Performance Comparison of TCP variants over AODV, DSDV, DSR, OLSR in NS-2

Md. Monzur Morshed*, Meftah Ur Rahman, Md. Habibur Rahman, Md. Rafiqul Islam www.tigerhats.org , www.gmu.edu , www.aiub.edu
Introduction
In this paper, an empirical study has been done by simulation and analysis of TCP variations under AODV, DSDR, DSR, OLSR routing protocol. In our simulation, we studied multiple variations of TCP, such as Reno, New-Reno, Vegas, and Tahoe. The simulation work has been done in NS2 environment. Based on the simulation results we carried out observations for different TCP packets under several QoS metrics such as drop, throughput, delay, and jitter.

Figure 3. DATA FOR THROUGHPUT IN RENO

Delay, Jitter Graph & Total Rec Thput

Performance Study & QoS metrics

For performance study, 4 QoS metrics are applied: Delay, Jitter, Packet Drop and Throughput to understand AODV, DSDV, DSR, OLSR routing protocol for the time period of 100 Sec

Figure 7. TOTAL RECEIVING THROUGHPUT RATE, PKT DELIVERY AND DROP RATE FOR TCP VEGAS

Conclusions
We have carried out our simulation for four types of TCP variants and analyzed TCP variants over AODV, DSDV, DSR, and OLSR where NewReno, Reno, Tahoe and Vegas performance are respectively (NewReno) drop rate = 1.04 %; delivery rate = 97.85 %; total receiving throughput = 49.96 % for DSDV, (Reno) drop rate = 1.49 %; delivery rate = 98.51 %; total receiving throughput = 61.36 % for AODV, (Tahoe) drop rate = 1.59 %; delivery rate = 98.41 %; total receiving throughput = 58.31 % for AODV, (Vegas) drop rate = 0.33 %; delivery rate = 99.67 %; total receiving throughput = 63.09 % for DSR. From our simulation study we have found that Vegas performs better over AODV, DSDV, DSR and OLSR than NewReno, Reno and Tahoe, where drop rate = 0.47 %; delivery rate = 99.53 %; total receiving throughput = 61.26 % for AODV, drop rate = 0.79 %; delivery rate = 99.21 %; total receiving throughput = 51.34 % for DSDV, drop rate = 0.33 %; delivery rate = 99.67 %; total receiving throughput = 63.09 % for DSR, drop rate = 0.91 %; delivery rate = 99.09 %; total receiving throughput = 62.90 % for OLSR. Considering the performance on the variants of TCP, Vegas shows the highest efficiency and performs best. So we can conclude that in terms of drop rates, delivery rates and total receiving throughput, Vegas is clearly best among the four variants.

Figure 4. Delay for TCP Tahoe for 100 sec

Figure 1. SIMULATION TOPOLOGY IN NS2 ENVIRONMENT

Packets Drop & Throughput Analysis

Figure 5. Jitter for TCP Vegas for 100 sec

Figure 2. NUMBERS OF PACKETS DROP FOR NEW-RENO.

Figure 6. TOTAL RECEIVING THROUGHPUT RATE, PKT DELIVERY AND DROP RATE FOR TCP NEW-RENO