Professional Documents
Culture Documents
on of
January
the
Wireless
OSPF 2008
Routing
Protocol
[The goal of this project is to evaluate by
simulation the WOSFP extension. We had
used the NS “Network Simulator” for that WOSPF
purpose and had compared different ad hoc
routing protocols.]
Imam Muhammad Bin Saud Islamic University
College of Computer & Information Sciences
Department of Computer Science
Graduation Project
ABSTRACT
Routing in an Ad Hoc network is always a hot research topic and still an open issue.
Many ad hoc routing protocols had been proposed by the network community and still
no agreement on a giving solution as it is the case for wired networks. Recently,
Boeing and Cisco had proposed the extension of the well known OSPF “Open Shortest
I am also grateful to people who helped me through in one way or another, as:
Dr.Humayun Bakht at Liverpool John Moores University, who provide me a good
information about Ad Hoc networks.
All people on the NS-2 mailing list, especially Mathieu Gallissot.
Chapter 1Introduction
1 Overview
Evaluation of the WOSPF Page 7
In a world of increasing mobility, there is a growing need for people to communicate
with each other and have timely access to information regardless of the location of the
individuals or the information. A phone call placed from a commuter train may close a
business deal, remote access to medical records by a paramedic may save a life, or a
request for reconnaissance updates by a soldier with a hand held device may affect the
outcome of a battle. Each of these instances of mobile communications poses an
engineering challenge that can be met only with an efficient, reliable, wireless
communication network. The demand for wireless communication systems of
increasing sophistication and ubiquity has led to the need for a better understanding of
fundamental issues in communication theory and electro magnetic and their
implications for the design of highly-capable wireless systems [1].
Wireless connectivity gives users the freedom of movement they desire. Most of the
wireless networks required an underlying architecture of fixed position: this
architecture in called infrastructure mode. That's means, mobile nodes communicate
directly with access points. In contrast way, the mobile nodes create underlying
architecture for communication between nodes: this architecture is called ad hoc mode.
Chapter 5 Implementation describes our scenarios, simulations and results over some
protocols.
2.1 Definition
2.2.1 Infrastructure
These networks are characterized by their use of access points (AP), or base stations.
In addition to acting as a router within the network, an access point can also act as a
bridge connecting, for example, the wireless network to a wired network. GSM, and its
3G counter part UMTS, are examples of well known cellular networks.
Centralized routing and resource management by an AP implies less complexity than
distributed routing. An AP, as opposed to individual nodes, usually possess more
information about the network, and is therefore able to make intelligent routing
decisions.
2.2.2 Ad Hoc
Ad hoc is a Latin phrase which means "for this purpose". It generally signifies a
solution that has been custom designed for a specific problem ht is non-generalizable
and cannot be adapted to other purposes [11].
The main challenge of MANET is that the connections between the nodes within the
network are continuously changing. Thus routing protocols must be adaptive and fast
enough to maintain routes in spite of the changing network topology.
Figure 4: A Request To Send (RTS) and Clear To Send (CTS) scheme. First, A and C
each transmit a packet simultaneously, causing a packet collision at B. Then A
retransmits the packet before C does, thus capturing the channel. [3]
security
As we know the signal is diffused in the air, then everybody is able to receive it. At
present MANET do not have any stick security policy. This could possibly lead active
attackers to easily exploit or possibly disable mobile ad hoc network. By the nature
Mobile ad hoc networks are highly dynamic i.e. topology changes and link breakage
happen quite frequently. We need a security solution which is dynamic too. [6]
3.1 Introduction
The routing is the process that selects paths in a computer network along which to send
data.In infrastructure mode, the routing part is handled by the access point and the
distribution system; every wireless device just has to forward all its traffic to this
access point. But, in Ad Hoc networks, there is no centralises for connections, and,
every device acts as a router.
This scenario is totally new. Adding to this, devices are not fixed, they can be mobile,
contrary to the Internet where every router has “fixed” neighbours (excepts if a link
goes down).
For solving this problem, the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force), powerful
standardisation authority in the communication world, created the MANET work
group. This group has a mission to create and discuss routing protocols for Ad Hoc
networks. This task is very important, due to the complexity of routing on Ad Hoc
networks.
The work started in January 1999, with the publication of the informational RFC 2501.
This document presents the 4 main constraints for routing on Ad Hoc networks, such as
dynamics topology, bandwidth constraints, energy constraints and low physical
security. The group has then to comply with these constraints in order to build an
efficient algorithm of route calculation. [2]
Proactive
The basic manner that the routing table is built before the data has to be sent. That
means these protocols are constantly making requests to their neighbours (if any) in
order to draw a network topology, and then, build the routing table.
Reactive
Reactive protocols are more specific to Ad Hoc networks. Contrary to the proactive
algorithm, they ask their neighbours for a route when they have data to send. If the
neighbours do not have any known route, they broadcast the request, and so on.
Hybrids
A Hybrid protocols will use the two above algorithms. The main goal is to reduce
broadcasts and latency, but improve the dynamism impact. The whole network will be
separated into logical zones, and each zone will have a gateway. Inside each zone, a
reactive protocol will be used. For inter-zone routing, a proactive protocol will be used.
3.2.1.1.1 Algorithm
DSDV is based on the Bellman-Ford algorithm. First designed for graph search
applications, this algorithm is also used for routing since it is the one used by RIP. With
DSDV, each routing table will contain all available destinations, with the associated
next hop, the associated metric (numbers of hops), and a sequence number originated
by the destination node.
Tables are updated in the topology per exchange between nodes. Each node will
broadcast to its neighbours entries in its table. This exchange of entries can be made by
dumping the whole routing table, or by performing an incremental update, that means
exchanging just recently updated routes. Nodes who receive this data can then update
their tables if they received a better route, or a new one. Updates are performed on a
regular basis, and are instantly scheduled if a new event is detected in the topology. If
there are frequent changes in topology, full table exchange will be preferred whereas in
a stable topology, incremental updates will cause less traffic.
The route selection is performed on the metric and sequence number criteria. The
sequence number is a time indication sent by the destination node. It allows the table
update process, as if two identical routes are known, the one with the best sequence
number is kept and used, while the other is destroyed (considered as a stale entry).
3.2.1.1.3 Performance
As with every table-driven protocol, DSDV reduces the latency by having a route when
the data has to be sent. But, DSDV presents a few problems, mainly in the route table
update process. One of the major problems is that data is exchanged only between
neighbours, and then, a change in the topology can take time to be spread in the whole
topology. That introduces the notion of route fluctuation. When a node disappears, it
takes time for this change to be reflected in the whole topology. So, if the topology is
dynamic, the routing layer will be unstable until changes are reflected everywhere.
This route fluctuation problem can be demonstrated with the example in 3.2.1.1.2.
Updates are sent after events, links broken and new links. At t+1, the routing protocol
Evaluation of the WOSPF Page 18
will transmit routing table updates according to the newly detected events. But, once
these updates are processed by nodes D, B and E, nodes C and D still have no routes
for G, and it will take two more updates until the entire topology will be updated on all
nodes.
3.2.2.1.1Algorithm
The AODV algorithm is inspired from the Bellman-Ford algorithm like DSDV. The
principal change is to be On Demand. The node will be silent while it does not have
data to send. Then, if the upper layer is requesting a route for a packet, a “ROUTE
3.2.2.1.2Illustration
3.2.3Hybrids Protocols
A routing protocol is proactive when it continually maintains its routing table. By this
way, routes are available when needed. Reactive protocol starts a route discovery
process when data has to be sent. The advantage of a proactive protocol is that when a
datagram must be sent, the route is already available, so, the processing time to find a
route in the routing table is not important. Reactive protocols require much more time
for finding a route as they are “On Demand”. But, in an Ad Hoc environment, nodes
are willing to move, and then, it reflects frequent changes in the topology. In such an
environment, reactive protocols are much more reliable and efficient as proactive
protocol will require exchanging a lot of data.
Hybrid protocols tend to merge advantages of reactive and proactive protocols. Their
aim is to use an “On Demand” route discovery system, but, with a limited research
cost.
This chapter describes the extensions to OSPFv2 [4] needed to support mobile ad hoc
networking. The extensions are based on the ideas proposed in Cisco’s Internet-draft
[8] proposing a MANET extension to OSPFv3. Throughout this thesis, the term
“Cisco’s draft” will refer to [8]. Before describes the WOSPF, I Make some important
details to understand the OSPF protocol.
4.1.1 Overview
OSPF is a link-state (LS) routing protocol. Each router running OSPF maintains a
database describing the Autonomous System's (AS) topology. The database is referred
to as the Link-State database (LS-database). All routers run the same algorithm in
parallel. From the LS-database each router constructs a tree of shortest path to the rest
of the network with itself as a root. Each router distributes its local state throughout the
AS by flooding. OSPF routes IP packets based solely on the destination IP address;
they are routed "as-is", then, they are not encapsulated in any further protocol headers.
When several equal-cost routes to a destination exist, traffic is distributed equally
among them. The cost of a route is described by a simple dimensionless metric. OSPF
allows sets of networks to be grouped together on areas. The topology of an area is
hidden from the rest of the AS. All OSPF protocol exchanges are authenticated.
Externally derived routing data is advertised throughout the AS.Two routers that have
interfaces to a common network are called neighboring routers. These routers form
relationships between them called adjacencies. The adjacencies are formed to exchange
routing information.The unit of information describing the local state of a router is
Packet Type
Packet Length: Total length, including the standard header.Router ID: Router
identification of the packet's originator.Area ID: The OSPF area that the packet is
being sent into.Checksum: Standard IP 16-bit one's complement checksum of the entire
indicates the type of authentication procedure in use. The 64-bit field is then used by
4.2WOSPF Overview
Deploying a legacy routing protocol defined for wired networks in an OSPF-MANET
calls for modifications and optimizations. First of all, non-MANET routing protocols
are not designed for operation in a multi-hop environment. Second, dissemination of
routing packets in a network whose topology is rapidly changing requires intelligent
and optimized techniques, unless resource consuming, pure flooding is to be used.
OSPF-MANET interfaces should take into account the different aspects of resource
constrained OSPF-MANET environments; the bandwidth may be scarce, topology is
unpredictable, and link quality poor. The wireless extensions described in this chapter
aim to define an interface that can cope with these properties.
• Wireless OSPF-OR
This draft comes from Cisco’s draft, elects a source dependent set of
routers that are to relay routing packets. It is close connection with OLSR.
• Wireless OSPF-MDR
Elects a source independent set3 of routers that are to relay routing packets
extends the OSPFv3 Hello packet to carry such information
4.2.2 WOSPF-OR
One of the most deployed flooding optimizations used in OSPF networks today, the
DR mechanism, will not perform correctly in OSPF-MANETs. This is because OSPF-
MANETs are not true multi-access networks, as is a DR assumption, in OSPF-
MANETs, two nodes on the same network segment cannot be assumed to have two-
way connectivity. Therefore, the [3] adopt the ideas behind the OLSR optimized
flooding scheme MPR Relays, and implement the overlapping relays mechanism.
Figure 8 depicts a very simple scenario, consisting of only four nodes. It is assumed
that the leftmost node is the originator of the packet, although the flooding would be
exactly the same for either of the nodes. As the figure shows, every node (except the
packet originator) retransmits the packet. Hence, we have n − 1 retransmissions. This
scheme is not optimal, as many duplicate packet received are the result of an
unnecessary transmission. This scheme could benefit from some flooding
modifications designed especially for OSPF-MANETs as in figure 9.
Chapter 5Implementation
“NS” Components are Ns the simulator it self and Nam the network animator that
permits to visualize ns output and that provides a GUI interface to generate ns scripts.
For the wireless part, NS provides ad hoc routing and mobile IP. NS provides also
traffic and topology generators and simple trace analysis.
• CPU utilization.
• Traffic engineering.
5.2.1First Scenario:
Number of nodes: 6 nodes.
Mobility: no.
Topology: 800m * 800m.
Time of simulation: 120s (2minutes).
Result:
As we saw in figure 12 the AODV routing protocol gives us the best result
regarding packets received and good result regarding lost packets. On the other hand
side, the DSDV routing protocol gives us the best result regarding packets lost and not
enough result regarding received packets. Then, in figure 13 the OLSR routing
protocol gives us the best result regarding CPU utilization. Finally, The AODV in
figure 14 gives us the best result regarding traffic engineering
5.2.2Second Scenario:
Number of nodes: 6 nodes.
Mobility: only one node that have mobility.
Topology: 800m * 800m.
Time of simulation: 120s (2minutes).
5.2.3Third Scenario:
Number of nodes: 6 nodes.
Mobility: yes, with random mobility.
Node speed: randomly change between 0-20m/s with 2s pause time
Topology: 800m * 800m.
Time of simulation: 120s (2minutes).
Result:
As we saw in figure 18 the DSDV routing protocol gives us the best result
regarding packets received and good result regarding lost packets. On the other hand
side, the OLSR routing protocol gives us good result regarding packets received and
the best result regarding packets lost. Then, in figure 19 the OSLR routing protocol
gives us the best result regarding CPU utilization. Finally, The DSDV in figure 20
gives us the best result regarding traffic engineering.
Regarding this scenario we conclude the best protocol is DSDV routing protocol.
5.2.4Fourth Scenario:
Number of nodes: 30 nodes.
Mobility: no.
Topology: 800m * 800m.
Time of simulation: 120s (2minutes).
Result:
As we saw in figure 21 the AODV routing protocol gives us the best result
regarding packets received and bad result regarding lost packets. On the other hand
side, the OLSR routing protocol gives us the best result regarding packets lost. Then, in
figure 22 the DSDV routing protocol gives us the best result regarding CPU utilization.
Finally, The DSDV in figure 23 gives us the best result regarding traffic engineering.
5.2.5Fifth Scenario:
Number of nodes: 30 nodes.
Mobility: only one node which is received data that have mobility.
Topology: 800m * 800m.
Time of simulation: 120s (2minutes).
5.2.6Sixth Scenario:
Number of nodes: 6 nodes.
Mobility: yes, with random mobility.
Node speed: randomly change between 0-20m/s with 2s pause time
Topology: 800m * 800m.
Time of simulation: 120s (2minutes).
Result:
As we saw in figure 27 all routing protocols gives us the worst result regarding
packets received and packets lost, in this situation the AODV routing protocol gives us
best result regarding packets received relatively the others protocols. Then, in figure
28-a the AODV routing protocol gives us the best result regarding CPU utilization.
Finally, the DSDV in figure 28-b gives us the best result regarding traffic engineering.
Regarding this scenario we conclude the best protocol is AODV routing protocol.
This chapter concludes this final project. We discovered during this project the
problems associated with Ad Hoc networks, more specifically routing on Ad Hoc
networks. We also discovered some of solutions for these problems. Then, we
discovered in more details the OSPF and WOSPF and conclude it by similarities with
OLSR. After that, we make six different scenarios and applied over three protocols,
which are “OLSR”, “AODV”, and “DSDV” to evaluate performance. We saw in the
first scenario of 6 fixed nodes the AODV is the best choice. In the second scenario 6
nodes only the receiving nodes have mobility in the topology, the OLSR is the best
choice. In the third scenario 6 nodes with random motion in the topology, the DSDV is
the best choice. In the fourth scenario 30 fixed nodes, the DSDV is the best choice. In
the fifth scenario 30 nodes only the receiving nodes have mobility in the topology, the
DSDV is the best choice. In the sixth scenario 30 nodes with random motion in the
topology, the AODV is the best choice. Even by testing these three protocols, there is
no perfect solution to make decision that an X protocol is the best. It is dependent on
the context. So we suggest that you use the NS simulator as a tool for choosing the
most adequate ad hoc routing protocol for your wireless ad hoc network before
implementing it.
At the end of this project, we get a lot information and knowledge such as:
• Simulation
1. Perform NS simulation
• Networking