc Networks, such as periodic update messages a routing
protocol tries to improve the lifetime of the nodes and network.
Thus different strategies can be followed for power awareness
in different routing protocols [5].The highly dynamic
character of a mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANET) poses
significant challenges in resource management and network
communications [4].
Earlier work on routing in MANETs has resulted in various
routing protocols whose aim is to satisfy constraints such as
minimum hop distance or lower energy. When route
availability is transient,(i.e. when no communication is taking
place mobile nodes switching their network cards into lower
power sleep modes) existing routing protocols fail to find
stable routes from source to destination.
In this paper, the work proposed a Stable Route Aware
Routing protocol (SRAR) that is capable of predicting the
stability (i.e., expiration time) of multiple routes. SRAR then
selects the route that minimizes hop count while staying
available for the expected duration of packet transmission. The
proposed scheme, protocol increases the successful packet
transmissions with comparable route establishment and
maintenance overheads. A new approach in Stable Route
Aware Routing protocol (SRAR) is based on the prediction of
future sleep times of mobile nodes (i.e., the times when mobile
nodes DPM techniques will turn off their network cards).This
new approach introduces DPM-awareness inrouting decisions
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 7July 2013

ISSN: 2231-2803http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 2050

and this increases the number of successful packet
transmissions.
II. RELATED WORK

Dynamic Power Management

Over the last decade MANET has gained huge popularity.
Different mobile nodes in wireless Ad-hoc Networks when
not transmitting or receiving data put their wireless network
cards into sleep mode. In most MANETs, wireless traffic is
infrequent and recent work [6] shows that wireless network
cards should be turned inactive for 50% or less of the entire
lifetime to obtain a balance between optimal power-saving
and sustained network connectivity. But sleep modes lower
the packet delivery ratio due to loss of network connectivity.
Routing in MANETs with transient route availabilities, i.e.,
route establishment takes into consideration the expiration
time and therefore the stability of a route. This concept of
stability is based on the prediction of future sleep times of
mobile nodes in the network (i.e., the times when mobile
nodes' DPM techniques will turn off theirnetwork cards). In
this approach DPM-awareness is introduced in
routingdecisions to increase the number of successful packet
transmissions. This concept of stability awareness can be
added to any routing protocol. Different types of stability
predictors can be used, that includes the DPM mechanism and
hints given by applications.

Network Sleep Time

Devices which are not currently active in any data
communication may enter a sleep state[7], but can be wake up
remotely through a signal using a simple circuit based on RF
technology can be powered up remotely. Radio devices select
different time-out values (sleep patterns),and on the basis of
sleep patterns devices enter into various sleep states
depending on quality of service and battery status. In a
MAC[8] layer protocol for PAMAS (Power Aware Multiple
Access protocol with Signalling) nodes overhearing
transmissions between two other nodes turn themselves off
and wake up after an interval of time equal to the total
transmission time as indicated in the RTS/CTS message
exchange between the sender-receiver pairs. The sleep and
awake schedule is determined from prediction of link
expiration based on the queue contents of the packet scheduler
and the network interface device timeout value. The DPM
schedule ignores the possibility of more packets being added
before the timeout expires hence this approach is somewhat
conservative.

III. PROBLEM FORMULATION
DPM supports energy conservation by making mobile nodes
put their wireless network cards to sleep when no data
communication is taking place. An effect of this technique is
that mobile nodes will be unreachable for large duration
oftime. Therefore, we require to know the precise network
`up' and `down' times (DPM schedule) in order to introduce
DPM awareness in routing decisions. Currently the protocol
predicts the DPM schedule for mobile nodes from the queue
contents of the packet scheduler and the network device
timeout value. Toward that end, the protocol computes the
minimum time to transmit all packets currently residing in the
packet scheduling
queueand adds the device-specific time out value,
transmission time of each data packet is calculated as follows
T
data
=T
rts
+T
cts
+T
ack
+T
dIIs
+3T
sIIs
+
(P +Q)
BW
channcI

Where
T
data
-Data packet transmission time
T
rts
-Time for transmitting RTS

T
cts
-Time for transmitting CTS
T
ack
-Time for transmitting ACK
T
difs
-DCF inter frame space defined in the protocol
standard of IEEE 802.11
T
sifs
-Short inter frame space defined in the protocol
standard of IEEE 802.11.
P - Size of the data packet
Q - Headerlength of IP MAC packet
BW
channel
-Channel capacity
We define the route uptime factor (RUF) as a metric which
indicates the earliest up time when the link between any pair
of adjacent nodes on a route is going to be interrupted due to
one (or both) of the nodes being put to sleep. Now we derive
RUF as follows: If we assume nodes as vertices and the links
between the nodes as edges connecting them, then let G(V,E)
be the graph representing the network topology where V is the
set of vertices and E is the set of edges. Let

) , ,... , ,.. , (
1 1 1 i i k k i i ij
v v v v v v R

(1)
be the route from source node V
i
to V
j
through intermediate
nodes V
k
,V
k+1
, etc. Let
ij
be the set of all possible alive
routes between V
i
and V
j
. The DPM sleeping schedule S
ij
for
the route is defined as

) ,.. , ,.. , (
1
1 1
up up
k
up
k
up
i
up
i ij
j
t t t t t S

(2)
Where
up
t is the earliest up time for node Vi. We define the
link uptime vector or L
ij
for the route
ij
R as
) ,.. , ,.. , (
1
1 1
uptime uptime
k
uptime
k
uptime
i
uptime
i ij
j
t t t t t L

(3)
Wheret

uptmc
is the uptime of the link (E
i
,E
i+1
) connecting
nodes V
i
and V
i+1
and is defined by average(t

up
,t
+1
up)
)since
uptime of a link is determined by how long
up
i
up
i
uptime
i
t t average t
1
, (

) (4)
The route R
ij
for route uptime factor RUF
ij
can be expressed
as the maximum of the link uptime vector L
ij
along the route
which shows how long the route will be alive before breaking
down due to the break in any of its constituent links:
) , , max(
ij
uptime
i i
uptime
i ij
L t V V t RUF

(5)
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 7July 2013

ISSN: 2231-2803http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 2051

Given the next earliest time to sleep t
i
off for each node
i
V
V, in the graph G(V,E), accumulate the set of all possible
routes
ij
between nodes V
i
and V
j
with the corresponding
route uptime factors RUF
ij
for each R
ij

ij
and then from all
available stable routes find the min-hop route R
ij
. If a
condition occurs that we have more than one route with the
same min-hop count then the route with maximum route
uptime factor is selected. Since this route has the highest
predicted lifetime. The route uptime factor contains the all
link uptime value between two nodes which satisfied the
transmission threshold value. The each node stores the link
uptime vector which contains the all stable link between two
nodes from source to destination.

III. PROPOSED WORK

Steps to identify the stable path in the proposed protocol

1. Source Node initiates the data transmission request.
2. Check for the destination node in route cache. If found
then forward the data packet to destination.
3. If destination node is not found in the route cache then
broadcast the route request packet to their neighbour node.
4. Calculate the link uptime value t

uptmc
between the node
V
i
to V
i+1
.
up
i
up
i
uptime
i
t t average t
1
, (

)
5. Ift

uptmc
>th (Threshold) then add in to the link uptime
vector and data packet is forwarded to the next node
) ,. , ,. , (
1
1 1
uptime uptime
k
uptime
k
uptime
i
uptime
i ij
j
t t t t t L

6.If the intermediate node receive more than two RREQ
packet thenIf I
k
uptmc
.previous RREQ >I
k
uptmc
.latest
RREQ then forward previous RREQ and discard latest
RREQ otherwise forward latest RREQ.
7. Repeat step 3 to step 6 till destination is found.
8. If destination found then store all route in to the routing
table in decreasing order of Route Uptime Factor
) , , max(
ij
uptime
i i
uptime
i ij
L t V V t RUF and send
RREP to the first entry of routing table.

Route discovery phase in Stable Route Aware Routing

When a source node needs to send a data packet to a target
node, it first searches its routing cache for any entry using the
target node address as the key. An entry in the routing cache
contains a list of stable routes to the target node. If an entry is
found in the cache table, then the source node selects a route
from the cache table, if no entry is found for the destination
node, then the source node initiates a route discovery for the
destination. The proposed protocol adds four new entry types
to the RREQ packet format of standard DSR
1. Link Uptime Vector (t

uptmc
;I (1,N-1)for the route,
2. Partial route R
ij
=(V
i
,V
i+1,.....
V
k ,.....................
V
j
,V
j+1)

3. Earliest Up-time of Last-upstream node (t

uptmc
)
4. Threshold value ( Th =t
data
transmission time of each data
packet ).

The protocol allows intermediate nodes to forward multiple
RREQ packet with the same <source address, request id>pair
if the data packets contain different source routes. During the
RREQ lookup at intermediate nodes, the 4-tuple <source
address, request id, address of last upstream node, partial route
length> is checked with each entry in the recently seen
requests list for possible match. If no match is found, then the
RREQ contains a distinct source route and is eligible to be
forwarded if the contained source route is predicted to be
stable.
If any intermediate node receives more than two RREQ
packets, it does not forward these all RREQ packet to their
neighbour node, the intermediate node performs the
comparison between the received RREQ and the previous
RREQ packet. If uptime of previous RREQ is greater than to
the received RREQ then discard the received RREQ and
forward the previous RREQ uptime. Fig1shows the route
discovery process; source node 1 broadcasts the RREQ packet
to their neighbour node and try to find the stable route from
source node 1 to destination node 6.
SRAR predicts the route stability using a link by link stability
prediction. Each intermediate node receives RREQ and
predicts the stability of the link between this node and the last
upstreamnode.
It is assumed that all the previous links in the source route are
stable; otherwise the RREQ packet would not have forwarded
by previous upstream nodes.
Thus the stability of the current link ensures the stability of
the entire source route. When intermediate node V
K+1
receive
RREQ itcalculates the uptime of the link between this node
and the last upstream node recorded in the RREQ and appends
it to the Link Uptime Vector in the RREQ. If the uptime is
less than Threshold, then the link will not be stable for the
entire period of exchanges of the RREQ, the following RREP
and then the data packet. Hence the RREQ is discarded by the
intermediate node.
In fig 1given example shows how the source node 1 broadcast
the route request packet (RREQ) to find the stable route for
transmitting the data packet to the destination node 6.
The RREQ packets contain the information of partial route
and link uptime vector for each route. The link uptime vector
stores the average value of link uptime of both nodes. In this
figure each node has an uptime value. In this example the
threshold value is 2, node 4 receives the two RREQ packets
from node 3 and 5 but .node 4 discard the RREQ of node 5
because the uptime value of node 5 is less then to the uptime
value of node 3 .
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 7July 2013

ISSN: 2231-2803http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 2052


Fig 1 Example of route discovery in SRAR














Flow chart of route discovery at Source node























Flow chart of route discovery at Intermediate node



























Route reply phase in SRAR
When the RREQ reaches the target, the route found through
the route discovery phase is predicted to be stable.The target
node sends an RREP packet back to the source along the
reverse path recorded in the RREQ. In this proposed protocol
the destination node maintains a routing table. The destination
node store the stable routes in the routing table in decreasing
order of the Route Uptime Factor .In the route reply phase the
destination node only send the one RREP packet which
contain the first entry of the routing table Hence it leads to
reduce the total transmission time between source to
destination. Fig 2 shows the example ofroute reply
process .The proposed protocol adds three new entry types to
the standard DSR RREP packet format:
Looking route cache
Buffer
Packet
Route
Discovery

No
Accept
Request Id
Already
seen?

Uptime of
previous
RREQ>up
time of
Latest
REQ

Discard
Link
uptime
long
enough
for data
transmis
sion?
Append My
address ,link
uptime
Store<src,id,lasthope,ro
ute length>

Broadcast RREQ
Done
Send RREP
Myadd
ress
=target
?


Forward
latest RREQ

Forward
previous
RREQ

Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Write source route
in thepacket
header

Packet in
Buffer


Done
Route
Found?
No
Yes
Yes
No
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 7July 2013

ISSN: 2231-2803http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 2053

1. Source route ) , , (
1 ,.. ,.. 1

j j k i i
V V V V V Rij
2. Link uptime vector (t

uptmc
; i (1,.,N-1))
3. Earliest up time. The minimum of all the Link Uptime
Vector elements.
4. Estimated Transmission Time

Route selection phase at the destination node in SRAR
At the destination node the all stable route store in the routing
table in decreasing order of the Route Uptime Factor .In the
route reply phase the destination node only send the one
RREP packet which contain the first entry of the routing table
Hence it leads to reduce the total transmission time between
source to destination












Fig 2 Example of route reply in SRAR
This example is based on the process of route reply in the
proposed protocol. In the fig 2 the destination node receive the
two RREQ packet at the destination node the all route store in
the routing table .The route store in the decreasing order of
Route Uptime factor. The RUF of first route {1,2,5} is 8 and
RUF of route{1,3,4} is 6.5. Hence the destination node first
send reply packet (RREP) to the route {1,2,5}.

V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
In order to validate the proposed protocol and show its
efficiency we present simulations using MATLAB.
MATLAB is a very popular network simulation tool.
It can be used for complicated graphics in two and three
dimensions.
Complicated algorithms involving matrices and vectors can
be coded easily.
Using MATLAB differential equations can be solved
easily.
For wide range of applications from science and
engineering it contains different tool boxes.

Simulation Setup

The simulated network area is 25pixelX25pixel with 10 to
25 nodes.
For each transmitting node network simulates a random
interval repeatedly. Each node is alive for the input Uptime
percentage of the simulated random interval and notifies the
routing module about its next earliest time to sleep each
time when it up.
Each simulation was run for 5 trials, with a full range of
uptime percentages from 0% to 100% with an interval of
10%. Each trial was run for 120seconds. Each transmitting
source node attempts to send one data packet to the sink
node.
In absence of significant communication nodes turn off their
network cards for power conservation, which leads to link
failures and low network connectivity.
Simulated network use the threshold value 0.6 for the each
link stability
The node transmission range is 6 meter

Results
We evaluate the performance of SRAR in terms metric as
follows:
In Fig 3 the graph measures the route discovery success rate
for both of the protocols. Route discovery success rate is
defined as the ratio of number of successful RREP packets
back to the number of RREQ packet send by the source
node.Results shows a significant increase in the performance
of SRAR over standard shortest path Routing. It is expected
because SRAR uses both the min-hop and stability metrics in
route discovery phase and finds more routes as the Uptime
percentage increases.



Fig 3Route discovery success rate

In Fig 4 the average number of routes per node has been found.
It shows how SRAR finds more routes per node with
increasing Uptime percentage.
.

0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
R
o
u
t
e

D
i
s
c
o
v
e
r
y

S
u
c
c
e
s
s

R
a
t
e
(
i
n
%
)
Uptime(in%)
ROUTE DISCOVERY SUCCESS RATE
STABLE
ROUTE
AWARE
ROUTING
SHORTEST
PATH
ROUTING
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 7July 2013

ISSN: 2231-2803http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 2054



Fig 4 Number of routes per source nodes (uptime)



Fig 5Number of routes per source nodes (threshold)
Fig 5 shows how SRAR finds more routes per node with
increasing Threshold percentage.
VI. CONCLUSION
The proposed protocol Stable Route Aware Routing
introduces DPM awareness into the routing decisions and
finds multiple stable routes from source to destination..
SRAR is hard in sense that it may discard any RREQ which
it considers to be non-stable and as a result may lead to a
situation where the source node fails to discover any stable
path to the destination node. But it can provide a user-
specified data rate & enhanced end-to-end transport
performance. Best optimal path will be selected from the
received paths. SRAR has been compared to shortest path
routing which does not consider power-saving but optimizes
routing for shortest delay and the proposed protocol provides
a significant increase in successful packet transmissions with
comparable route establishment and maintenance overheads.
SRAR is aggressive in sense that it proactively discards any
RREQ which is predicts to be non-stable and thus might lead
to a scenario where the source node fails to find any stable
path to the sink node

VII. FUTURE WORK
Future works would study how SRAR performs with
respect to other protocol. Stability can be added to any
existing routing protocol. Concept of bandwidth can be
added to SRAR to make it more stable and avoid link
breakage.
Future work would also study the combination of other
metrics such as real-time or minimum-energy
communication and how to obtain a balance of these
multiple constraints to make the new protocol yield good
performance.
REFERENCES
[1] G.Vijaya Kumar, Y.VasudevaReddyr, Dr.M.Nagendra Current
Research Work on Routing Protocols for MANET: A Literature
Survey, International J ournal on Computer Science and Engineering,
Vol. 02 , pp. 706-713 , 2010.
[2] VinayKalkal, Sami Anand, Routing algorithm protocol integrating
power aware routing and shortest path for Mobile Ad hoc network,
International J ournal for Science and Emerging Technologies with
Latest Trends, Vol.5, pp.15-19, 2013.
[3] MortezaMaleki, KarthikDantu, and MassoudPedramPower-aware
Source Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks , 2002.
[4] VeenaVenugopal, RadimBartos, Michael J . Carter and Sai S.
Mupparapu Improvement of Robustness for Ad Hoc Networks Through
Energy-Aware Routing, University of New Hampshire, 2003.
[5] C.-K. Toh, Maximum Battery Life Routing to Support Ubiquitous
Mobile Computing in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks, IEEE, pp.138-147,
2001.
[6] J . Monteiro, A. Goldman, A. Ferreira, Performance Evaluation of
Dynamic Networks using an Evolving Graph Combinatorial Model,
IEEE International Conference on Wire-less and Mobile Computing,
Networking and Communications, 2006.
[7] Carla F. Chiasserini, Ramesh R. Rao, A Distributed Power
Management Policy for Wireless Ad Hoc Networks, Proceedings of
IEEE Wireless Communication and Networking Conference, 2000
[8] S. Singh and C. S. Raghavendra, PAMAS-Power Aware Multi-Access
protocol with Signaling for Ad Hoc Networks ,ACM Commun. Rev.,
J uly 1998.











0
1
2
3
4
5
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
0
1
0
0
N
o
.

o
f

R
o
u
t
e

p
e
r

s
o
u
r
c
e

n
o
d
e
Uptime(in%)
No. of route per source node
Stable
Route
Aware
Routi
0
1
2
3
4
5
10 30 50 70 90
N
o
.

o
f

R
o
u
t
e

p
e
r

s
o
u
r
c
e

n
o
d
e
Threshold(in%)
No. of route per source node
Stable Route
Aware
Routing