2011 International Conference on Recent Trends in Information Technology (ICRTIT) 2011
DOI: 10.1109/icrtit.2011.5972426
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mobile cluster assisted routing for urban VANET

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Given the light traffic load (i.e., 20 sessions), when the vehicle's speed is low (i.e., below 40 km/hr), the proposed scheme adopts Level-1 and thus generates lowest packet delivery rate (in Figure 20(a)) and longest end-to-end delay (in Figure 21(a)). Oppositely, when the vehicle's speed gets faster (i.e., above 40 km/hr) or the traffic load becomes heavier (i.e., 40 and 60 sessions), the proposed scheme adopts (1) case (QoS ) (2) if ( < ) (3) set Level-1 Cluster (4) if else ( = ) (5) if ( < V ) (6) set Level-1 Cluster (7) if else ( ≥ V ) (8) set Level-2 Cluster (9) end (10) if else ( < ≤ ) (11) set Level-2 Cluster (12) if else ( < ) (13) set Level-2 Cluster (14) if ( < V ) (15) set communication range as 250 (16) if else ( = V ) (17) set communication range as 200 (18) if else ( V < < ℎV ) (20) set communication range as 150 (21) if else ( ≥ ℎV ) (22) set communication range as 100 (23) end ( Level-2. The performance of the proposed scheme, including packet delivery rate (in Figures 20(b), 20(c), and 20(d)), the end-to-end delay (in Figures 21(b), 21(c), and 21(d)), and the signaling overhead (in Figures 22(b), 22(c), and 22(d)), fall between those of the ADOV+ and MGRP.…”
Section: Comparing Different Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Given the light traffic load (i.e., 20 sessions), when the vehicle's speed is low (i.e., below 40 km/hr), the proposed scheme adopts Level-1 and thus generates lowest packet delivery rate (in Figure 20(a)) and longest end-to-end delay (in Figure 21(a)). Oppositely, when the vehicle's speed gets faster (i.e., above 40 km/hr) or the traffic load becomes heavier (i.e., 40 and 60 sessions), the proposed scheme adopts (1) case (QoS ) (2) if ( < ) (3) set Level-1 Cluster (4) if else ( = ) (5) if ( < V ) (6) set Level-1 Cluster (7) if else ( ≥ V ) (8) set Level-2 Cluster (9) end (10) if else ( < ≤ ) (11) set Level-2 Cluster (12) if else ( < ) (13) set Level-2 Cluster (14) if ( < V ) (15) set communication range as 250 (16) if else ( = V ) (17) set communication range as 200 (18) if else ( V < < ℎV ) (20) set communication range as 150 (21) if else ( ≥ ℎV ) (22) set communication range as 100 (23) end ( Level-2. The performance of the proposed scheme, including packet delivery rate (in Figures 20(b), 20(c), and 20(d)), the end-to-end delay (in Figures 21(b), 21(c), and 21(d)), and the signaling overhead (in Figures 22(b), 22(c), and 22(d)), fall between those of the ADOV+ and MGRP.…”
Section: Comparing Different Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three methods for finding gateways, namely, reactive, proactive, and hybrid gateway discovery, are introduced and compared in this study. In [21], the packet delivery rate can be greatly improved by combining static node mechanism and mobile cluster approach. A static node is set up at the road junction to meet the high mobility and scalability requirements while mobile cluster is used for helping routing in VANETs.…”
Section: Preliminarymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Network management architectures designed for terrestrial wire‐line networks cannot be easily ported to airborne network due to their reliance on persistent connections [1]. Classical routing algorithms are inefficient in high mobility and scalability scenarios [2] as normally encountered in military operations. Additionally, adversaries might resort to interference or jamming to degrade network performance.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%