A comprehensive review on performance of aodv and dsdv protocol using manhattan grid mobility model

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Issue: 03 | Mar-2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 496
A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW ON PERFORMANCE OF AODV AND
DSDV PROTOCOL USING MANHATTAN GRID MOBILITY MODEL
Amandeep Kaur1
, Meenakshi Mittal2
1
M.Tech Scholar, Centre for Computer Science and Technology, Central University of Punjab, Punjab, India
2
Assistant Professor, Centre for Computer Science and Technology, Central University of Punjab, Punjab, India
Abstract
Wireless networks have become an epitome of revolution in the communication industry as these have enabled the devices to
communicate and access information independent of their location. These networks can be classified into two categories:
Infrastructure based and Infrastructure less. Mobile ad hoc networks (MANET) fall under infrastructureless category in which nodes
are able to move thereby making the topology of the network highly dynamic. Due to the dynamically changing topology, efficient
routing mechanisms needed to be developed, which led to the foundations of various mobile ad hoc routing protocols. There are a
number of mobile ad hoc routing protocols proposed to serve different purposes like security and transmission efficiency. These
protocols are divided into two categories: Table based and Demand based. Through this work, table based traditional routing
protocol DSDV and demand based routing protocol AODV have been assessed through simulation using Manhattan Grid mobility
model. Comprehensive analysis was carried out to analyze which protocol performs better in the assumed scenarios. The performance
metrics evaluated for the two protocols are Throughput, Average End to End delay, Routing Overhead and Packet Delivery Ratio.
Keywords: Ad hoc, MANET, DSDV, AODV, Manhattan Grid, Throughput, Overhead
-----------------------------------------------------------------------***-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. INTRODUCTION TO MOBILE AD HOC
NETWORKS
H. Bakht [1] has described the phrase “Ad Hoc” being
originated from Latin language referring to something that is
planned for a specific purpose. According to him, this term
was amalgamated with networks having mobile nodes to form
“Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANET)” back in 1970’s.
Basically the wireless networks are of two kinds-
Infrastructure based and Infrastructure less networks.
Fig.1: Classification of Wireless Networks
S. Basagni et al [4] have defined the various categories of the
wireless networks as discussed ahead. Infrastructure based
networks are those in which the communication among the
nodes is handled by a central authority and Infrastructureless
networks do not need any central authority to coordinate the
communication. The infrastructureless networks are further
categorized into fixed and mobile infrastructureless networks.
Fixed infrastructureless networks have static nodes which are
unable to change their locations, whereas Mobile
infrastructureless networks have a dynamically changing
topology in which nodes are capable of moving from one
location to another.
In these networks, devices are themselves the network thereby
allowing seamless communication at low cost, self organized
manner and easy deployment. These networks are called
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks.
Fig.2: Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
Wireless Networks
Infrastructure based
Wireless Networks
Infrastructure less
Wireless Networks
Fixed Infrastructureless
Wireless Networks
Mobile
Infrastructureless
Wireless Networks
(Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks)

__________________________________________________________________________________________
The mobile ad hoc networks have experienced an
unprecedented growth since their inception. These are being
widely deployed in various emergency scenarios. The various
benefits enjoyed by the users of these networks have been
listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Various benefits of mobile ad hoc networks (Manets) [2]
Benefit Explanation
Autonomy and Infrastructureless
There is no centralized entity to control the communication between the
devices. The devices act as peers and the routing functionality is inbuilt in them
Multi-hop routing
There packet sent by a source node to its destination may travel through a
number of nodes on its journey towards the destined node.
Dynamic network topology
The network is dynamic. The nodes can move away from one location to
another thereby making the topology dynamically changing.
Heterogenous devices
There may be devices having different functionalities communicating with each
other. For example, a mobile phone and a laptop.
Scalability
The nodes can move away and join some other network at any time. The
addition of new nodes into the network is also possible at any time.
Self creation, self organization, self
administration
The network can be created at any time by the nodes themselves and is
organized and administered by the nodes only.
Every technology has some loopholes that are open for research. MANETs also have some complexities associated with them which
have been listed in Table 2.
Table 2: Various Complexities of Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs) [3]
Complexity Explanation
Energy constrained operation
The nodes operate on batteries or other means of energy.
Therefore energy conservation is an important system design
optimization criterion for these nodes.
Bandwidth constraints
The throughput of wireless links is usually lesser than wired links.
Therefore, the efficiency of links need to be improved by limiting
the effects of noise, interference, multiple access etc..
Security
These networks are more prone to security threats like
eavesdropping, spoofing, denial of service attacks etc.
Efficient Routing capabilities
There is a need of efficient routing protocols to manage the
routing and security concerns of mobile ad hoc networks. Many
protocols have been developed for efficient routing, energy
conservation, security and throughput enhancement in these
networks. The improvement of these protocols is an open area of
research.
The MANETs came into picture to serve the areas (listed in Table 3) in which their applicability has come as a boon.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Table 3: Various Applications of Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs) [2]
Application Area MANETS can be employed in
Tactical Networks
Various military combat operations in which military personnel’s need secure ad hoc communication
and automated battlefields.
Emergency Services
 Various Rescue operations in disaster prone areas
 Hospitals for better services in situations of environmental tragedies
 police and fire fighting operations
Education Virtual classrooms, online tutorials & lectures, worldwide conferences and meetings
Commercial and
Civilian Situations
Ecommerce, business applications, vehicular services, airports, shopping centers, sports stadiums
Entertainment Multi-user gaming, wireless P2P networking, internet access
Sensor Networks Smart homes, data tracking of animal movements, chemical and biological monitoring.
MANETs are the most challenging and innovative areas of
wireless networking and are ubiquitous. But these networks
face a number of challenges as well, the major one being the
challenge of routing the data across the network efficiently
and in secure manner. To enable efficient routing of data
across the network, various routing protocols have been
proposed over the years which have been discussed in section
2.
2. MOBILE AD HOC NETWORK ROUTING
PROTOCOLS
A. S. Tanenbaum [1] described that a routing protocol is a set
of rules for efficient transmission of data across a network.
Protocols enable the selection of an optimal and efficient
routing path from source to the destination comprising of a
number of intermediate nodes. Routing in mobile ad hoc
networks is a major challenge because of the dynamic changes
in the topology of the network. A number of protocols have
been proposed to handle the communication among the nodes
in an efficient manner. These protocols have been categorized
as Table based and Demand based Routing protocols.
Fig.3: Classification of Mobile Ad Hoc Routing Protocols
2.1. Table Based Routing Protocols (Proactive):
According to P. Mishra [5], these are the protocols in which
each node maintains a routing table containing information of
routes to all other nodes in the network. Whenever there is a
topology change, the nodes transmit update packets to all other
nodes so that the routing information contained in the tables is
accurate and up to date. The updates are periodic. There are a
Mobile Ad
Hoc
Routing
Protocols
Table Based
Routing
Protocols
Demand
Based
Routing
Protocols
DSD
V
WRP GSR CBRP AODV DSRFSR HSR ZHLS CGSR TORA ABR SSR

__________________________________________________________________________________________
number of table driven routing protocols that differ in the
method by which update information is shared among the
nodes. He has listed various table based routing protocols i.e.
DSDV (Destination Sequenced Distance Vector), WRP
(Wireless Routing Protocol), GSR (Global State Routing),
FSR (Fisheye State Routing), HSR (Hierarchical Routing
Protocol), ZHLS (Zone-based Hierarchical Link State
Routing) and CGSR (Clusterhead Gateway Switch routing).
2.2. Demand based Routing Protocols (Reactive):
According to P. Mishra [5], these protocols use the approach
which allows the routes be created when demanded by the
nodes. The route is found by flooding the network with route
request packets. When a node wants to send data to a
destination node, it initiates the Route discovery process to
find a suitable route. Routes are erased when these are no
longer needed. The various Demand based routing protocols
as listed by A. S. Tanenbaum [6] are Cluster Based Routing
Protocol (CBRP), Ad Hoc on Demand Distance Vector
(AODV), Dynamic Source Routing Protocol (DSR),
Temporally ordered routing algorithm (TORA), Associativity
Based Routing (ABR) and Signal Stability Routing (SSR).
3. AODV AND DSDV MANET ROUTING
PROTOCOLS
The protocols whose performance was evaluated through this
work are AODV (Ad Hoc On Demand Distance Vector
Rotuing) and DSDV (Destination Sequenced Distance
Vector). The comparison between the two protocols have been
described in Table 4.
3.1. Destination Sequenced Distance Vector Routing
Protocol (DSDV)
G. He [7] have described that DSDV, short for Destination
Sequenced Distance Vector, is based on the idea of Routing
Information Protocol (RIP) that uses Bellman Ford routing
algorithm. So DSDV is basically an improved version of
classical Bellman Ford algorithm. It is one of the earliest ad
hoc routing protocols which make use of bidirectional links
only. Packets are routed between the nodes of mobile ad hoc
network using the routing tables that are stored at each node.
Routing table stored at a node contains list of addresses of all
the other nodes in the network topology as well as address of
the next hop that needs to be visited in order to reach the
destination node.
3.1.1 Packet Transmission using DSDV
Suppose a source node 1 wants to send packets to destined
node 7, it will refer to its routing table to locate the next hop.
When the packet reaches the next hop i.e node 2, a table
lookup will be performed by node 2 to find out the next hop
towards the intended destination [11]. This process is repeated
till the packet reaches its destination. The sequence of steps
followed is depicted through Fig.4.
3.1.2 Routing Table Management9
B. C. Lesink [11] have described that the crucial point of
DSDV is the kindling and upkeep of the routing tables.
Everytime the network topology changes, the routing table
needs to be updated and whenever routing tables are not
updated, loops may emerge. To carry out routing table
maintenance, some additional information is also stored inside
the routing table i.e. Destination Address, Next Hop Address,
Route Metric, Route Sequence Number. Every node will
broadcast an update packet periodically as well as immediately
whenever there is a topology change. This is how DSDV
differs from traditional distance vector routing. Initially the
value of the metric of update packet is 1. Each receiving
neighbour node is one hop away from node that sends the
Update packet. The neighbours will increment this metric and
then retransmit the update packet. Process is repeated round
the clock until every other node in the network has received
the update packet with a corresponding metric. If node
receives duplicate update packets, it will only consider the
packet with smallest metric and ignore the rest.
3.1.3 Handling Stale Packets
According to B. C. Lesink [11], to manage stale packets each
update packet is earmarked by the original node with a
Sequence number which refers to a monotonically increasing
number which gives unique identification of each update
packet from the given node. If a node X receives an update
packet from another node Y, the sequence number obtained
must be equal to or greater than the sequence number already
present in the routing table. Otherwise the update packet is
considered stale and ignored. If sequence number matches the
sequence number already present in the routing table, then the
metric is compared and updated. Each time an update packet is
forwarded by the node; the packet not only contains the
address of destined node, but also contains address of
transmitting node.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Table 4: Comparison of DSDV and AODV MANET Rotuing Protocols [8]
DSDV AODV
Routing
Approach Table Based Protocol Demand Based Protocol
Update
Every change is broadcasted periodically
in the network.
Such broadcasts are not needed.
Route
Creation Routes are predefined
Routes are created when needed by initiating a Route
Discovery process.
Looping
Uses sequence number to prevent looping Uses sequence number to prevent looping
Table 5: Handling Stale Packets Using Sequence Number
Sequence Number in
UPDATE packet
Lesser than Sequence
number in routing table
Equal to Sequence
number in routing table
Greater than sequence number
in routing table
UPDATE Ignored Metric field of UPDATE
packet is compared with
metric field in routing
table entry.
If metric field value in
UPDATE packet is less
than that in routing table
entry then Update is
performed, else update is
ignored.
UPDATE performed
Fig 4: Packet Transmission in DSDV Protocol from node 1 to node

__________________________________________________________________________________________
3.2 Ad Hoc on Demand Distance Vector Routing
protocol (AODV)
B. Awerbuch & A. Mishra [8] have defined AODV to be a
descendent of traditional routing protocol DSDV. It was
further mentioned by him that AODV uses bidirectional links
and initiates a route discovery process whenever a route to a
particular destination is needed. It maintains active routes ,
uses sequence numbers to prevent looping and can provide
unicast as well as multicast communication among the
network nodes. When the routes are no longer needed, these
are discarded , hence there is not much requirement of route
maintainence.
I. D. Chakeras et al [12] and C. E Perkins et al [13] have
described that AODV uses 5 kinds of messages to make the
source and destination communicate with each other- HELLO,
Route Request (RREQ), Route reply (RREP), Data and Route
Error (RERR). They have defined the purpose of these
messages as follows:
 HELLO: This message is used to detect and monitor
various links to neighbouring nodes. If HELLO
messages are being utilized, then every active node
periodically broadcasts the HELLO message to all its
neighbouring nodes. So if a node fails to receive
HELLO messages from a neighbouring node, the link
breakage is detected.
 RREQ: When source node wants to send data to an
unknown destination node, it broadcasts a Route
Request message in order to reach that destination.
Intermediate nodes that receive RREQ, tend to create a
route to source.
 RREP: If RREQ has been received by the destination
node, then Route Reply (RREP) is generated and sent
by destination node. This message is unicast. In this
way, the route is finally created between the source and
destination nodes.
 Data : When the route is established, data can be
transmitted.
 RERR:If a link breakage is detected while data is being
transmitted , then a Route Error (RERR) is sent to the
source. After this, the intermediate nodes invalidate the
routes towards unreachable destinations.
Fig. 5: Propagation of RREQ packet from source and possible
RREP reply from destination
4. SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT
Simulation is an art which is widely used in the field of
engineering sciences research. In this study, NS2.35
simulation package was used to carry out the required
simulations to evaluate the performance of DSDV and AODV
MANET Routing protocols. The study was performed on Intel
Core i7 computer system using Ubuntu Linux 12.04 Operating
System.The results were then analyzed graphically and the
comparison of the performance of the two protocols was
drawn. The Simulation parameters used to carry out the study
have been listed in Table 5.
Table 5: Simulations Parameters
Propagation Model Two Ray Ground
MAC IEEE 802.11
Interface Queue (IFQ)
Type
PriQueue
Antenna Omni-Antenna
Routing Protocols AODV and DSDV
Simulation Time 150 ms
Traffic Type FTP
Mobility Model Manhattan Grid Model
Network Size 10, 30, 50, 70, 100 nodes
Performance Metrics
Throughput, Packet Delivery
Ratio, Routing Overhead and
Average End to End delay

__________________________________________________________________________________________
4.1 Propagation Models:
According to T. Henderson [16], Radio propagation models
are used to predict the received signal power of each packet.
At the physical layer of each mobile wireless node, there is a
receiving threshold value. Whenever a packet is received, if its
recieved signal power is below the receiving threshold value,
it is marked as errorneous packet and is therefore dropped by
the MAC layer. There are three propagation models available
in ns2 viz. Free Space model, Two Way Ground Reflection
model and the Shadowing model [17]. These models have
been discussed below:-
• Free Space Model: The free space propagation model is
based on the assumption of only one clear line-of-sight
path between the sender and receiver [16].
• Two Ray Ground Reflection Model: This model is
based on the assumption of both the direct path and a
ground reflection path [16]. This model gives more
accurate prediction at a long distance than the free space
model [18].
• Shadowing Model: This model takes into account the
effect of multipath propagations which are termed as
fading effects [16].
For this simulation study, the two ray ground reflection
propagation model has been chosen.
4.2 Medium Access Control (MAC) Protocol
In mobile ad hoc network, various mobile nodes share a
medium whose access is facilitated by using a MAC protocol.
In this work, standard IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol has been
used to control the access to the shared medium. This protocol
covers the MAC and physical layer and makes use of
Distribution Coordination Function (DCF). Here DCF is a
Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance
(CSMA/CA) mechanism [19].
4.3 Interface Queue Type (IFQ)
IFQ is a FIFO queue that contains the packets of the routing
protocols. In this study, priority Queue has been used which
gives priority to routing protocol packets by inserting them at
the head of queue [20].
4.4 Antenna Type
Antenna is device which converts electronic signals to
electromagnetic waves with minimum loss of signals [21].
Omni-directional antennas mount vertically and transmit and
receive equally in all directions within the horizontal plane
[22].
4.5 Mobiliy Model
Mobility model depicts the movements of the nodes inside a
network. There are a number of mobility models available like
Random Waypoint, Random Drunken, Random Walk,
Manhattan grid etc. In this study manhattan grid model has
been used in order to analyse the performance of protocols in a
network where nodes move according to a city grid map.
Manhattan Grid Mobility model as described by M. M. Javadi
[15] is used to imitate the movement pattern of mobile nodes
on horizontal and vertical streets defined by maps. The mobile
node is encouraged to move along the grid of horizontal and
vertical streets on the map whereby this model got its name
“Manhattan Grid”. The movements of nodes using this model
have been shown in Fig. 9. At the intersection of a horizontal
and a vertical street, the mobile node can turn left, right or
head straight. The choice of movement at the intersection is
probabilistic: the probability of moving on the same street is
0.5, the probability of turning left is 0.25 and the probability of
turning right is 0.25 [15]. The velocity of the mobile node at a
time slot is dependent on its velocity at the previous time slot.
The node’s velocity is also restricted by the velocity of the
node preceding it on the same lane of the street.
Fig.6: Manhattan Grid mobility pattern [15]
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The performance of the protocols AODV and DSDV was
compared graphically on basis of results obtained through
extensive simulations by increasing the network size.
5.1 Packet Delivery Ratio:
Packet Delivery ratio (PDR) is the ratio of received packets to
sent packets. The graph (Fig.10) shows that the packet
delivery ratio dropped with the increase in network size in
DSDV. AODV performed better in this scenario. Following
formula [23] was for calculating the packet delivery ratio
using AWK script. The number of packets sent and received
was calculated with help of Trace file generated after
simulation.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 7: Comparison of Packet Delivery Ratio of AODV and
DSDV with increase in number of nodes
5.2 Average End to End Delay
It is the average time required by packets to reach from source
to the destination. It considers all kinds of delay such as
queuing delay, route discovery delay, interface delay, etc. It is
also known as the average time between sending and
successfully receiving a packet [9]. Average end to end delay
experienced by AODV as lesser as compared to DSDV.
Following formula was used to calculate this metric in
milliseconds [24].
Fig. 8: Comparison of Average End to End Delay of AODV
and DSDV with increase in number of nodes
5.3 Routing Overhead
Routing message overhead is defined as the total number of
routing control packets transmitted from source to destination.
It may also be called as Control message overhead. The
increase in the routing message overhead reduces the
performance of the mobile ad-hoc network as it consumes
some part of bandwidth available for transmission of data
between the nodes [10]. AODV generated less routing
overhead than DSDV in the simulations performed. Following
formula has been used in the calculation of routing overhead
[25].
Fig. 9: Comparison of Routing Overhead of AODV and
DSDV with increase in number of nodes
5.4 Throughput
The rate at which data can be transmitted successfully across a
network is termed as throughput. Throughput was more in
case of AODV as compared to DSDV. Following formula was
used to calculate throughput in Kbps [23].

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 10: Comparison of Throughput of AODV and DSDV
with increase in number of nodes
CONCLUSIONS
The use of MANETs has grown over the years because of an
attractive number of benefits it offers to the end users. The
performance evaluation of mobile ad hoc routing protocols is
an interesting area of research and is open to researchers all
over the world. This study focussed on the comprehensive
performance evaluation of MANET Routing protocols AODV
and DSDV under growing network size and using Manhattan
grid mobility model. It was concluded that AODV
outperforms DSDV in terms of all the chosen performance
metrics- Packet Delivery Ratio, Average End to End delay,
Throughput and Routing Overhead. The obtained results
signify that performance of AODV was consistent under
varying number of nodes, whereas the performance of DSDV
degraded as the network size increased. The reason behind
poor performance of DSDV was the extra overhead required
to maintain the routing tables and frequent updates.
REFERENCES
[1] H. Bakht, “History of mobile ad hoc networks”, School
of Computing and Mathematical Sciences, Liverpool
John Moores University, Available:
http:/www.geocities.com/humayunbakht.
[2] J. Hoebeke, I. Moerman, B. Dhoedt and P. Demeester,
“An Overview of Mobile Ad Hoc Networks:
Applications and Challenges”,Department of
Information Technology (INTEC), Ghent University,
Belgium.
[3] C. M. Cordeiro and D. P. Agarwal, “Mobile Ad Hoc
Networking”, OBR Research Center for Distributed
and Mobile Computing, ECECS, University of
Cincinnati, USA.
[4] S. Basagni, M. Conti, S. Giordno and I. Stojmenovic,
“Mobile Ad Hoc Netwkorking”, IEEE Press, Wiley-
Interscience John Wiley & Sons Publication, 2004.
[5] P. Mishra, “Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Mobile
Wireless Networks”, Ohio State University Notes,
Available: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~jain/cis788-
99/adhoc_routing/index.html
[6] A. S. Tanenbaum, Computer Networks, 3rd ed., Ch. 5,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1996, pp. 357–58.
[7] G. He, Destination-Sequenced Distance Vector
(DSDV) Protocol, Networking Laboratory Notes,
Helsinki University of Technology, 2004.
[8] B. Awerbuch and A. Mishra, “Ad hoc On Demand
Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol”, CS: 647
Advanced Topics in Wireless Networks, Department of
Computer science, Johns Hopkins.
[9] N. Mishra, N. Maurya, & N. Gaur, “PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION OF MOBILE AD HOC NETWORK
EXTENSION TO ROUTING PROTOCOLS
SIMULATION BASED”, VSRD International Journal
of Computer Science & Information Technology,
pp.2231-2471, 2(10), 2012.
[10] T. El-Nabi, “Modeling and Simulation of a Routing
Protocol for Ad Hoc Networks Combining Queuing
Network Analysis and Ant Colony Algorithms”,
University of Duisburg-Essen. (Phd Thesis), 2005.
[11] B. C. Lesiuk, Routing in Ad Hoc Networks of Mobile
hosts, MECH 590: Directed Studies with Dr. Gerald
McLean, Available at:
http://ghost.lesiuk.org/AdHoc/adhoc/#E16E2,
University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada, 1998.
[12] I.D. Chakeres and E.M. Belding-Royer, “AODV
Routing Protocol Implementation Design”, Proceedings
of the International Workshop on Wireless Ad Hoc
Networking (WWAN), Tokyo, Japan, 2004.
[13] C.E.Perkins and E.M .Royer, “Ad-Hoc On-Demand
Distance Vector Routing”, Proceedings of the 2nd
IEEE
Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and
Applications, New Orleans, LA, pp. 90-100, 1999.
[14] C.E.Perkins, E.M.Royer and S. Das, “Ad-Hoc On
Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing”, IETF
RFC 3561.
[15] M. M. Javadi, Mobility Simulator Manhattan,
Available at:
http://www.masoudmoshref.com/old/myworks/docume
ntpages/mobisim/manhattan.html, 2007.
[16] T. Henderson, “Radio Propagation Models”, Available:
http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/doc/node216.html, 2011.
[17] T. Issariyakul and E. Hossain, Introduction to Network
Simulator NS2, Springer Science+Business Media,
2009, New York, USA.
[18] T. S. Rappaport, Wireless Communications, Principles
and Practice, Prentice Hall, 1996.
[19] S. Xu and T. Saadawi, “Does the IEE 802.11 MAC
Protocol Work Well in Multihop Wireless Ad Hoc
Networks?”, IEEE Communications Magazine-
Challenges in Mobile Ad Hoc Networking, New york,
June 2001.
[20] T. Henderson, “Network Components in a Mobile
Node”, Available:
http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/doc/node173.html, 2011.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
[21] C.A. Balanis, ‟ Antenna theory: analysis and design”,
2nd ed., John Willey and & Son, Inc., 1997.
[22] Antenna Basics, Available:
http://info.bannerengineering.com/cs/groups/public/doc
uments/literature/132113.pdf.
[23] AWK Scripts for NS2 to process data from Trace Files
, Available: http://www.nsnam.com/2013/03/awk-
scripts-for-ns2-to-process-data.html, 2013.
[24] Packet delivery ratio, Packet Lost, End to end delay,
Available: http://harrismare.net/2011/07/14/packet-
delivery-ratio-packet-lost-end-to-end-delay/, 2011.
[25] M.A. Hajar,[ns] tcl scripts, Available:
http://mailman.isi.edu/pipermail/ns-users/2007-
August/060808.html, 2007.

A comprehensive review on performance of aodv and dsdv protocol using manhattan grid mobility model

More Related Content

What's hot (19)

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to A comprehensive review on performance of aodv and dsdv protocol using manhattan grid mobility model (20)

More from eSAT Journals (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A comprehensive review on performance of aodv and dsdv protocol using manhattan grid mobility model