Analysis of Delay-Tolerant Routing Protocols using the Impact of Mobility Models

Abstract

Intermittently connected mobile networks are sparsely connected wireless ad-hoc networks where there is no endto-end path from a source device to a destination. Generally, these paths do not exist. Hence, these devices use intermittent paths using the concept of store-and-forward mechanism to successfully accomplish the communication. These networks are featured by long delay, dissimilar data rates, and larger error rates. Hence, we look into the analysis of several delay-tolerant routing protocols, e.g., epidemic, spray-and-wait, prophet, maxprop, rapid, and spray-and-focus using opportunistic network environment simulator. At first, the investigations of the above considered routing protocols are done across three mobility models namely random direction, random walk, and shortest path map based (SPMB) movement model for node impact only. Then, we evaluate these routing protocols against the impacts of message copy, buffer, and time-to-live using SPMB movement model considering the results of node impact. We use three metrics, and the results show that spray-and-focus yields good performance for showing higher delivery, lower latency, and lower overhead among all routing techniques, while epidemic is poor.

Opportunistic Networks: An Empirical Research of Routing Protocols and Mobility Models

“…Delivery probability with varying message copies/minute [95] Figure 12 Delivery probability with varying TTL [95] Figure 13 Delivery probability with varying buffer size [95] Figure 14 Average latency with varying message copies/minute [95] Figure 15 Average latency with varying TTL [95] Figure 16 Average latency with varying buffer size [95] Page 73/75…”

“…Overhead ratio with varying message copies/minute [95] Figure 18 Overhead ratio with varying TTL [95] Figure 19 Overhead ratio with varying buffer size [95]…”

“…Among these models, we will see here the impact of random walk (RW), random direction (RD), and shortest path map-based (SPMB) mobility models. What we will see here is the impact of the considered models with a few selected routing techniques, namely, Epidemic, Prophet, Maxprop, Rapid, spray-and-wait (SnW), and spray-and-focus (SnF) considering the above rst three metrics [95]. We have set the con guration of ONE simulator using table XII to analyze the impact of mobility models and routing techniques with the nodes' impact.…”

Performance Analysis of DEBT Routing Protocols for Pocket Switch Networks

“…In PSN, several routing methods have been projected to increase the performance of message routing. Like DTN, generally, there are two types of routing methods in PSN: forwarding and replicating [19]. The first technique delivers only a message to its target node.…”

“…Fig. 1 represents such a network where people share their messages until the connection lasts among the mobile phones within certain regions when they move around [18][19][20][21]. In relation to such concept, cluster detection methods have been used to ensure effective message delivery in such networks.…”