You are on page 1of 6

MANTHAN-15

ISSN: 2321-8134

IJFEAT
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS AND
TECHNOLOGY

Literature Review on Ant Colony Optimization Based Routing Protocol for


Vehicular Ad-hoc Network (VANet)
K.D. Kalambe1, N. A. Giradkar2, Benazeer A. Khan3
1

Research Scholar, ETC Department, GHRCE, Nagpur-440016, India. E-mail: kkalambe102@gmail.com


Research Scholar, ETC Department, DMIETR, Wardha-442001, India. E-mail: nehaa.giradkar@gmail.com
3
Research Scholar, ETC Department, DMIETR,Wardha-442001, India. E-mail: benazeerkhan023@yahoo.com
2

Abstract
VANETs are the networks that rely on their own vehicles to provide accident avoidance systems. Such networks have clear
distinctive features such as restricted mobility and high speed of nodes. One of the mainly vital challenges in such a network is
reliable routing of data packets among the vehicle users. Ant Colony Optimization is used to search diverse routes between nodes
in the network to aid in link failures. To attain scalability the network has to divide into many zones. The use of proactive approach
is to discover a route within a zone and reactive approach is to discover routes between zones. To reduce broadcasting and
overcrowding the local information stored in each zone is used. The algorithm make resourceful use of the network bandwidth is
scalable and is strong to link failures. The hybrid algorithm proved to be more efficient in terms of End to End delay, Jitter, Energy,
and Throughput for the network. In this paper the review of routing protocol which is proactive as well as reactive with Ant colony
optimization is shown.
Index TermsAnt Colony Optimization (ACO), IARP, IERP and Vehicular Ad-hoc Network (VANET).

I.

INTRODUCTION

Vehicular Ad-hoc Network (VANET) is a subclass of an ad


hoc network. Vehicles in VANET communicate with close by
vehicles or road side units that are mounted in centralized
locations such as intersections and parking lots. There are two
types of communication: vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicleto-infrastructure (V2I). In V2V communication nearby vehicles
exchange data by using short range wireless technologies, WiFi and WAVE. Vehicles have a special electronic device that
allows them to receive or relay messages. In V2I, vehicles are
connected to the nearby road infrastructure via continuous
wireless communication through Wi-Fi hotspots or long/wide
range wireless technologies for exchanging information
relevant to the specic road segment. In this work we consider
V2V communication. In VANETs, some applications require
group communication services. Therefore, Multicast routing is
the most efficient method, overcoming the unicast and
broadcast routing.

The frequent change in the network topology, the high speed of


nodes and other features of VANETs, make the multicast
routing a real challenge in vehicular scenarios. Therefore, a
proficient protocol to maintain a good performance in the
transmission/reception of multicast packets is required.
In V2V, each vehicle (a vehicle in a network) transmits a
message to other vehicles using on-board units. The movement
of vehicles although are in an organized fashion, that is, in
accordance to traffic rules and traffic signals, there are some
challenges posed in developing an efficient routing algorithm
for VANET. First, the life time of the links are affected by the
mobility of the vehicles, that is, the connectivity between the
vehicles. Second, because of dynamic network topology, the
routing table of each vehicle needs to be congured frequently
requiring lots of communication and causing overcrowding.
This makes deliverance of packets to destination extremely
hard. In general, vehicles make use of wireless network as the
primary medium to communicate with other vehicles in their
radio range using routing protocols. The routing protocols
exchange topology related information within the network to
nd an efficient path between vehicles.

http: // www.ijfeat.org (C) International Journal For Engineering Applications and Technology

MANTHAN-15

ISSN: 2321-8134
periodically to the neighbors. This scenario may cause extra
overhead particularly in the high mobility network. Though,
routes to destinations will always be obtainable when needed
[8]. Proactive protocols frequently depend on shortest path
algorithms to determine which route will be selected as they
usually use two routing strategies: Link state strategy and
distance vector strategy.

Figure 1: Classification of Routing Protocols

IARP is a family of limited-depth, proactive link-state routing


protocols. Nodes regularly send information about their
inbound neighbours. The hop-count of these advertisements is
limited to the zone radius. If the IARP is unable to discover
the destination,
i.e., the destination node is out of nodes zone, at that time,
IERP is called. It is a reactive protocol that enables the
discovery of the destination. Rather than focusing on a standard
flood search, it exploits the structure of the routing zone to do
more intelligent query dissemination [3].
Several works in mobile ad hoc networks have shown that
nature inspired (bio inspired or swarm intelligence) algorithms
inspired by insects such as ant colony based optimization
(ACO), can be successfully applied for developing efficient
routing algorithms. These algorithms have a quantity of
advantages compared to other routing algorithms. For example,
they reduce the routing overhead by sharing local information
for future routing decisions. They also offer many paths
enabling selection of another route in case of link failure on the
previously selected path.
ACO algorithm is a hybrid routing algorithm that makes
effective use of the bandwidth. This algorithm is scalable and
robust to link failures. We subdivide the nodes into zones with
each vehicle belonging to one or two overlapping zones. We
use proactive approach to nd a route within a zone and
reactive approach to nd routes between zones using the local
information stored in each zone thereby trying to reduce
broadcasting and congestion [2].

II.

OVERVIEW OF PROACTIVE
ROUTING PROTOCOLS

Proactive protocols permit a network node to use the routing


table to stock up routes information for every node, though
every entry in the table contains the next hop node used in the
path to the final node, whether the route is really essential or
else not. The table must be updated simultaneously to replicate
the network topology changes and should be broadcast

A.
DESTINATION
SEQUENCE
DISTANCE
VECTOR ROUTING (DSDV)
DSDV protocol it is an most primitive ad hoc routing protocol
in which it implements the distance vector approach and uses a
shortest path algorithm to employ simply single route to
destination which stored in the routing table, the information
about all accessible nodes with the entire amount of hops
required to reach these nodes are always found in each routing
table and each entry in the routing table is labelled with a
sequence number initiated by the destination node. To continue
routes accurately, every node should periodically broadcast its
routing table to its neighbors. The loop free routs, excludes
additional traffic caused by regular updates and reduces control
message overhead guarantees by DSDV protocol [10]. Though,
by maintaining nodes randomized conclusion which allows
each node to formulate a judgment whether to forward or
discard a packet.
B. OPTIMIZED LINK STATE ROUTING
PROTOCOL (OLSR)
OLSR protocol utilizes the link state strategy; it
provides a routing table contains information with reference to
every probable route to network nodes. Each node have to send
its updated information to various selective nodes when the
changed in network topology occurs, which rebroadcasts this
information to its other selective nodes. The nodes which are
absent in the particular list can just read and process the packet.
Some researchers thought that OLSR has simple process which
allows it to integrated different operating systems, also it
workings fit in the dynamic topology, though, OLSR may
cause network overcrowding; because of common control
packets which sent to switch topology changes, additionally
OLSR do not take into account the high assets capabilities of
nodes (like transmission range, bandwidth, directional antenna)
[10].
C.

FISHEYE STATE ROUTING (FSR)


In FSR, the node periodically updates its table based on
the latest information received from neighboring nodes. The
neighboring nodes always get an updating of the routing table
entries that concern a certain destination which is broadcasted
by different frequencies. Table entries that are additional in the
distance are broadcast with lower frequency than entries that
are closer, this scheme doesn't assurance reduce broadcast
overhead in large distances routing procedure. Though, it could
be exact, if the packets get nearer towards the destination [8].
The problem with the FSR is that, the increasing network sizes
will also enlarge the routing tables, moreover if the topology
changes enlarged, the route to a remote destination becomes
incorrect. The benefit of proactive routing protocols can be
resulted that there is no need to route discovery process;
because the route to the destination is kept in the background,

http: // www.ijfeat.org (C) International Journal For Engineering Applications and Technology

MANTHAN-15
furthermore proactive protocols at regular intervals update the
routing information which lets these protocols to perform well
in low mobility networks.

III.

OVERVIEW OF REACTIVE
ROUTING PROTOCOLS

Reactive routing protocols is also called on-demand


which reduces the network overhead; by maintaining routes
only when required, so as to the source node starts a route
detection procedure, if it desires a non active route to a
destination, it does this procedure by flooding the network by a
route request message. Once the message reach the destination
node (or to the node which has a route to the destination), this
node will send a route reply (RRP) message back to the source
node using unicast communication. Reactive routing protocols
are applicable to the large size of the mobile ad hoc networks
which are highly mobility and frequent topology changes [4].

A. AD HOC ON-DEMAND DISTANCE VECTOR


(AODV)
AODV offers low network overhead by reducing messages
flooding in the network; that when compared to proactive
routing protocols, by reducing the requirement of memory size;
by minimizing the routing tables which keep only entries for
recent routes, also keeps next hop for a route rather than the
route. It moreover provides dynamically updates for providing
the route conditions and eliminates looping in routes; by using
destination sequence numbers as a result it causes delays in a
route discovery and also route failure may require a new route
discovery which produces additional delays that decrease the
data transmission rate and increase the network overhead.
Moreover, the varying broadcasts without control will consume
extra bandwidth (broadcast storm problem), this problem
increases because the number of network nodes increases that
besides collisions which excess lead to packet lost problem [4].
B. DYNAMIC SOURCE ROUTING PROTOCOL
(DSR)
DSR is a multi hop protocol; it decreases the network
overhead by reducing periodic messages. This protocol has two
main processes that are route discovery and route Maintenance.
In the route discovery, when a source node needs a busy route,
it primarily broadcasts a route request message. All in-between
nodes which arriving this message will rebroadcast it,
excluding if it be the destination node otherwise it has a route
to the destination; in this case the node will send a route replay
message back to the source, afterwards the received route is
cashed into the source routing table for future use. If a route is
fault, the source node will be acknowledged by a route error
message. In DSR protocol, each data packet contains a
complete list of the intermediate nodes; so the source node
should delete the failed route from its cache, and if it supplies
other successful route to that destination in its cache, it will
swap over the failed one by the other successful route. If there
is no another route, it will start a new route discovery
procedure [9]. The benefit of DSR protocol is that it can use
the alternative route before starts a new process for route
discovery. Conversely, the multi routes may guide to extra

ISSN: 2321-8134
routing overheads by adding all route information to each data
packet, further, as the network cover greater distance and
together with extra nodes, the overhead will normally increase
and as result network performance will be degraded [9].
C. TEMPORALLY ORDERED ROUTING
ALGORITHM (TORA)
TORA is a distributed routing protocol using multi hop
routing; it is designed to reduce the communication overhead
related to frequent network changes. This protocol does not
employ a shortest path algorithm; therefore the routing
structure does not stand for a distance. TORA build up a
directed graph which includes the source node as the tree root.
Packets must be running from higher nodes to lower nodes in
the tree. If a node broadcasts a packet to a specific destination,
its nearer node will broadcast a route replay if it has a
downward link to the destination, if not, it drops the packet.
TORA ensures the multi path loop free routing; since the
packet always flows downward to the destination and don't
flow upward back to the sending node [4]. The advantage of
TORA offers a route to every node in the network and
decreases the control messages broadcast. Though, it causes
routing overhead in maintaining routes to all network nodes.

IV.

OVERVIEW OF HYBRID ROUTING


PROTOCOLS

Hybrid protocol is a mixture of both proactive and reactive


protocols. The main aim is to minimize the proactive routing
protocol control overhead and reduce the delay of the route
discovery process within on-demand routing protocols. For
route discovery and maintenance processes the hybrid protocol
divides the network into many zones to provide more
reliability.
A. ZONE ROUTING PROTOCOL (ZRP)
ZRP is the first protocol developed as a hybrid routing
protocol, it was proposed to reduce the control overhead of
proactive routing protocols and decrease the latency caused by
routing discover in reactive routing protocols. ZRP defines a
zone around each node consisting of its k-neighbourhood (e. g.
k=3). In ZRP, the distance and a node, all nodes within -hop
distance from node belongs to the routing zone of node. ZRP is
formed by two sub-protocols, a proactive routing protocol:
Intra-zone Routing Protocol (IARP) is used inside routing
zones and a reactive routing protocol: Inter-zone Routing
Protocol (IERP) is used between routing zones, respectively. A
route to a destination within the local zone can be established
from the proactively cached routing table of the source by
IARP, therefore, if the source and destination is in the same
zone, the packet can be delivered immediately. Most of the
existing proactive routing algorithms can be used as the IARP
for ZRP. For routes beyond the local zone, route discovery
happens reactively. The source node sends a route requests to
its border nodes, containing its own address, the destination
address and a unique sequence number. Border nodes are nodes
which are exactly the maximum number of hops to the defined
local zone away from the source. The border nodes check their
local zone for the destination. If the requested node is not a
member of this local zone, the node adds its own address to the
route request packet and forwards the packet to its border

http: // www.ijfeat.org (C) International Journal For Engineering Applications and Technology

MANTHAN-15
nodes. If the destination is a member of the local zone of the
node, it sends a route reply on the reverse path back to the
source. The source node uses the path saved in the route reply
packet to send data packets to the destination.

V.

OVERVIEW OF ANT COLONY


OPTIMIZATION

Problem solving approaches that take their inspiration from


nature (the social behaviour of insects and other animals) are
termed as Swarm Intelligence (SI). Ant Colony Optimization is
one of the significant SI techniques that have been widely
applied in providing solution to static and dynamic problems
[2]. The behaviour of ants have been studied by Goss [7] which
shows that ants are able to find out the shortest path from their
nest to a food source and also adapt easily to path disruptions
that may occur.
The Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) is a bio-inspired
metaheuristic procedure. It aims to nd suitable solutions in a
feasible computational time, rather than the optimal solution in
non-feasible time. The inspiring source of ACO is the foraging
behaviour of real ants. This behaviour enables ants to nd the
shortest paths between their food sources and their nests. When
looking for food ants deposit pheromone on the ground. When
they make a decision about a route to go, they choose paths
with higher probability that is marked by stronger pheromone
concentrations. This behaviour is the basis for the ACO
metaheuristic. The ACO metaheuristic can easily adapt to the
routing in mobile ad hoc networks because it has the features
of: adapting to dynamic topology, evaluation of link
transmission quality, path selection solution in feasible time
and distributed management control [1].

ISSN: 2321-8134
The ability of ants to self organize is based on four principles.
They are positive feedback, negative feedback, randomness and
multiple communications.
This is used to improve the good result.
When ants move from one node to another, the concentration
of the pheromone along that trail increases. This helps other
ants to travel in this path.
e feedback This is mainly used to destroy bad
solution. It can be done by decay of pheromone concentration
with respect to time. The rate of decay is problem definite. Low
decay rate encourages the bad result not being destroyed for
longer time and higher decay rate destroys good solution early.
Path to be taken by ant is completely random
hence there is possibility of generation of new solutions.
Multiple interactions The solution is found by interaction
of different agents, so one ant cannot find the food, as the
pheromone would decay. Hence more ants can find food
faster in food searching process [6].
Zone-based ant colony VANET algorithm In our algorithm the
network is divided into zones. For routing the packets, we
follow a proactive approach within the zone and a reactive
approach between the zones. The radius length measured in
hops determines the size of the zone. A vehicle can exist within
two overlapping zones and the zones can vary in size. A
vehicle is categorized as interior vehicle, boundary vehicle and
exterior vehicle. All the vehicles within a zone having a hop
distance of less than the radius are known as interior vehicles.
The overlapping vehicles within the zones with the hop
distance equal to the radius are known as boundary vehicles
and the vehicles with the hop distance greater than the radius
are known as exterior vehicles. Figure 3 explains about the
vehicles with an example. If the source vehicle is S and the
radius of the zone is 2 then vehicles A, D, F are boundary or
border vehicles, and vehicles B, C, E are interior vehicles. All
other vehicles are exterior vehicles i.e. the vehicles outside the
zone.

Figure 2: Ants behaviour

ACO uses stigmergy (i.e. communication through the


environment) for interaction among members. Interaction is
based on primitive instincts with no supervision. ACO works
on the concept of pheromone laying on trails, followed by
other ants. Pheromone is a potent form of chemical substance
that can be sensed by ants as they travel. It attracts ants and so
ants lean to follow trails that have high pheromone
concentrations. This causes an autocatalytic reaction, one that
is accelerated by itself.

Figure 3: Zone-based ant colony VANET

The two main phases of routing, route discovery and route


maintenance can either happen within the zone or between
zones. We have used two routing tables: Intra zone routing
table and Inter zone routing table. The Intra zone routing table

http: // www.ijfeat.org (C) International Journal For Engineering Applications and Technology

MANTHAN-15
proactively updates the information within the zone, whereas,
the Inter zone routing table tracks the information between the
zones, on demand. During route discovery and maintenance,
we have used ve different types of ants. These are: internal
forward ants, external forward ants, backward ants, notication
ants, error ants. The data structure of the ant contains Source,
Destination, Sequence number, Type, Hops, Speed, Position
and Path.
Source: Source node address is stored in source eld.
Destination: This eld stores the destination address. This
eld is left blank for internal forward ant and stores the
destination node address for external forward ants.
Sequence Number: Each ant is tagged with a sequence
number, stored under sequence number eld.
Type: There are ve types of ants which are described in
the Type eld. 0 is internal forward ant, 1 is external
forward ant, 2 is backward ant, 3 is notication ant, 4 is
error ant.
Hops: It is used to indicate the number of hops between the
node and all the nodes within its zone. This eld helps to
differentiate between a peripheral node and an internal
node. For internal forward ant, the zone radius is assigned
and for external forward ant, we leave this eld blank.
Speed: It is the speed of the vehicle.
Position: This eld contains the current position of the
vehicle.
Path: Path eld represents the sequence of nodes between
source and destination.
The phases are explained below as:
a) Route discovery within the zone: The Intra zone routing
table is used for route discovery within the zone. This table
will contain the information about all the vehicles within
the zone and the internal forward ant periodically (every
.20s) updates the vehicles information in the table. The
columns in the table represent all the vehicles within a zone
while the row represents the vehicles that are one hop away
from each of the vehicles that is the degree of each vehicle.
Therefore the size of the table is the number of vehicles
within a zone x the maximum degree of all the vehicles. In
this routing table, we have incremented and decremented
(evaporate) the pheromone concentration on the vehicles
based on the identied route. When source needs to send
information to the destination, it rst looks up the columns
of its intra zone routing table. If the destination is found
within its zone, the route discovery process is done.
Otherwise, the route discovery process continues between
zones.
b) Route discovery between the zones: When the vehicle fails
to nd the destination with the zone, Inter zone routing
table is used to identify the new route using the boundary
vehicles. External forward ants are sent to the boundary
vehicle for route discovery which will in turn forward to the

ISSN: 2321-8134
next boundary vehicle from its current location, until the
destination vehicle is found. If the destination vehicle is
found, then the backward ant will traverse back to the
source, based on the inherited route. However, if the
destination is not within the current vehicles zone or the
paths lifetime has expired, the route discovery process will
be repeated using the boundary vehicle from the current
zone.
c) Route maintenance: Route paths may break because of the
dynamic nature of the network. If the broken route is within
the internal zone, then it is repaired periodically using the
proactive approach, but if the Inter zone route breaks, then
the upstream vehicle of the broken link is used to store the
packets and nd an alternative path. When the alternative
route is identied, then a notication ant is used to update
the new route on the source vehicle. If an alternative route
is not identied, then an error ant is used to notify the
source vehicle about route failure [2].

VI.

CONCLUSION

In this paper we comparatively study the performance of


Proactive as well as routing protocol and ant colony
optimization technique. Compare to classical VANET routing
scheme the above maintained protocol have a very good
performance because of its more efficient techniques, like
restricted or directional flooding. The classical technique
required more energy and experiencing more delays which will
reduce efficiency and performance of routing protocol. To
make routing protocol more efficient we are developing it with
the help of ant colony optimization (ACO) algorithm so as to
compare the performance by considering parameter like Endto-End delay, Jitter Rate, Energy Consumption and
Throughput. So by applying ACO algorithm in routing
protocol we can choose an efficient node in the network so to
get efficient routing path which naturally increases the
performance of protocol.
The ZRP provides a flexible solution to the challenge of
Discovering and maintaining routes in a wide variety of ad hoc
network environments. The Dynamic Source Routing protocol
(DSR) provides excellent performance for routing in multi-hop
Wireless ad hoc networks. These both routing protocol are
efficient with an ACO. So by applying ACO with Hybrid
routing protocol that is ZRP. The Quality of service (Qos)
parameters of a network will be reliable and optimum for
routing of data packages in vehicular ad-hoc networks
(VANETs).

VII.

REFERENCES

[1] Alisson B. Souza, Joaquim Celestino Junior, Felipe A.

Xavier, Francisco D. Oliveira, Ahmed Patel, Maryam


Latifi, Stable Multicast Trees based on Ant Colony
Optimization for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks, 978-1-46735742-5/13/, ICOIN 2013.
[2] Himani Rana, Parimala Thulasiraman, and Ruppa K.
Thulasiram, MAZACORNET: Mobility Aware Zone based

http: // www.ijfeat.org (C) International Journal For Engineering Applications and Technology

MANTHAN-15

ISSN: 2321-8134

Ant Colony Optimization Routing for VANET, 2013 IEEE


Congress on Evolutionary Computation June 20-23,
Cancn, Mxico.
[3] Arpit Chaudhari, Prachi Jain, Stealthier Attack on Zone
routing Protocol in Wireless Sensor Network, 2014 Fourth
International Conference on Communication Systems and
Network Technologies, DOI 10.1109/CSNT.2014.154.
[4] Mr.Vaibhav D. Patil, Prof. Atul R. Deshmukh, Performance
Improvement of Routing Protocol Using Two Different
Mobility Models In Vehicular Adhoc Vehicular Network,
International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile
Computing, Vol.3 Issue.4, April- 2014, pg. 440-445
[5] Sree Ranga Raju, Kiran Runkana, Jitendranath Mungara,
ZRP versus AODV and DSR: A Comprehensive Study on
ZRP Performance on MANETs, 2010 International
Conference
on
Computational
Intelligence
and
Communication Networks, DOI 10.1109/CICN.2010.48
[6] Uday Mane, Dr. S.A Kulkarni, QoS Realization for Routing
Protocol on VANETs using Combinatorial Optimization,
4th ICCCNT 2013 July 4-6, 2013, Tiruchengode, India,
IEEE 31661.
[7] S. Goss, S. Aron, J.L Deneubourg, and J. Pasteels. Selforganized
shortcuts
in
the
argentine
ant.
Naturwissenschaften, 76(12):579581, Dec. 1989.
[8] A.Mahajan, N. Potnis, K. Gopalan, and A.I.A.Wang,
Urban mobility models for vanets" in Proceedings of the
2nd IEEE International Workshop on Next Generation
Wireless Networks,December 2006.
[9] M. Tamilarasi, Shyam. Sunder. V. R, U. M.Haputhanthri,
C. Somathilaka, N. R. Babu, S.handramathi and T. G.
Palanivelu Scalability Improved DSR Protocol for
MANETs, International Conference on Computational
Intelligence and Multimedia Applications 2007, pp. 283287.
[10] Md. Anisur Rahman, Alex Talevski " Performance
Measurement
of Various routing Protocols in ad-Hoc
Network", IMECS, March 18-20,2009, Hong Kong.

http: // www.ijfeat.org (C) International Journal For Engineering Applications and Technology

You might also like