1 / 29

Minor Thesis Presentation

Minor Thesis Presentation. By: Junaid M. Shaikh Supervisor: Dr. Ivan Lee. A Comparative Analysis of Routing Protocols in VANET Environment Using. Realistic Vehicular Traces. O UTLINE. I NTRODUCTION R ESEARCH O BJECTIVES W ORKFLOW S IMULATIONS D EMO R ESULTS E VALUATION C ONCLUSIONS

nowles
Télécharger la présentation

Minor Thesis Presentation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Minor Thesis Presentation By: Junaid M. Shaikh Supervisor: Dr. Ivan Lee

  2. A Comparative Analysis of Routing Protocols in VANET Environment Using Realistic Vehicular Traces

  3. OUTLINE • INTRODUCTION • RESEARCH OBJECTIVES • WORKFLOW • SIMULATIONS • DEMO • RESULTS • EVALUATION • CONCLUSIONS • FUTURE WORK

  4. INTRODUCTION • Technology is moving us from wired to wireless networks • Structured Networks (WLAN) • Unstructured Networks (Mobile Ad hoc Network - MANET) • Vehicular Ad hoc Network – VANET

  5. VANET • Vehicles form network • Vehicles equipped with • Wireless transceivers • Computerized control modules • Roadside Units • Drop point • Geographically relevant data • Gateway to internet • VANET Scenario (Source: MoNet Lab)

  6. VANETAPPLICATIONS • Safety • Accident avoidance warnings • Rapid rescue service • Convenience • Detour information • Toll road payments • Geographically-oriented local information • Entertainment • Internet access • Multimedia entertainment • V2V Communication

  7. RESEARCH CONSIDERATION • Network Layer • Ad hoc Routing Protocols • Proactive (routes update periodically) • DSDV • Reactive (routes update on-demand) • AODV • AOMDV • DSR • Nodes Movement

  8. RESEARCHOBJECTIVES • Analyzing data dissemination in VANETs • Identify and Study Routing Protocols in VANET • Highest Delivery Ratio • Lowest End-to-End Delay • Mobility Models • Deploy realistic vehicular traces • Obtained: Multi-agent microscopic traffic simulator (MMTS) • Developed: K. Nagel (at ETH Zurich) • Available for research community

  9. NS-2(Network Simulator) • Network simulator targeted at networking research • Almost complete OSI features with open-source • Simulation components • Nodes (hardware entities) • Agents (software entities; TCP, UDP) • Links (for nodes connections) • Traffic generators (source, sink) • Simulation operations • Event scheduler • Network creation • Tracing, etc

  10. Mobility and Traffic Generator City Scenario Highway Scenario TCL File with support of Mobility Patterns, Comm. Paradigms, Reliability constraints, and Related Parameters Compile NS-2 Simulator AODV AOMDV DSR DSDV Multiple Trace & NAM Files Trace File Analysis (Preferably AWK Script) WORKFLOW

  11. SIMULATIONS • City Model • Density Levels • Low • Medium • High • Highway Model • Density Levels • Low • Medium • High

  12. CITY MODEL (Parameters) Common Parameters Specific Parameters

  13. CITY MODEL (Mobility Traces) Google Map View Simulator View

  14. HIGHWAY MODEL (Parameters) Common Parameters Specific Parameters

  15. HIGHWAYMODEL (Mobility Traces) Google Map View Simulator View

  16. DEMO CITY HIGHWAY

  17. CITY

  18. HIGHWAY

  19. TRACE FILE & AWK SCRIPT M 0.01000 7 (3076.65, 4672.97, 0.00), (3198.59, 4629.61), 13.65 s 2.556838879 _1_ AGT --- 0 cbr 512 [0 0 0 0] ------- [1:0 2:0 32 0] [0] 0 0 r 2.556838879 _1_ RTR --- 0 cbr 512 [0 0 0 0] ------- [1:0 2:0 32 0] [0] 0 0 s 2.560742394 _1_ RTR --- 1 DSR 32 [0 0 0 0] ------- [1:255 2:255 32 0] 1 [1 1] [0 1 0 0->0] [0 0 0 0->0] r 2.561962728 _4_ RTR --- 1 DSR 32 [0 ffffffff 1 800] ------- [1:255 2:255 32 0] 1 [1 1] [0 1 0 0->0] [0 0 0 0->0] r 2.561963021 _6_ RTR --- 1 DSR 32 [0 ffffffff 1 800] ------- [1:255 2:255 32 0] 1 [1 1] [0 1 0 0->0] [0 0 0 0->0] s 2.604736825 _1_ RTR --- 2 DSR 32 [0 0 0 0] ------- [1:255 2:255 32 0] 1 [1 2] [0 2 0 0->16] [0 0 0 0->0] #packet delivery ratio # # Sent tcp packets # if($4 == "AGT" && $1 == "s" && seqno < $6) { seqno = $6; } #receivedPacketSeqno[receivedPackets] = $12; # # Received tcp packets # #else if((($6%2) == 1) && ($1 == "r") && ($7 == "tcp")){ else if (($4 == "AGT") && ($1 == "r")){ rpkt++; } # # end-to-end delay # if($4 == "AGT" && $1 == "s") { start_time[$6] = $2; } else if(($7 == "tcp") && ($1 == "r")) { end_time[$6] = $2; } else if($1 == "D" && $7 == "tcp") { end_time[$6] = -1; } }

  20. RESULTS (CITY) • City Model • 3 Density levels • 4 Routing protocols • 12 Trace files • Routing Metrics • Packet Delivery Ratio • Average End-to-End Delay

  21. RESULTS (CITY)

  22. RESULTS (CITY)

  23. RESULTS (HIGHWAY) • Highway Model • 3 Density levels • 4 Routing protocols • 12 Trace files • Routing Metrics • Packet Delivery Ratio • Average End-to-End Delay

  24. RESULTS (HIGHWAY)

  25. RESULTS (HIGHWAY)

  26. EVALUATION Weighted Evaluation Matrix

  27. CONCLUSIONS • Through major aspects of rigorous simulations followed by certain evaluations, • AODV and AOMDV remained preferable for both city and highway scenarios used in for this project. • DSDV good in city scene but not suitable for highway • DSR remained acceptable only for E2E delay

  28. FUTURE WORK • Mobility Traces • Adelaide’s Data • Utilize Test Bed • New routing protocols

  29. Thank you for listening. Q&A

More Related